Cannabis prosecutions

Summary

The request sought statistics on cannabis prosecutions, verdicts, fines, and court costs on the Isle of Man since March 2019. The Attorney General's Chambers disclosed the number of offences committed for trial by jury and confirmed all resulted in guilty pleas, but refused to provide data on total prosecutions, fines, costs, and historical jury trials due to lack of records or excessive compilation effort.

Key Facts

• Information on total prosecutions, fines, custodial sentences, and court costs was refused as the authority does not hold it.
• Data on jury trials since October 2001 was refused as it would require substantial compilation.
• The disclosed figures represent charged offences rather than the number of individual defendants.
• None of the cannabis offences committed for trial by jury since March 2019 proceeded to a full jury trial.
• All offences committed for trial by jury since March 2019 resulted in guilty pleas.

Data Disclosed

• 39
• 3
• 50
• 4
• 2
• 20 March 2019
• October 2001
• 2022-02-14
• 2022-02-18
• 2264429

Exemptions Cited

• Section 11(3)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2015 (Information not held)
• Section 11(3)(b) of the Freedom of Information Act 2015 (Substantial compilation or collation)

Original Request

Please state: 1. How many prosecutions have proceeded on the Isle of Man for: a. Possession of cannabis b. Possession of cannabis resin c. Production of cannabis d. Production of cannabis resin e. Cultivation of cannabis Since the closing of the public consultation on 20th March 2019 regardless of the outcome. 2. How many of these prosecutions ended with a verdict of guilty. 3. How many of these prosecutions were committed for trial by jury. 4. How many of these prosecutions ended with a fine. 5. What is the total value of all fines related to these charges. 6. How many of these prosecutions ended with a custodial sentence. 7. What is the value of court costs associated with all these prosecutions that has been attributed. 8. What is the value of the true court costs in all these prosecutions whether found guilty or not. 9. Out of the prosecutions that proceeded with trial by jury, what were the verdict outcomes of each case and for what offence. 10. Have many trial by juries for any cannabis offences have been heard since October 2001 and what were the outcomes of those jury trials.

Data Tables (1)

Data Tables (reformatted)

Full Response Text

Attorney General's Chambers 2nd floor Belgravia House Circular Road, Douglas Isle of Man, IM1 1AE Telephone: (01624) 685452 E-mail: attgen@gov.im

Our ref: 2264429 17 February 2022

Dear ###

We write further to your request which was received on 14 February 2022 and which states:

"Please state: 1. How many prosecutions have proceeded on the Isle of Man for: a. Possession of cannabis b. Possession of cannabis resin c. Production of cannabis d. Production of cannabis resin e. Cultivation of cannabis Since the closing of the public consultation on 20th March 2019 regardless of the outcome. 2. How many of these prosecutions ended with a verdict of guilty. 3. How many of these prosecutions were committed for trial by jury. 4. How many of these prosecutions ended with a fine. 5. What is the total value of all fines related to these charges. 6. How many of these prosecutions ended with a custodial sentence. 7. What is the value of court costs associated with all these prosecutions that has been attributed. 8. What is the value of the true court costs in all these prosecutions whether found guilty or not. 9. Out of the prosecutions that proceeded with trial by jury, what were the verdict outcomes of each case and for what offence. 10. Have many trial by juries for any cannabis offences have been heard since October 2001 and what were the outcomes of those jury trials."

While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance a practical refusal reason has been applied, under section 11(3)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2015 (“the Act”), to parts 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the request, as the Attorney General’s Chambers (“AGC”) does not hold or cannot, after taking reasonable steps to do so, find this information. A practical refusal reason has also been applied under section 11(3)(b) of the Act, to part 10 of the request, as complying with this part of the request would require the AGC to do one or more of the matters mentioned in section 8(3) of the Act, specifically section 8(3)(c) – undertake substantial compilation or collation of the information held.

I have detailed below the information that is held. Please note that the information provided represents the number of charged offences and not the number of defendants, i.e. one defendant may have been charged with more than one offence. Part 3 – How many of these prosecutions were committed for trial by jury. Since 20 March 2019, the number of cannabis offences by categories [using the categories as detailed in part 1 (a-e) of the request] that were committed to the Court of General Gaol Delivery were – a) Possession of Cannabis - 39 b) Possession of Cannabis resin - 3 c) Production of Cannabis - 50 d) Production of Cannabis resin - 4 e) Cultivation of Cannabis – 2 Part 9 – Out of the prosecutions that proceeded with trial by jury, what were the verdict outcomes of each case and for what offence. Since 20 March 2019, none of the prosecutions at Part 3 above proceeded with jury trial at the Court of General Gaol Delivery. The verdicts/outcomes of each of the offence [using the categories as detailed in part 1 (a-e) of the request] were all guilty pleas. Please note, the above does not include cannabis cases dealt with in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction. As the AGC is not the responsible authority for court and sentencing information, and in the interests of providing advice and assistance, you may wish to refer to the Chief Constable’s Annual Report 2020-21 for further information: https://www.iompolice.im/footer/corporate/chiefs-constable-annual-report-2020-2021/ Please quote the reference number 2264429 in any future communications.

Your right to request a review

If you are unhappy with this response to your freedom of information request, you may ask us to carry out an internal review of the response, by completing a complaint form and submitting it electronically or by delivery/post.

An electronic version of our complaint form can be found by going to our website at https://services.gov.im/freedom-of-information/Review . If you would like a paper version of our complaint form to be sent to you by post, please contact me and I will be happy to arrange for this. Your review request should explain why you are dissatisfied with this response, and should be made as soon as practicable. We will respond as soon as the review has been concluded.

If you are not satisfied with the result of the review, you then have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner for a decision on; 1. Whether we have responded to your request for information in accordance with Part 2 of the Freedom of Information Act 2015; or 2. Whether we are justified in refusing to give you the information requested.
In response to an application for review, the Information Commissioner may, at any time, attempt to resolve a matter by negotiation, conciliation, mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution and will have regard to any outcome of this in making any subsequent decision. More detailed information on your right to a review can be found on the Information Commissioner’s website at www.inforights.im. Should you have any queries concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Further information about freedom of information requests can be found at www.gov.im/foi.

I will now close your request as of this date.