Controlled Substances, Controlled People: How Drug Laws Reinforce Colonial Power Structures

By Topaz Manneh

Introduction 

Drug legislation has never been a neutral or purely scientific matter of public health or criminal justice. Rather, drug laws have long functioned as mechanisms of social control deeply embedded in racialised and colonial systems of domination (Hanson, Venturelli, & Fleckenstein, 2015; King County Bar Association Drug Policy Project, 2005). This essay explores how contemporary drug policies regulating “controlled substances” are rooted in and continue to reproduce colonial power structures (Daniels aet al., 2021). 

By examining historical contexts and present-day impacts, particularly on the Global South and marginalised communities, this analysis reveals drug laws as tools designed to maintain global hierarchies and social inequities (Stowe aet al., 2024; Safe Drug, n.d.). The analysis draws on decolonial and critical theorists such as Walter Mignolo (2011), Linda Tuhiwai Smith (2012), Frantz Fanon (1963), Angela Davis (2003), Paul Farmer (2004), and Leanne Betasamosake Simpson (2017) to frame drug policy as a site of epistemic, structural, and carceral violence.

Colonial Genealogies of Drug Legislation

The origins of modern drug laws trace back to European imperial expansion, where substances such as opium, coca, and cannabis held significant cultural, spiritual, and medicinal roles in Indigenous societies. As colonial powers sought to commodify and control these substances, they criminalised Indigenous practices, transforming local knowledge systems into “illicit” activities (Buxton, 2008). This legal redefinition served both economic extraction and political domination, enabling colonial authorities to govern not only territories but also the bodies and cultures of subject peoples (Britannica, 2025).

Walter Mignolo’s theory of the “colonial matrix of power” helps explain how colonialism extended beyond territorial conquest to encompass epistemic control, whereby Western legal and scientific systems were imposed to delegitimise Indigenous knowledge (Mignolo, 2011). Linda Tuhiwai Smith similarly critiques the colonial imposition of research and legal frameworks that reframe Indigenous practices as deviant or irrational, arguing that these systems continue to shape global knowledge hierarchies (Smith, 2012).

For example, British colonial policy in India institutionalised the opium trade as a state-controlled enterprise aimed at economic profit, while simultaneously criminalising Indigenous opium use (Brown, 2002). Similarly, in Latin America, Spanish and Portuguese colonists criminalised traditional coca use by Indigenous Andean populations, even as coca was integrated into colonial economies (Discovering Bristol, n.d.). Such policies illustrate how drug laws have historically functioned as instruments to undermine cultural sovereignty and entrench colonial power (Anec, n.d.).

The War on Drugs as a Neo-Colonial Continuation

In the twentieth century, the United States became the principal architect of global drug control, embedding colonial logics within international frameworks such as the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (United Nations, 1961). Framed as moral and security imperatives, the “War on Drugs” has disproportionately targeted racialised and economically marginalised groups worldwide (Taifa, 2021; UNODC, 2015).

Frantz Fanon’s analysis of colonial violence and its psychological effects is particularly relevant here. Fanon argued that colonial systems internalise domination through both physical and symbolic violence, a dynamic mirrored in the militarised enforcement of drug laws in the Global South (Fanon, 1963). Angela Davis extends this critique through her work on the prison-industrial complex and abolitionist frameworks, showing how drug laws have become tools of racialised social control, particularly in the United States (Davis, 2003).

In Latin America, Southeast Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa, domestic policies have been shaped by international drug treaties that frequently disregard local cultural practises and priorities (Pol, 2015). The criminalisation of the coca leaf, a substance with profound spiritual and medicinal significance for Andean Indigenous communities, exemplifies how global drug laws enact epistemic violence by erasing Indigenous knowledge and sovereignty (Metaal, 2025). The consequences include militarised violence, mass incarceration, and the erosion of Indigenous governance and wellbeing (Regilme Jr., 2023).

Contemporary Consequences: Carceral Expansion, Economic Exploitation, and Cultural Violence

The legacy of drug control policies today manifests in vast carceral systems and socioeconomic inequities. In the United States, punitive drug laws have driven the mass incarceration of Black, Latin American, and Indigenous populations at unprecedented rates (UNODC, 2015). Parallel trends occur in Latin America and Southeast Asia, where prisons are overcrowded with non-violent drug offenders living in inhumane conditions (Pol, 2015).

