Abstract: · Decriminalization of possession, purchase and cultivation for personal use operates reasonably comfortably inside the confines of the UN drug control conventions · Harm reduction services, including drug consumption rooms, can operate lawfully under the drug control treaty system · There is greater scope to provide health care or social support instead of punishment for people caught up in minor offences related to personal use or socio-economic necessity · All controlled drugs can be used for medical purposes, including heroin prescription and medical marijuana’; what constitutes medical use is left to the discretion of the parties · The INCB often increases tensions around interpretations instead of resolving them, though the Board should be guided ‘by a spirit of co-operation rather than by a narrow view of the letter of the law’ · There are limits of latitude; a legal regulated market for non-medical use of cannabis or any other scheduled drug is not permissible within the treaty framework · Legal tensions exist with other international legal obligations such as those stemming from human rights or indigenous rights · Growing doubts and inherent inconsistencies and ambiguities provide legitimate ground for demanding more space for experimentation with alternative control models than the current systems allows