"The Human Rights Committee seemed to deviate from the above-mentioned principle of in dubio pro libertate in its Views on MAB, WAT and J-AYT v Canada. This case concerned the arrest of leading members of the "Assembly of the Church of the Universe" for their involvement in the care, cultivation, possession, distribution, maintenance, integrity and worship of the "Sacrament", which was generally know as marijuana. Rather than deciding the case under the obvious limitations clauses to protect public healt or public order, the Human Rights Committee concluded that it already did not raise prima facie issues under an probision of the ICCPR: "In particular, a belief consisting primarly or exclusively in the worship and distributuin of a narcotic drug cannot conceivably be brought within the scope of article 18 of the Covenant (freedom of religion and conscience)(...), fra boken "Freemdom of Religion or Belief, An International Law Commentary" (2016) side 114.

tl;dr: man må gjerne prøve seg, men Menneskerettighetskomiteen er ikke enig. Kanskje likevel verdt å merke seg at de i saken bruker "primarily or exclusively".