Paul Farmer’s concept of structural violence is instructive in understanding how drug laws produce health and economic disparities. Farmer argues that systemic inequalities—rooted in colonial histories—manifest in the unequal distribution of suffering, particularly in the Global South (Farmer, 2004). Economically, small-scale farmers are caught in a colonial cycle, compelled to cultivate illicit crops under threat of eradication and criminalisation while wealth and control accrue to transnational organisations and state actors (Singer, 2008). The illicit drug trade thus mirrors historic patterns of extraction and exploitation, perpetuating global inequalities.

Indigenous Perspectives and the Psychedelic Renaissance: Ethics, Safety, and Reciprocity

The resurgence of interest in psychedelic substances has illuminated ongoing tensions around colonialism and appropriation within drug policy and practice. Indigenous peoples have long emphasised that the use of traditional medicines is inseparable from cultural context, ceremony, and relational responsibilities (Celidwen aet al., 2022). This is not simply an ethical concern but a critical safety issue.

Leanne Betasamosake Simpson’s work on Indigenous sovereignty and relational epistemologies underscores the importance of centring Indigenous frameworks in any engagement with traditional medicines. Simpson argues that Indigenous knowledge is not merely content to be extracted but a living system of relationships, responsibilities, and resurgence (Simpson, 2017).

Indigenous frameworks of preparation, ceremony, cosmology, and recognition of spiritual entities provide essential guidance for the responsible and safe use of these medicines. Ignoring or diluting these protocols risks physical and psychological harm and constitutes a form of cultural violence (Indigenous Reciprocity Initiative, n.d.). As Yuria Celidwen, an Indigenous scholar and leader in psychedelic ethics, asserts:

“The medicine demands respect and relationship; without ceremony and reciprocal care, it can be dangerous and disempowering” (Celidwen, 2023).

At the same time, it is important to acknowledge the diverse actors in the psychedelic space. While some commercial and research entities perpetuate extractive and appropriative practices, numerous Indigenous-led organisations and allies are actively building reciprocal, culturally grounded models that honour traditional knowledge and foster genuine partnerships. Examples include the Indigenous Reciprocity Initiative and others working collaboratively with Indigenous healers to ensure ethical practices and benefit sharing.

Conclusion

Drug laws have historically functioned as mechanisms of colonial domination, intrinsically linked to racialised and economic systems of control. Rooted in imperialist extraction and the erasure of Indigenous cultures, these legal frameworks persist in contemporary policies that disproportionately marginalise racialised and economically disadvantaged communities globally. The perpetuation of the global “War on Drugs” exemplifies this ongoing colonial continuity through practices such as mass incarceration and economic exploitation, which compound structural inequities.

In contrast, Indigenous-led approaches to psychedelic medicines represent a critical site of resistance and reparation, offering decolonial pathways that centre Indigenous epistemologies, ceremonial practises, and principles of reciprocity. These frameworks not only challenge the epistemic violence embedded in prevailing drug policies but also propose alternative ethical paradigms prioritising community wellbeing and sovereignty.

Acknowledging and integrating these Indigenous models is essential not just as a gesture of justice, but as a transformative imperative for public health and drug policy globally. Only through such decolonial engagement can drug governance move beyond its colonial legacies toward equitable and culturally attuned practices that benefit all stakeholders.

Bibliography:

1. Anec. (n.d.). Cocaine in Coca, Miners, Silver, and Spanish Empire. Retrieved from https://www.anec.org/en/knowledge/biology/coca-sliver-35-382.htm

2. Blocker, J. S. (2006). Did Prohibition Really Work? American Journal of Public Health. Retrieved from https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdfplus/10.2105/AJPH.2005.065409

3. Britannica. (2025). Opium trade | China, History, Wars, & Facts. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/opium-trade

4. Britannica. (2025). Western colonialism - Opium Wars, China, Britain. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Western-colonialism/The-Opium-Wars

5. Brown, R. H. (2002). The Opium Trade and Opium Policies in India, China, Britain, and the United States: Historical Comparisons and Theoretical Interpretations. JSTOR. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/23654609

6. Burger, J., & Kapron, M. (2017). Drug Policies and Indigenous Peoples. Health and Human Rights Journal. Retrieved from https://www.hhrjournal.org/2017/05/08/drug-policies-and-indigenous-peoples/

7. Buxton, J. (2008). The Historical Foundations of the Narcotic Drug Control Regime. World Bank. Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/266161468315365139/pdf/wps4553.pdf

8. Davis, A.Y. (2003). Are Prisons Obsolete? New York: Seven Stories Press.

9. Discovering Bristol. (n.d.). The Spanish and Portuguese empires | South America. Retrieved from https://discoveringbristol.org.uk/slavery/routes/places-involved/south-america/spanish-Portuguese-empires/

10. Fanon, F. (1963). The Wretched of the Earth. Translated by C. Farrington. New York: Grove Press.

11. Farmer, P. (2004). Pathologies of Power: Health, Human Rights, and the New War on the Poor. Berkeley: University of California Press.

12. Hanson, G., Venturelli, P., & Fleckenstein, A. (2015). Ch. 3: A Brief History of Substance Use and U.S. Policy Responses. Ohio State Pressbooks. Retrieved from https://ohiostate.pressbooks.pub/swk3805coursebook/chapter/module-1-chapter-3/

13. King County Bar Association Drug Policy Project. (2005). Drugs and the Drug Laws: Historical and Cultural Contexts. DocsLib. Retrieved from https://docslib.org/doc/10100487/drugs-and-the-drug-laws-historical-and-cultural-contexts

14. Luty, J. (2018). The beginning of the end of prohibition: the politics of drug addiction. BJPsych Advances. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bjpsych-advances/article/beginning-of-the-end-of-prohibition-the-politics-of-drug-addiction/60E4954299297C87D5197844670AFB50

15. Mejía, D., & Csete, J. (2016). The Economics of the Drug War: Unaccounted Costs, Lost Lives, Missed Opportunities. Open Society Foundations. Retrieved from https://www.unodc.org/documents/ungass2016/Contributions/Civil/OpenSociety/The_Economics_of_the_Drug_War_-_Unaccounted_Costs_Lost_Lives_Missed_Opportunities.pdf

16. Metaal, P. (2025). Conflicted over Coca. Transnational Institute. Retrieved from https://www.tni.org/en/article/conflicted-over-coca

17. Mignolo, W.D. (2011). The Darker Side of Western Modernity: Global Futures, Decolonial Options. Durham: Duke University Press.

18. Pol, L. (2015). Failed drug policies in Latin America: the impact on prisons and human rights. Penal Reform International. Retrieved from https://www.penalreform.org/blog/failed-drug-policies-in-latin-america-impact-on/

19. Regilme Jr., S. S. F. (2023). State Violence in Narcotic Drug Governance: A Call for Harm Reduction and Human Rights Protection. Journal of Perpetrator Research, 5(1), 65-76. Retrieved from https://jpr.winchesteruniversitypress.org/articles/131/files/64a00ce9cf1a6.pdf

20. Rêgo, X., Oliveira, M. J., Lameira, C., & Cruz, O. S. (2021). 20 years of Portuguese drug policy - developments, challenges and the quest for human rights. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy. Retrieved from https://substanceabusepolicy.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13011-021-00394-7

21. Safe Drug. (n.d.). The Economic Costs and Impact on Development of the War on Drugs: A Comprehensive Report. Retrieved from http://safedrug.org/the-economic-costs-and-impact-on-development-of-the-war-on-drugs-a-comprehensive-report/

22. Simpson, L.B. (2017). As We Have Always Done: Indigenous Freedom through Radical Resistance. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

23. Singer, M. (2008). Drugs and development: the global impact of drug use and trafficking on social and economic development. The International Journal on Drug Policy. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/22983516/Drugs_and_development_the_global_impact_of_drug_use_and_trafficking_on_social_and_economic_development

24. Smith, L.T. (2012). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. 2nd ed. London: Zed Books.

25. Stowe, M-J., Gatonye, R., Maharjan, I., Kehinde, S., Arya, S., Herrera Valderrábano, J., Mcbride, A., Scheibein, F., Igonya, E. K., & Fast, D. (2024). The war on drugs is a war on us: young people who use drugs and the fight for harm reduction in the Global South. Harm Reduction Journal. Retrieved from https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12954-023-00914-7

26. Taifa, N. (2021). Race, Mass Incarceration, and the Disastrous War on Drugs. Brennan Center for Justice. Retrieved from https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/race-mass-incarceration-and-disastrous-war-drugs

27. UNODC. (2015). The Drug War, Mass Incarceration and Race. Retrieved from https://www.unodc.org/documents/ungass2016/Contributions/Civil/DrugPolicyAlliance/DPA_Fact_Sheet_Drug_War_Mass_Incarceration_and_Race_June2015.pdf

28. United Nations. (1961). Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Retrieved from https://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf