Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing Cannabis yet again. This issue has kind of been at the forefront of some news here in Thailand because quite honestly this "Government" and I kind of put that in quotes because I am really not sure they have the Parliamentary votes at any given moment in the Parliament to really actually continue being the Government; that seems to be kind of a tenuous thing. But for whatever reason, they have arbitrarily and capriciously decided that they are going to go after Cannabis here notwithstanding the fact it was legalized some years back and without any legal authority in my opinion, especially pursuant to the Doctrine of Codification, where there has been no law promulgated through Parliament to illegalize Cannabis, or to regulate it, they are still trying to go after it but what I think is interesting has been the push in a media sense to go after it. 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is title: Cannabis edibles producer raided after toddler intoxicated. Quoting directly: "Police raided an illegal cannabis edibles maker in Khlong Sam Wa District in Bangkok, seizing Cannabis-infused jellies and cookies worth an estimated 900,000 baht. The investigation was initiated after a report in early July about a two-year old girl who became drowsy and required hospitalization after consuming jelly suspected to contain Cannabis." Well okay, in early July, what do the two have to do with one another? And why is this being pushed in the media as if; they have tried this since the get-go, since Cannabis got legal, that it is a massive threat to kids, it is a massive threat to kids, and they have just pushed that narrative. By "they", look, there are clearly interests that don't want Cannabis to be legal in Thailand. I would say Big Pharma is among them, Big Alcohol is out there. There may even be specific special interests as has been brought up by the Writing Cannabis Network in their petitions against certain actors in the government saying, "are you putting forth regulations in order to serve specific Cannabis interests at the expense of other Cannabis interests?"

Again, as we have discussed in other videos, there are nearly 20,000 licensed shops in Thailand that have been arbitrarily and capriciously, in my opinion, harassed without proper due process of law here for the past number of weeks now, mostly based on this whole notion that certain actors within the Government can just do things because they say so and don't necessarily need to pass a law. And I have talked about that at length in other videos, but again, another aspect of this has been sort of the media push, and I would love to know at whose behest, against Cannabis like this story here where, okay it's one thing that the edibles producer was raided but the title is "after toddler intoxicated". It is not like some kid walked out on the street, passed out in front of the building and the cops ran in, No. That happened in early July. There was a child, and I urge those who are watching this video, read that article for further details, but there was a child who consumed something accidentally I think that they thought was like a jelly, Jellybean or whatever you want to call it, a jelly edible, became intoxicated and I think passed out. Now to be clear, the child survived because look Cannabis doesn't kill anyone to paraphrase The Gentleman, Matthew McConaughey's character in The Gentleman - I'll try to find a thumbnail for that, I'll try to put that up - but the point I am trying to make is look I have said it before and I will say it again, anybody that gives this stuff, especially with intent, to children, we need to throw the book at that person; that person needs to do serious jail time. Children should not have anything to do with this. Now it looks to me like there was an accident that - and I'm not justifying it, let me be clear - I think this was a bad thing. A kid becoming intoxicated on Cannabis is not a good thing; nobody thinks that. But my point is it looks to me like it is being used as a pretext to sort of push the narrative or push an anti-cannabis narrative in such a way that makes it look like kids are super susceptible to being intoxicated by this stuff when the reality is, that incident occurred some weeks before this actual raid of this unlicensed facility. And again, the issue of licensure and regulation of all of that stuff, because processed Cannabis products, yes, they were subject to more intense regulatory oversight. I know this because I was told this. I went and got a Cannabis license for myself at one point, mostly just to kind of do it and I thought about getting in the business, I ultimately didn't really end up wading into that as deeply as I initially thought I would for a variety of different reasons, but I did go and get a license and the first thing they said was "hey, if you want to do processed products like edibles, you need further licensing and there is further scrutiny and investigation associated with that." So again, I'm not even saying that what anybody was doing here was the right thing to do; if they didn't have their licenses fair enough and if there was a kid that was intoxicated, that's no good, I think that there should be some justice brought to bear for that. But that said, to push this the way it was sort of pushed in that article I find that disingenuous. 

