The treaty updated the
Paris Convention of 13 July 1931, to include the vast number of
synthetic opioids invented in the intervening 30 years and to add a mechanism for more easily including new ones. From 1931 to 1961, most of the families of synthetic opioids had been developed, including drugs related to
methadone,
pethidine (meperidine/Demerol),
morphinans, and
dextromoramide (Palfium, Palphium, Jetrium, Dimorlin, marketed solely in the Netherlands). Research on
fentanyls and
piritramide (R-3365, Pirium, Dipidolor, Piridolan, among others) was also nearing fruition at that point. Earlier treaties had only controlled
opium,
coca, and derivatives such as
morphine,
heroin, and
cocaine. The Single Convention, adopted in 1961, consolidated those treaties and broadened their scope to include
cannabis and other substances with effects similar to drugs already covered. The
Commission on Narcotic Drugs and the
World Health Organization were empowered to add, remove, and transfer drugs among the treaty's four schedules of controlled substances. The
International Narcotics Control Board was put in overall control of drug production, international trade, and dispensation. The
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) was delegated the Board's daily monitoring of each country and working with national authorities to ensure compliance with the Single Convention. This treaty has since been supplemented by the
Convention on Psychotropic Substances, which controls
LSD,
MDMA, and other psychoactive pharmaceuticals, and the
United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, which strengthens provisions against
money laundering and other drug-related offenses.
Schedules The Single Convention's Schedules of drugs range from most restrictive to least restrictive, in this order: Schedule IV, Schedule I, Schedule II, Schedule III. The list of drugs initially controlled was annexed to the treaty.
Article 3 states that for a drug to be placed in a Schedule, the
World Health Organization must make the findings required for that Schedule, to wit: •
Schedule I – The substance is liable to similar abuse and productive of similar ill effects as the drugs already in Schedule I or Schedule II, or is convertible into a drug. •
Schedule II – The substance is liable to similar abuse and productive of similar ill effects as the drugs already in Schedule I or Schedule II, or is convertible into a drug. •
Schedule III – The preparation, because of the substances which it contains, is not liable to abuse and cannot produce ill effects; and the drug therein is not readily recoverable. •
Schedule IV – The drug, which is already in Schedule I, is particularly liable to abuse and to produce ill effects, and such liability is not offset by substantial therapeutic advantages.
Schedule I According to the Commentary, is the category of drugs whose control provisions "constitute the standard regime under the Single Convention."
Limitation of scope The Single Convention allows only drugs with morphine-like, cocaine-like, and cannabis-like effects to be added to the Schedules. The strength of the drug is not relevant; only the similarity of its effects to the substances already controlled. For instance,
etorphine and
acetorphine were considered sufficiently morphine-like to fall under the treaty's scope, although they are many times more potent than morphine. However, according to the Commentary: Since cannabis is a
hallucinogen (although some dispute this), the Commentary speculates that
mescaline,
psilocybin,
tetrahydrocannabinol, and
LSD could have been considered sufficiently cannabis-like to be regulated under the Single Convention; however, it opines, "It appears that the fact that the potent hallucinogenics whose abuse has spread in recent years have not been brought under international narcotics control does not result from legal reasons, but rather from the view of Governments that a regime different from that offered by the Single Convention would be more adequate." That different regime was instituted by the 1971
Convention on Psychotropic Substances. The Convention on Psychotropic Drugs' scope can include any drug not already under international control if the
World Health Organization finds that: • The substance has the capacity to produce "[a] state of dependence" AND "[c]entral nervous system stimulation or depression, resulting in hallucinations or disturbances in motor function or thinking or behaviour or perception or mood"; or • The substance has the capacity to produce similar abuse and similar ill effects as
LSD or one of the other controlled substances enumerated in Convention; or • There is sufficient evidence that the substance is being or is likely to be abused so as to constitute a public health and social problem warranting the placing of the substance under international control. The reason for sharply limiting the scope of Single Convention to a few types of drugs while letting the Convention on Psychotropic Drugs cover the rest was concern for the interests of industry. Professor
Cindy Fazey's
The Mechanics and Dynamics of the UN System for International Drug Control explains, "concerted efforts by drug manufacturing nations and the pharmaceutical industry ensured that the controls on psychotropics in the 1971 treaty were considerably looser than those applied to organic drugs in the Single Convention." A failed 24 March 2003
European Parliament committee report noted the disparity in how drugs are regulated under the two treaties: For this reason, the
European Parliament,
Transnational Radical Party, and other organizations have proposed removing cannabis and other drugs from the Single Convention and scheduling them under the Convention on Psychotropic Substances.
Rescheduling of cannabis There has long been a controversy over whether cannabis is "particularly liable to abuse and to produce ill effects" and whether that "liability is not offset by substantial therapeutic advantages", as required by Schedule IV criteria. Already in 1973, the Commentary on the Single Convention edited by
UN Secretary-General pointed out that "should the results of the intensive research which is at the time of this writing being undertaken on the effects of [cannabis and cannabis resin] so warrant, they could be deleted from Schedule IV, and these two drugs, as well as extracts and tinctures of cannabis, could be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II." Since the discovery of the
endocannabinoid receptor system in the late 1980s, which revolutionized the scientific understanding of the psychopharmacological effects of cannabis, and the important progresses in
research related to the medical uses of the plant, questions as to the validity of the placement of cannabis and cannabis resin in Schedule IV increased. In 1991,
delta-9-THC was down-scheduled from Schedule I to Schedule II of the
Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971. After numerous discussions at the
World Health Organization in the 2000s and 2010s, on 2 December 2020, the
Commission on Narcotic Drugs adopted Decision 63/17 The decision entered into force in April 2021.
Drugs and substances scheduled in other treaties Cannabinoids (natural and synthetic) and opioids (synthetic and semisynthetic) are scheduled by
Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Natural cannabinols (synthetic cannabinoids omitted): •
tetrahydrocannabinol, the following isomers and their stereochemical variants: • 7,8,9,10-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol • (9R,10aR)-8,9,10,10a-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol • (6aR,9R,10aR)-6a,9,10,10a-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol • (6aR,10aR)-6a,7,10,10a-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol • 6a,7,8,9-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol • (6aR,10aR)-6a,7,8,9,10,10a-hexahydro-6,6-dimethyl-9-methylene-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol •
delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol – (6aR,10aR)-6a,7,8,10a-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol, and its stereochemical variants (
dronabinol is the international non-proprietary name, although it refers to only one of the stereochemical variants of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, namely (−)-trans-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) Semisynthetic
agonist–antagonist opioids: •
buprenorphine Synthetic agonist-antagonist opioids – benzomorphans: •
pentazocine Synthetic open chain opioids having also stimulant effects: •
lefetamine Opioids not scheduled Some opioids currently or formerly used in medicine are not scheduled by UN conventions, for example: •
tramadol •
tapentadol •
nalbuphine (
agonist-antagonist opioid) •
butorphanol (
agonist-antagonist opioid) There are of course many opioid
designer drugs, not used in medicine.
See also •
List of UN-controlled psychotropic substances •
List of UN-controlled drug precursors ==Governance==