Cannabis Freedom Index
← History

Ban 🇦🇫 Afghanistan

Afghanistan's Penal Code forbids domestic cannabis production and use

Article 125 of the 1924–1925 penal code forbade producing and using charse and bhang for the domestic market. Users under 25 faced 25 to 39 lashes and older users 50 to 75, although the chapter says there is little evidence about enforcement. Cannabis intended for export was exempt and taxed.[1]

Index score

1007

−93 points

The story · written by gpt-6,

Afghanistan’s penal code of 1924–1925 restricted domestic production and consumption of cannabis preparations while exempting drugs intended for export. Historian James Bradford places this apparent contradiction within King Amanullah Khan’s attempt to extend state authority and generate revenue.

The history entry is dated 1924 for the code’s period. It does not identify a verified day on which every provision entered force.

A state claiming new powers

Amanullah’s government pursued legal and administrative reform after he took the throne in 1919. The 1923 Fundamental Law defined powers and rights; the subsequent penal code extended the state’s claim to regulate individual conduct.

Bradford describes restrictions on charse, bhang, opium and alcohol as part of this project. Moral regulation had previously been closely associated with religious authority. Codification made it a concern of the central government as well.

Severe penalties, uncertain enforcement

The chapter reports corporal penalties for consumers: twenty-five to thirty-nine lashes for those under twenty-five, and fifty to seventy-five for older users. It also describes taxes intended to discourage consumption.

These figures describe legal provisions as reconstructed by Bradford. He explicitly finds little evidence establishing whether, or how consistently, they were enforced. A prescribed punishment is not a count of punishments actually carried out.

The chapter also notes variation in article numbering among versions of the code. Its main discussion refers to Article 125, while an earlier historian used another number. The original editions would need comparison before treating one numbering system as universal.

An export exception

Cannabis preparations and opium intended for foreign markets were exempt from the domestic prohibition. Taxes and trade linked producers and merchants with government revenue and with customers beyond Afghanistan.

British officials were particularly concerned that smuggled Afghan products competed with the regulated market in India. Bradford uses that trade to show that drugs were already involved in regional commerce well before Western tourists arrived.

Before the hippie trail

The code complicates later accounts of Afghanistan as a place without cannabis restrictions. During the 1960s, foreigners could find hashish around Chicken Street and other Kabul meeting places despite formal prohibitions.

The 1969–1970 encouragement of production and 1972 enforcement drive developed within this older tension between domestic control and income from trade. The 1924 event records a legal restriction, while the surviving evidence leaves its practical reach uncertain.[1]

Score by segment 0 to 10

  1. Possession · 25%10 1−9
  2. Personal cultivation · 25%10 1−9
  3. Punishment & enforcement · 20%10 0−10
  4. Sharing & gifting · 10%10 1−9
  5. Consumption · 10%10 1−9
  6. Legal access · 10%10 0−10

The bar shows the score after the change; the tick marks where it stood before. Afghanistan's scores have changed again since.

References

  1. Smuggler’s Paradise: The Hash Trade and Drug Control in the Building of the Afghan State, ca. 1923–1974James Bradford · In Cannabis: Global Histories, edited by Lucas Richert, James H. Mills · MIT Press · 2021 · ch. 8, From Baba Ku to Amanalla Khan: Cannabis in Afghan History; notes 11–23 (EPUB) · ISBN 9780262045209

Checked. The date and the event were compared with a source that was read. The score before the change is an editorial estimate.

    ↑↓ to move, ↵ to open.