Meanwhile, I thought again of making this video after reading another article, again from the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: Phuket pressed to tackle issues vexing tourists. There is a lot going on in that video, excuse me in that article; I urge those who are watching this video to go check out that article in detail to read all the details. But quoting an excerpt: "The smell of Cannabis is pervasive in Phuket, and the Ministry of Public Health has not come up with a clear plan to address the issue." Well we talked about this going all the way back to when this first happened. The Thai Police have at their disposal the Nuisance Laws and they have talked about this whole "oh there is the smell of cannabis", I've seen this a lot, again in the narrative, the anti-cannabis narrative, "oh there is the smell of Cannabis out on the streets and things." Well when people are out making food like on barbecues and things like out on the street, there is smoke that emanates off of that. That super spicy food that you'll walk by certain street vendors making that, it gets in your mouth and lungs, and it actually causes me to cough sometimes. I'm not saying it's a one-to-one comparison. I don't like the idea of the smell of Cannabis being pervasive across all these streets but there's a way to deal with that; we know how to deal with that. If the police started citing people on the streets that were smoking Cannabis for nuisance, especially foreigners, and there were a few news stories to that effect, I'm pretty sure pretty quickly that behaviour would pretty well subside because nobody wants to go and have to deal with the police precinct or even end up in jail on some nuisance violation. It's not like there are no laws to handle this and again, in an anti-cannabis narrative context, it is sort of being pushed as if "oh, there's no way to deal with this, we just need to re-illegalize it." Bringing up that point, quoting further: "Mr. Sophon said the Ministry of Public Health is considering reclassifying Cannabis as a narcotic for medical use only." Well how are you going to do that? As I have discussed in other videos, you need to pass a law and by the way, everybody said a year and a half ago on this issue they were going to pass a law through Parliament. Is the reason you haven't done that is that this Government would fall apart because there is not support for that legislation, so you are just trying to do it based on the basis of, "oh because we say so, it is now a narcotic!" As I have discussed in other videos, what stops then, this comes down to fundamental legal principle. The Doctrine of Codification exists in a Civil Law context so that you can't just walk around willy-nilly saying, "oh this is illegal now." No, you have to go through legislative due process, make a law, make it illegal or make a law regulating it and then have regulations stemming therefrom. To allow for them to just say, "oh it's a narcotic now" that's like a florist should be worried at that point that they will say orchids are narcotics, and I know that sounds rhetorical, but it's really not. This comes down to fundamental notions of freedom, fundamental notions of rule of law, that you can't just say something's illegal or say something is a narcotic because you say so; you have got to go through due process of law. And yeah I understand that this became legalized because of use of emergency powers on the part of Mr. Anutin when he pulled this off the Narcotics list, but those emergency powers were codified in the Communicable Diseases Act which was promulgated through Parliament. So when he used that power then that power extinguished with the end of the Emergency Decree, it would either require the Emergency Decree to come back and then somebody to put it back on the Narcotics List in theory, although I don't know that that works in line with the Doctrine of Codification that way; I think it works pulling it off, if it's in favour of more freedom, it operates; if it is in favour of less freedom I don't think it operates. 

Meanwhile, the other thing to take away from this video is they need to pass a Law through Parliament. And again, I question their motives on all of this. One because it seems like as we have discussed in other videos, all of this so-called regulation may be aimed at promoting certain Cannabis interests to the extent of others, but it is also in deep violation of the basic notion of the Doctrine of Codification. Also as we discussed in another video, the Secretary to the Public Health Minister during or in the brief aftermath after a recent protest at the Public Health Ministry by Cannabis advocates, said that they would not be reclassifying it as a narcotic. So again, there is just all kinds of double speak and just, 'because we say so and la, la, la’. How about you just deal with the fact it is legal. You have got 20,000 licensed shops out there. Let's move on. And how do you make something illegal when somebody has an affirmative license? Again, you might be able to do it again through legislative due process through Parliament, but how do you do that where you just say, "oh because we say so!" That's nonsense. 

Quoting further: "Phuket has over 1,640 Cannabis shops without zoning laws or enforcement authority, only public consumption can be penalized under cleanliness regulations." Who says it can only be penalized under cleanliness regulations? Again, there are Nuisance Laws that are out there, disturbing the peace kind of, the police have powers to deal with folks who are being a nuisance on the street, okay? This notion that Oh, it is so terrible, that's why I say, this childishness needs to end, okay? Pass a law or in the absence of that, enforce the laws as they are on the books, but stop trying to do this arbitrary and capricious stuff just because certain interests don't like Cannabis in Thailand.