Salvia Legal Status

The situation may be subject to future change but at present Salvia divinorum remains legal in most countries. Exceptions as of June 2008[update], countries where there is some form of control, include Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Italy, Japan, Spain, and Sweden.[107][108][19]

In the United Kingdom, following a local newspaper story in October 2005,[109] a parliamentary Early Day Motion was raised calling for Salvia divinorum to be banned there. However, it only received 11 signatures.[110] A second Early Day Motion was raised in October 2008 attracting 18 signatures,[111] with it being reported that Mann had also written to the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith saying, “Sadly the issue has come to light again as our young people are using the internet and sites like YouTube to broadcast their friends taking the drug and witnessing the hallucinogenic effects. Our young people are at risk and a wider cultural attachment to this drug seems to be developing that I am sure you agree – regardless of its legal status – needs nipping in the bud.” The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, the independent body that advises UK government on drugs, has been asked to investigate further.[112]

In such places where Salvia divinorum legislation exists, it varies in its prohibitive degree from country to country. Australia has imposed its strictest ’schedule 9′ (US Schedule I equivalent) classification for example, and Italy has also placed salvia in its ‘Table I’ of controlled substances (also US Schedule I equivalent). Whereas in Spain there are just controls focusing on the commercial trade of Salvia divinorum, and private cultivation (growing your own plants for non-commercial use) is not targeted. In Germany there are also measures targeting commercial sales, i.e. in any shops that are not drugstores.[107][108]

In the United States, salvia is not regulated under the Controlled Substances Act but some states, including Delaware, Louisiana, Missouri, Ohio and others, have passed their own laws.[19] Several other states have proposed legislation against salvia, including Alabama, Alaska, California, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Many of these proposals have not made it into law, with motions having failed, stalled or otherwise died, for example at committee review stages.[107][108]

National legislation for amendment of the Controlled Substances Act to place salvinorin A and Salvia divinorum in Schedule I at the federal level was proposed in 2002 by Representative Joe Baca (D- California). Those opposed to bill HR 5607 include Daniel Siebert, who sent a letter to Congress arguing against the proposed legislation,[113] and the Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics (CCLE), who sent key members of the US Congress a report on Salvia divinorum and its active principle,[6] along with letters from an array of scientists who expressed concern that scheduling Salvia divinorum would negatively impact important research on the plant. The bill did not pass.[114][115][116]

Similar to the international situation, in the United States, where individual state legislation does exist, it varies from state to state in its prohibitive degree. As of June 2008[update] twelve states had passed legislation to regulate Salvia divinorum and/or salvinorin A. Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Virginia have classified Salvia divinorum and salvinorin A as schedule I substances under state law; for example the Illinois Controlled Substances Act (Jan 1, 2008) list of Schedule I substances includes any plant part, extraction, or preparation of Salvia divinorum. Legislation restricting the distribution of the plant had been enacted by Louisiana, Maine and Tennessee.[19] By contrast, the state of Maine has passed laws imposing age restrictions, prohibiting use and sale to minors under 18 years of age – in a manner generally consistent with controls existing for tobacco and alcohol.[117] California has also passed similar age restrictions. These came into effect on Jan 1, 2009. Legislative bills for Schedule I classification are proposed in Iowa, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina. New York has proposed restrictions on possession, with a fine of no more than $50 per violation.[nb 7][19]

Louisiana passed a wide-ranging law (RS 40:989.1) in 2005 which designated 39 plants, including Salvia divinorum, as “hallucinogenic” and made it illegal for any one to “knowingly or intentionally produce, manufacture, distribute, or possess” (with or without intent to produce, manufacture, distribute) “a material, compound, mixture, or preparation intended for human consumption which contains a hallucinogenic plant.” Although the penalties are steep (with intent: 2–10 years of imprisonment “with or without hard labor” plus a possible fine up to $20,000; without: up to 5 yrs imprisonment and a possible fine up to $5,000), the law does not apply to “possession, planting, cultivation, growing, or harvesting of a hallucinogenic plant strictly for aesthetic, landscaping, or decorative purposes” nor does it apply to any “dosage form which is legally obtainable from a retail establishment without a prescription and is recognized by the Federal Food and Drug Administration as a homeopathic drug” (i.e. listed in the Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States, an addendum to it, or its supplements, by definition in the law).[118]

Tennessee has some provision for Salvia divinorum in its natural plant form. – There the law classes its use as a ‘Class A misdemeanour’, but it is not an offence to possess, plant, cultivate, grow, or harvest Salvia divinorum for “aesthetic, landscaping, or decorative purposes”.[119]

In some states there is no mention of Salvia divinorum’s active constituent at all. In Delaware for example the plant in its natural form is classified as ‘Schedule I’, while much more potent purely extracted salvinorin A remains quite legal.[120]

In Illinois their legislation wording does not mention salvinorin A either, but there it includes instead “the seeds thereof, any extract from any part of that plant, and every compound, [...] derivative, mixture, or preparation of that plant”.[121] Daniel Siebert has criticised this wording as being “absurdly broad in scope, for it implies that any substance extracted from Salvia divinorum (water, chlorophyll, whatever) would be treated as a Schedule I controlled substance under the proposed law.”[107]

Salvia legislation may prove difficult to police. The plant has a nondescript appearance; unlike cannabis the leaves are not distinctive and it does not have a distinctive odour. Salvia divinorum looks like and can be grown as an ordinary houseplant without the need of special equipment such as hydroponics or high-power lights.[122][123]

Source:

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia