Is MDMA legal in Saint Lucia?

Also known as: molly, ecstasy

Legal status

Controlled. Class A drug under section 4(1)(b), by Part I paragraph 1(c) of Schedule 2. The abbreviation MDMA is not printed anywhere in the act, and neither is ecstasy or methylenedioxymethamphetamine; all three search terms return zero. It is caught by the generic in paragraph 1(c), which lists among its parent compounds 'an N-alkyl- -methylphenethylamine', the statute book's setting of N-alkyl-alpha-methylphenethylamine, derived 'by substitution in the ring to any extent with alkyl, alkoxy, alkylenedioxy or halide substituents'. MDMA is N-methyl-alpha-methylphenethylamine carrying a 3,4-methylenedioxy ring substituent. The Part II entry 'Methylamphetamine' was read and rejected: it is the same N-methyl parent without the ring substituent and it is Class B. Section 4(2) lets the Minister amend Schedule 2 by statutory instrument after consultation with or on the recommendation of the Advisory Council, and section 49 lets the Minister amend the Schedules by order, so the printed schedule is not the last word. No statutory instrument later than the Revised Edition showing the law as at 31 December 2021 was read here, and no index of Saint Lucia statutory instruments could be enumerated, so that is a real limit on this cell and not a form of words.

Consequences if caught

Capital exposure: none. The methylenedioxy ring substituent is what separates this row from methamphetamine: the same N-methyl parent is Class B under Part II, and adding the ring substituent brings the compound inside Part I paragraph 1(c) as Class A. Schedule 3 carries identical Class A and Class B figures in every row, so the sentence does not move. No section 8(4) quantity presumption attaches, and because there is no threshold in dosage units a pill count is evidence of intent under section 8(3) or section 25 rather than a statutory trigger. Schedule 3, which section 37 brings into effect, sets every punishment and it graduates by class rather than by substance. The Class A and Class B columns carry identical figures in every row of Schedule 3, so the class split makes no difference to the sentence. Importation or exportation under section 5(3) and production or being concerned in production under section 6(2) each carry, on summary conviction, 3 years or $100,000, and on indictment 14 years and $200,000. Supplying or offering to supply under section 6(3) carries the same figures. Possession under section 8(2) carries, on summary conviction, 3 years or $100,000, and on indictment 7 years or $200,000. Possession with intent to supply under section 8(3) carries, on summary conviction, 3 years and/or $100,000, and on indictment 14 years and/or $200,000. Section 25(1) is a separate trafficking ceiling and it does not graduate by substance at all: on summary conviction a fine of $100,000 or, where there is evidence of the street value of the controlled drug, 3 times that street value whichever is the greater, together with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years but which shall not be less than 5 years; on conviction on indictment, imprisonment for life. Section 2 defines drug trafficking to reach producing, supplying, transporting, storing, importing and exporting a controlled drug. The act provides no death penalty and the words death, capital and sentenced to death appear nowhere in it. Section 12(1) makes possession of any controlled drug in or within a radius of one hundred yards of school premises unlawful in itself and section 12(4) deems that possession to be for supply unless the contrary is proved. Section 25(3) separately deems possession in any school premises to be for drug trafficking unless the contrary is proved. Section 38 requires forfeiture on conviction.

If prescribed or medical

Section 10(3) obliges the Minister to exercise the regulation making power in section 10(1) so as to secure that it is not unlawful under section 6(1) for a doctor, dentist or veterinary practitioner acting in his or her capacity as such to prescribe, administer, manufacture, compound or supply a controlled drug, and not unlawful under section 8(1) for a doctor, dentist, veterinary practitioner, druggist or person lawfully conducting a retail pharmacy business to possess one for that purpose. Section 10(4) lets the Minister take a named drug back out of that protection by statutory instrument. Section 21(2)(g) empowers regulations regulating the issue of prescriptions containing controlled drugs. Whether regulations under sections 10 and 21 of this act have been made, and whether there is an authorised medicinal form of this substance in Saint Lucia, was not established here.

Documentation

Carry a prescribed controlled medicine in its original pharmacy packaging with the prescription. The act puts no documentation duty on a private traveller: section 21(2)(b) and (c) put documentation of transactions and record keeping on the trade, and sections 15 to 18 govern controlled drugs brought into Saint Lucia in transit under an export authorisation or diversion certificate, which is consignment traffic and not personal carriage. No local traveller permit scheme was established here.

Drug laws and enforcement change and vary within a country. This is not legal advice. Always confirm with Saint Lucia’s embassy or official drug authority before traveling; penalties can be severe, including imprisonment.