So what were our ‘tough’ cops doing as dope clouds drifted across Royal park?

NOT long ago a large part of London’s Hyde Park, and the roads that run beside it, stank of illegal cannabis for an entire day. Law-abiding people passing nearby just had to put up with it. The Royal Park, a public space for the use of all, was partly taken over by pro-drug campaigners celebrating the dopesmokers’ annual festival and deliberately breaking the law.

Internet publicity for this event made it clear that those present would be expected to smoke marijuana. Though the official penalty for possessing this Class B drug is five years in prison or an unlimited fine, they were told by campaigners not to worry.

As thecannabisgeek.com pointed out, this annual event gets soft treatment from the Metropolitan Police. ‘People have been spotted openly engaging with police officers while smoking a joint, so I think we needn’t fear arrest.’

As if to confirm this breezy attitude, the police themselves tweeted helpful advice (from ‘MPS Events’) to pro-dope demonstrators. I really cannot see why. Perhaps to make up for this, they also tweeted: ‘A reminder for those attending the rally at Hyde Park today, officers will be enforcing drugs legislation.’

Did they? See later on. But in previous years they had been far from rigorous, according to organisers, who claimed in April 2016 that they had arranged a ‘safe conduct zone’ with police, where ‘discreet’ lawbreaking would be more or less tol- erated. So, what happened? There were some arrests (about half as many as there had been in 2016 ). I would guess they involved a tiny proportion of those openly breaking the law. But what then? I pestered Scotland Yard for details. This is what I found.

One man was arrested and charged with assault (so much for dope being peaceful). And a mere 11 people (out of thousands) were actually arrested on suspicion of cannabis possession. Three of them were released without charge. Six teenagers received cautions.

Another six juveniles, who were not arrested, were told to go to police stations for a ticking-off later. Fifty-eight, also not arrested, received empty ‘cannabis warnings’ which are not recorded centrally and are effectively meaningless.

Just two – that’s right, two – were charged and prosecuted for cannabis possession. And what happened to them? One was so overawed by the majesty of the law that he did not turn up for his trial at a London magistrates’ court last week. The other received a fine of £80, plus a victim surcharge of £30, and was ordered to pay costs of £85. Tough prohibition, huh?

I have not been able to find out exactly why these two were singled out from the surrounding thousands, and can only guess that it was because of the quantity of the drug found in their possession. But interestingly they were not charged with intent to supply.

I wouldn’t mind this pathetic weakness so much if responsible people didn’t so frequently pretend it wasn’t happening. Take the former Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, who claimed in 2014 that the courts jail a thousand cannabis users every year for doing no more than possess the drug.

I’ve never seen his evidence for this. But other prominent people often make similar blood-curdling claims. Can they be true? Or have they just made them up, as part of a dangerous campaign to destroy what is left of the drug laws? Even back in 1979, an official survey could find only 80 people in jail for this offence, just one of them a first offender. Things are much slacker now.

Drug laws grow laxer, in practice, every year. Personally, I think this is a grave mistake, just as the evidence comes pouring in that use of supposedly ‘soft’ cannabis is correlated with mental illness.

But if we are to debate this matter seriously, those who call for weaker drug laws really must stop pretending the problems we have result from severe and stern enforcement, and the Government must stop pretending it is standing firm.

The opposite is true. Our society is drenched in dangerous drug use because we no longer enforce our own laws. Did anyone ever ask your opinion on that policy – pursued by all the big parties for 45 years – at an election?