TBH it may still be better to see a doctor (where do you think the students get theirs from?) if you are going for a specialist professional qualification.
Getting pulled up for diversion/unauthorised posession of controlled substances or being identified as addicted to drugs (or any other serious mental health issue) makes everything a lot harder. In the same way the whole world is supposed to be adopting GAAP and by and large uses technical standards designed by some sort of fragile consensus between the USA, Europe and Asia to keep such things as telephones and the Internet working, these rules apply worldwide.
Drugs may well give you the energy and focus to get grade A in all your exams and the degree and TBH even if you get caught with loads you’d be unlikely to get a harsh penalty because of the value of your studies and might not get jail – (Malaysia and Singapore supply about half of Europes accountants as well as their own needs and have both quietly stopped using the death penalty for drugs posession), but employers and the professional associations carry out security auditing checks.
It is viewed as a big security risk to employ a drug addict or any other offender (and even those with serious but treatable mental heath conditions) in safety or business critical roles; at least until or unless a certain amount of time has passed which could be months or years; and rehabilitating such a person makes the cost of employment larger.
That applies even in “liberal” European countries and the more enlightened bits of the US. Not because the candidate is going to instantly sabotage the place or nick all the money and become a terrorist; but because their character shows they disobey rules which are suppoed to have been agreed by consensus (even though when it comes to drug control the reasons for them are now 60 years out of date).
