Report of Ecstasy Drug’s Great Risks Is Retracted http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/06/health/06ECST.html
September 6, 2003
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.
A leading scientific journal yesterday retracted a paper it published last year saying that one night's typical dose of the drug Ecstasy might cause permanent brain damage.
The monkeys and baboons in the study were not injected with Ecstasy but with a powerful amphetamine, said the journal, Science magazine.
The retraction was submitted by the team at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine that did the study.
A medical school spokesman called the mistake "unfortunate" but said that Dr. George A. Ricaurte, the researcher who made it, was "still a faculty member in good standing whose research is solid and respected."
The study, released last Sept. 27, concluded that a dose of Ecstasy a partygoer would take in a single night could lead to symptoms resembling Parkinson's disease.
The study was ridiculed at the time by other scientists working with the drug, who said the primates must have been injected with huge overdoses.
Two of the 10 primates died of heat stroke, they pointed out, and another two were in such distress that they were not given all the doses.
If a typical Ecstasy dose killed 20 percent of those who took it, the critics said, no one would use it recreationally.
In an interview yesterday, Dr. Ricaurte said he realized his mistake when he could not reproduce his own results by giving the drug to monkeys orally. He then realized that two vials his laboratory bought the same day must have been mislabeled: one contained Ecstasy, the other d-methamphetamine.
Dr. Ricaurte's laboratory has received millions of dollars from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and has produced several studies concluding that Ecstasy is dangerous. Other scientists accuse him of ignoring their studies showing that typical doses do no permanent damage.
At the time Dr. Ricaurte's study was published, it was strongly defended against those critics by Dr. Alan I. Leshner, the former head of the drug abuse institute, who had just become the chief executive officer of the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, which publishes Science.
Dr. Leshner had testified before Congress that Ecstasy was dangerous, and Dr. Ricaurte's critics accused him of rushing his results into print because a bill known as the Anti-Rave Act was before Congress. The act would punish club owners who knew that drugs like Ecstasy were being used at their dance gatherings.
Dr. Ricaurte yesterday called that accusation "ludicrous."
His laboratory made "a simple human error," he said.
"We're scientists, not politicians."
Asked why the vials were not checked first, he answered: "We're not chemists.
We get hundreds of chemicals here. It's not customary to check them."
Under the noses of the Israeli police – February 2003 Under the noses of the Israeli police
Published by Ha'aretz - Monday 4 February, 2003
Copyright: Ha'aretz
Drug use in East Jerusalem is rising steadily. Residents of the Palestinian city do not trust the Israeli police to efficiently combat the problem, but in the absence of enforcement institutions of their own they are helpless.
Drug dealers in East Jerusalem operate almost openly, say social workers and residents who are trying to combat the phenomenon. They claim that very often the dealers operate right under the noses of Israeli police officers - beside the branch of the Interior Ministry in East Jerusalem, in the vicinity of Damascus Gate, near the Flower Gate, in the Ras al Amud neighborhood beside the police headquarters and in the Christian Quarter of the Old City, right on the route taken by students on their way to school.
One does not need particularly sharp eyes to distinguish the pair of youths acting secretively in a corner and afterward hurriedly exchanging a handful of bills for something hidden in clenched fist. One does not have to be an expert to figure out that the youths on the corner of Sultan Suleiman St. are dragging on a hash or marijuana joint and not on a regular cigarette.
People in East Jerusalem can tell you that during the Christmas and New Year period, the drug of choice is LSD and that it is easy to obtain. That doesn't mean that it is hard to obtain heroin. One social worker who deals with addicts says a gram of heroin costs $70-80 in Jerusalem markets these days, compared to $200 a few months ago. The laws of the free market economy work - the price drops when supply rises.
Addicted at 16
Once only the Shuafat refugee camp and the Old City were stigmatized as "drug dens." Today, says Wisam Jawhan, who works in a Palestinian institute that advises and assists addicts and their families, drugs are everywhere. They have entrapped young people from all types of homes - religious and secular, rich and poor, refugees and the children of established Jerusalem families. Jawhan has also encountered young Palestinian women who use ecstasy and marijuana.
Each year the addicts Jawhan is asked to treat are younger and younger. If a 16-year-old is already an addict, one can only guess at what age he began using light drugs.
The high rate of drug users and addicts in East Jerusalem is another clear indication of the creation of a huge Palestinian slum in the Israeli capital. This symptom is joined by the tremendous extent of poverty (municipality statistics indicate that 66 percent of the Palestinians in Jerusalem live below the poverty line - more than anywhere else in the state), the blatant neglect of development and infrastructure, housing density that is among the highest in the city, building violations (for whatever reason) to the point of endangering lives, street gangs that control territory practically unimpeded, political-religious alienation between the authorities and the residents.
In 1999 the Arab Thought Forum (ATF), a center for Palestinian research in East Jerusalem, initiated a study of drug addiction among Palestinians in Jerusalem in order to increase anti-drug activity and reduce drug use. Addiction and the widespread use of drugs - with much higher levels than among Palestinian society in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and higher than among Jewish-Israeli society - have been worrying the capital's Palestinian community for years.
Members of the ATF feel this use of drugs indicates the extent of social and personal frustration among the community's youngsters, the disintegration of family cohesion, the demise of social and religious conventions and the apathy of the authorities.
The ATF's study was conducted by sociologist Michel Sayegh, in conjunction with a group of field workers - rehabilitated addicts. The study was published in 2001, six months after the outbreak of the bloody hostilities of September 2000. Sayegh and Jawhan believe the number of drug users has only risen since then.
A livelihood from crime
It is hard to verify the estimates because, among other reasons, the Authority for the War Against Drugs in Israel was unable to provide Haaretz with updated figures on the extent of addiction in East Jerusalem so that they could be compared with the extent of addiction in Israel. The authority, the body that coordinates all the activities in this area also failed to provide information on the rehabilitation facilities available to Palestinians. Haaretz received no response to a list of questions sent to the authority's spokesman, Shamai Golan, on January 6, 2003 and again on January 12, despite assurances that the information would be provided.
Sayegh based his research partially on the 1999 figures published by the authority. The gap between the ratio of drug users among the Jews and Arabs in Jerusalem is similar to the gap in the ratio between poor Jews and poor Arabs (27.8 percent compared to 66 percent). According to the figures published in Sayegh's study, 10,500 Jerusalem Arabs (5.5 percent) used drugs in 1999, compared to 14,434 Jews (3.3 percent). These figures were provided by the Central Bureau of Statistics. Jawhan says that the figures do not portray the severity of the problem and estimates that some 19,000 Palestinians in Jerusalem are drug users and alcoholics.
Sayegh's study found "only" 5,000 Palestinian drug addicts (2.4 percent of the Palestinian population). Statistics compiled by the anti-drug authority in 2000 showed that 6,000 Jerusalem Arabs (almost 3 percent) and 8,000 Jews (about 2 percent) were addicted to drugs. Sayegh also found some not very surprising correlations between socio-personal status and drug use. 94 percent of the fathers of the 250 addicts who participated in the study were unemployed or were not working for other reasons (such as disability, illness or age). Some 60 percent of those surveyed were from single parent families; the fathers of half of them were illiterate; 16.4 percent of the addicts were illiterate themselves, 29.6 percent had attended elementary school and 30.8 percent had completed ninth grade.
Sayegh's research showed that a large proportion of the addicts were young adults, with 32 percent being between the ages of 20 and 22 at the time of the survey and 27.6 between 23 and 25. Most of the rest were older. Some 19.6 percent of those surveyed said their families were helping them financially, 46 percent said they earned a livelihood from theft and other crimes and the remaining 34.4 percent said they worked for a living or subsisted on savings from previous employment.
Frustration, depression
The scourge of drugs in East Jerusalem is worst and has been around the longest in the Christian Quarter of the Old City, according to local residents. The problem began back in the 1970s and was so bad that it was one of the main causes behind the emigration of many Christian families. Former addicts say that even today, any new drug that hits the market appears first in the Christian Quarter. People who are active locally in the war against drugs note that Christian families suffer most from more than one family member being an addict or drug user. On the one hand the Christian families have been more attracted to the modern customs of Western Jerusalem, but on the other, since most of these families are middle class, their ambitions for social and professional advancement, just like those of middle class Muslims, have been blocked in the city expropriated by Israel.
The families can afford higher education, but the Israeli job market was and is closed to Palestinian professionals such as doctors, lawyers and accountants, even though they are residents of Jerusalem. In Christian society, unlike in Muslim society, alcohol is permitted. This removes another important defense against dependency in cases in which personal-family status, frustration, a feeling of being trapped and unemployment lay the groundwork for addiction. And Palestinians in East Jerusalem have many reasons to feel personal frustration and depression, say Sayegh, Jawhan and other community workers like Maha Abu Dia, director of the Center from Women's Counseling in East Jerusalem.
The center serves Palestinian women from the West Bank and Jerusalem, who complain of discrimination and violence both inside and outside the family. Abu Dia noticed that the complaints of violence or abuse in the home are not connected to drunkenness or drug addiction, while those of women from East Jerusalem usually stem from violence against them due to the addiction of a family member.
Many share Abu Dia's impression that despite the poverty, frustration and depression among residents of the West Bank and Gaza, the problem of drug addiction is not as bad there as in East Jerusalem. The Palestinian police told social workers at a Palestinian rehabilitation center in the West Bank, there are about 5,000 addicts in each of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Sayegh and Jawhan note that this is purely and estimate, but agree that the phenomenon is much worse in Jerusalem.
Shin Bet collaboration
One reason for the difference between Jerusalem and the Palestinian Authority (PA) areas is the accessibility of drugs. Jawhan say that the closer a Palestinian community is to the Green Line, the more drug users it will have. Another explanation is that families in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have a greater tendency to hide addiction from the eyes of society. This may affect the statistics, but it also reduces the friction and the exposure there. The damage caused to the institution of the Palestinian family in East Jerusalem is another reason: even in the Old City social workers have noticed that the exposure to drugs is much lower in the more religious Muslim neighborhoods and families, and it is reasonable to assume that this is true in traditional locales in general.
Another reason is that, contrary to what is happening in Jerusalem, the law enforcement authorities in the PA areas operate with more diligence. They have every intention of fighting the drug trade, all the more so because the drug trade is always linked with collaboration with the Israeli Shin Bet security services. Jerusalemites who are active in political organizations that have been outlawed by Israel say that more than once they have shared a prison cell with drug addicts, also Jerusalemites, who admitted at some stage or other that they have worked for the Shin Bet.
Palestinians in East Jerusalem say that the Israeli police is not doing all it can to halt the drug trade. Moderates say it is clear the police allocates most of its resources and efforts to security operations. Others, however, have the impression that in general more drug users than dealers are caught, and that the while drug sale locations that serve Jews are shut down within a week, those that serve only Arabs are allowed to continue to operate unhindered.
No neglect
Before the hostilities resumed, members of the Palestinian preventative security forces operated almost openly against drug dealers. Today, sources at the Orient House say the if preventative security personnel or any other person from any Palestinian institute, including community workers, try to act against drug dealers, they are liable to be arrested on suspicion of "operating under the auspices of the PA."
On the Mount of Olives, for example, a group of youths decided to beat up another group of youths, drug users and dealers who operated in the area unhindered. Local residents relate that it was the instigators of the beating who were arrested, not the dealers.
The poverty in the Palestinian neighborhoods of Jerusalem, the neglect and the high rate of addiction are fertile ground for the flourishing of theories of conspiracy whereby the Israeli authorities, including the police, are actually interested in the social and moral deterioration that leads to the weakening of the Palestinian community. The Jerusalem police reject this claim out of hand. According to police figures, in the past year there was and 8.3-percent increase in police activity toward preventing drug-related crime in the eastern part of the city.
Of the 545 persons arrested for drug-related crimes in 2002, 255 were Palestinians. Three of the six undercover dealers operated by the police worked in East Jerusalem, leading to the arrest of 66 drug dealers. Last year 400 criminal files were opened in East Jerusalem (some people had two files against them) - 165 for drug-related offenses, 42 for possession of drugs not for consumption and about 60 for drug use. The police add that there is no basis for the claim that places where drugs are sold to Jews are closed down while those selling to Arabs remain open, if only for the simple reason that Jews have stopped buying drugs in the eastern part of the city. The police emphasize that there is no deliberate neglect of the war against drugs.
One thing that the police do not dispute is the willingness of the Palestinian society to assist in catching drug dealers. Palestinians admit that their revulsion to drug dealers and their fear of the spread of addiction outweigh their apprehension and hesitation regarding calling on the Israeli police. The police concur that the Palestinians help the police in the war against drugs more than in any other area of crime. Residents are quite willing to let the police use their rooftops as lookouts for drug dealers and when patrol vehicles come to pick up dealers local residents do not crowd around the vehicles in an attempt to delay them, as the do in other types of cases.
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/
Centennial Thoughts: The Indian Hemp Drugs Commission Report – November 2002 Centennial Thoughts: The Indian Hemp Drugs Commission Report
Published by The Schaffer library of drug policy - Tuesday 19 November, 2002
Copyright: The Schaffer library of drug policy
This monumental study exposes the overriding and pervasive powers of contemporary collective denial and moral failure underpinning policies of cannabis prohibition. Motivated by convenient moralism, questions are repeatedly disingenuously raised concerning the harm of hemp drugs, cannabis, or marijuana. The engine of agitprop bureaucratic ire fires up. Hearings are scheduled, witnesses heard, proceedings transcribed, summarized, presented to the requesting organization, discussed, filed, and forgotten. The prohibition policies go on. Enforcement, corrections systems strain under the demands of majoritarian magical beliefs in coercive powers of Government; promoted by continuing self-serving Government misinformation and censorship. From the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission's policy perspective, today's drug polices would be unthinkable.
In the century since the resolution passed the British House of Commons setting up the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission that resulted in this massive inquiry documented in a nine volume report there have been drastic changes in public policy in the United States and Great Britain.
The Indian hemp drug regulation policies were explicitly predicated upon optimal and minimal government intervention.
The subsequent century in the United States, Great Britain, and Europe has seen pandemic spread of prohibitionist authoritarian Government interference- the American Disease- social experiment run amok.
Income taxes, mass conscription, and two world wars have seen regression from utilitarian governance of enlightened non-interference to intrusive majoritarian autocracy. Authoritative Government has become authoritarian. Less and less Government justification and demonstrated necessity are needed. The principle of non-interference is virtually inoperative. The space of human existence where a person reigns uncontrolled contracts even further. The large departments of individualistic human life are contracted or eliminated by laws, public and corporate policy.
The second intervention by Government; giving advice and promulgating information has seen a parallel degradation. From legitimate and trustworthy dissemination of factual information through the institutions of science and medicine to censorship, giving bad advice, dissimulation and deception in the service of coercion and manipulation. The ensuing chaos of ignorance, partial truths, and outright lies has produced a cacophonous toxic confusion surrounding the use of hemp drugs. The font of contemporary knowledge is now a stinking swamp, hopelessly poisoned by the ignorant fantasies, fears, and untruths resulting from prohibitionists' drug propaganda efforts.
Fifty years after the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission Report in America the New York Mayor's Committee on Marihuana reported on use of the drug after a five year study, seven years after national marijuana prohibition. The perspective was based on the premise that departments of human life and individual circle with uncontrolled reign did not include the right to use marihuana. The authoritative Government intervention of Prohibition is now accepted; the non-interference principle of the Millsean Indian Hemp Drugs Administration policy; dead- a luxury enjoyed, ironically, by people of India subjugated by the British imperium.
Descriptions of marihuana use were now from the perspective of studying the characteristics of the users of this illicit drug: to what extent, method of distribution, attitude of smoker toward society and use of the drug, relationship with eroticism, crime, and juvenile delinquency. Discussions of legitimacy of Government intervention are by implication discussing the relative dangerousness of marihuana. The legitimacy of Prohibition as a social policy was neither justified nor discussed. Religious use or freedom is not mentioned.
"I am glad that the sociological, psychological, and medical ills commonly attributed to marihuana have been found to be exaggerated insofar as the City of New York is concerned. I hasten to point out, however, that the findings are to be interpreted only as a reassuring report of progress and not as encouragement to indulgence, for I shall continue to enforce the laws prohibiting the use of marihuana until and if complete findings may justify an amendment to existing laws."
In the 1970 revision in Government marihuana prohibition policy generated another report in 1972: Marihuana: a Signal of Misunderstanding- First Report of the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse.
Individual rights are at least discussed in order to be heavily discounted:
"So, while we agree with the basic philosophical precept that society may interfere with individual conduct only in the public interest, using coercive measures only when less restrictive measures would not suffice, this principle merely initiates inquiry into a rational social policy but does not identify it. We must take a careful look at this complicated question of the social impact of private behavior. And we must recognize at the outset the inherent difficulty in predicting effects on the public health and welfare, and the strong conflicting notions of what constitutes the public interest."
"Religious freedom" as currently delineated by the Government places the burden on the individual to pass certain "tests" to prove that hemp drugs used for sacramental purposes:
"Cases dealing with religious freedom in other contexts have isolated three distinct foci of inquiry when a law is challenged as violative of the "free exercise" clause: (1) Is the claimant's belief and practice really a "religion" within the meaning of the First Amendment? (2) If so, is the practice prohibited by the challenged statute essential to the practice of the "religion?" (3) Even if the answers to (1) and (2) are yes, is there nevertheless a sufficiently compelling state interest to warrant overriding the practice? Only when the proscribed activity is essential to a qualified "religion" and the state's interest is not overwhelming will the courts invoke the First Amendment to invalidate an otherwise permissible legislative proscription."
In the 1989 Carl Olsen, a white Rastafarian and director of Iowa NORML unsuccessfully attempted a religious freedom defense for charges of marijuana selling and importation for distribution to other members of the Ethiopian Coptic Zion Church.
"If the 'compelling interest' test is to be applied...it must be applied across the board, to all actions thought to be religiously commanded... Any society adopting such a system would be courting anarchy.... The rule respondents favor would open the prospect of constitutionally required religious exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind- ranging from compulsory military service....to the payment of taxes.....drug laws."
Dutifully crafted by Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, now on the supreme court, no question of how authoritative interference of Government is accepted to be appropriate public policy. Religious freedom is now restricted to activity that must be asserted and proven rather than assumed. Proving compelling interest has switched from the Government to the individual.
Departments of human life were seen not to be imperiously guarded for the individual but regarded with mistrust and source of opportunities for dissent against public policy. At the height of the Vietnam war marijuana use was strongly identified with the growing student antiwar resistance.
The non-intervention principle is at least recognized but the departments of individuality and circle around the individual were routinely stepped over by Government with justification in this case for national security. Militarism preempted any considerations of individual rights of privacy. Departments of human life were small and confined to cosmetic obligatory institutional ritual displays in the context of growing public resistance to the American military industrial behemoth run amok in southeast Asia.
Notwithstanding the cautious conclusion of the Commission to critically examine the policies of marijuana prohibition, the report was conspicuously rejected sight unseen by then president Richard M. Nixon to demonstrate his being "tough on crime" in a presidency struggling to end the Vietnam war.
Twenty-two years later on the centennial of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission Report finds the principle of Government non-interference is an all but forgotten faded idealistic icon, given hollow obeisance at state ceremonies, a quaint philosophical curiosity of the past. The circle around the individual is reduced to a pale, flaccid, tattered, transparent, and permeable membrane. Intrusion is limited only by available funding to Government interference. The worsening of the balance of power between the individual and state has increased by an order of magnitude, facilitated by advances in technology.
Toqueville in his prophetic Democracy in America warns of dangerous forms of despotism in democratic, egalitarian America:
"A great many persons of the present day are quite contented with this sort of compromise between administrative despotism and the sovereignty of the people; and they think they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large. This does not satisfy me: the nature of him I am to obey signifies less to me than the fact of extorted obedience."
"Thus it every day renders the exercise of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent; it circumscribes the will within a narrower range and gradually robs a man of all the uses of himself. The principle of equality has prepared men for these things; it has predisposed men to endure them and often to look upon them as benefits.
After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of the man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence, it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd."
Attacked by oaths of "drug free," informers (including children), undercover police, drug-sniffing dogs, random and warrantless searches, child snatching, drug testing, forfeiture of property, surveillance of bank, business, electricity, and other records, the departments of human life wither. The parts of human life considered reserved territory are noticeably smaller- the individual, society and "civilization" suffer the loss.
Review of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission Report is important for perspective in assessing the legitimacy and direction of contemporary Government drug policy in a democratic society. Froude's theorem of functional governance: "no laws are of any service which are above the working level of public morality, and evasion." was of importance to feudal England, the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission in 1894 and a century later a public policy issue of prime magnitude.
THM April 16, 1994
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/index.htm
Swedish national policy and the drug free state – November 2002 Swedish national policy and the drug free state
Published by The Canadian Library of Parliament - Tuesday 19 November, 2002
Copyright: The Canadian Library of Parliament
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND TO SWEDISH DRUG POLICY
NATIONAL DRUG STRATEGY
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
A. Classes of drugs
B. Offences
C. Penalties
D. Prosecutorial discretions
DEBATE IN SWEDEN
RECENT REPORTS OR STUDIES
COSTS
A. Public Costs
B. Social Costs
ADMINISTRATION
STATISTICS
A. Use
B. Offences
INTRODUCTION
This paper provides a brief introduction to Sweden’s national drug policy. This includes:
· Background information to its drug policies;
· A review of the national drug strategy;
· The legislation with respect to illicit drugs;
· The debate and recent studies;
· The costs associated with illicit drug use; and
· Data related to drug use and drug-related offences.
This paper forms part of a series of country pictures being prepared by the Parliamentary Research Branch of the Library of Parliament for the Special Senate Committee on Illegal Drugs.
BACKGROUND TO SWEDISH DRUG POLICY
Sweden, a Nordic country covering 450,000 km2, has a population of roughly 9 million. Approximately 2/3 of the population lives in rural areas and the others generally have their roots in these areas. The population is relatively homogenous, with almost 90% being Lutheran. It would appear that Swedish people tend to be conformist and that strange or deviant behaviour is not easily accepted. Sweden has a social democratic tradition and is well known for its welfare system which in the past included jobs, housing, universal health care, a social safety net and a secure future for its population. It is only in the last century that it has become a “rich” country. Economic problems in the last decade or so, however, have had negative effects on its welfare system.
Popular movements have a long history in Sweden and have helped shape it. These movements are eligible for state subsidies and are nationally established with many local branches. Some of the popular movements in the fields of drugs (for example, Parents Against Drugs, Hassela Solidarity and the Association for a Drug-Free Society who all strive for a drug free society and a corresponding strict drug policy) have played, and still play, an important role in the development of Swedish drug policy. Others with influence include individuals and groups from the treatment sector, the police and the organization European Cities Against Drugs.
In Sweden, drug policy is viewed as part of its welfare and social policy. The drug phenomenon is seen as one of the most serious social problems (if not the most important problem) and drugs are viewed as an external menace to the country. Drug abuse is often perceived as a cause for other social problems. Many are of the view that the drug problem puts traditional Swedish values at risk. It is not only drugs, but also the liberalization debate, that are seen as coming from other countries to influence Swedish values. These concerns have increased since Sweden became a member of the European Union in 1995, as most of the other members of the EU have adopted a more liberal approach when it comes to the drug issue.
In comparison to other Western countries in Europe, Swedish drug policy is regarded as restrictive. One of the aims of the policy is to make it clear that drugs are not tolerated in society. Drug use is regarded as deviant behaviour and such behaviour must be stopped. Some examples of this restrictive attitude include:
· The overall goal is that of a drug-free society;
· Harm reduction programs are only available in a limited fashion;
· Treatment is based on obtaining complete abstention and it is possible to force people into treatment;
· Consumption of narcotics is an offence, and urine and blood test are used to detect those suspected of drug use;
· Drug legislation is strictly enforced;
· Discussions regarding the medical value of cannabis are almost non-existent;
· Swedish legislation strictly adheres, and even surpasses, the requirements set out in the three United Nations drug conventions.
Historically, Sweden has not had a problem with illegal drug use and such use was not regarded as a serious social problem. As in many other western countries, this changed in the 1960s. In Sweden in 1965, there were signs of increased drug use, including use of cannabis, amphetamines, LSD and opiates. Amphetamines were, and are, more of a problem than heroin, which was the problem drug in many other countries. Drug addicts have historically been people injecting amphetamines intravenously.
Amphetamines were introduced into Sweden in 1938, and were promoted for weight loss and as stimulants. They were used by large segments of the population and were also related to a criminal subculture. Over the years, as the controls on amphetamines increased (for example being only available on prescription), the occasional and experimental use declined, while regular use and abuse increased. In addition, the way the drug was taken (intravenously rather than orally) had changed. “The development of the consumption of central stimulants from the late 1930s to the mid 1960s could be described as the transformation of a socially accepted medicine used by many, and different kinds of people, to an illicit drug basically consumed in a deviant environment.” This long history of use is one of the reasons that amphetamine use was and remains a major concern in Sweden.
While Swedish drug policy is currently very restrictive, this was not always the case. In fact in the 1960s, its policy was fairly liberal, basically reflecting a harm reduction approach. For example, from 1965 to 1967, it was possible for severe drug abusers to obtain prescriptions for morphine and amphetamines. This non-scientific experiment (involving approximately 120 people) was used by Nils Bejerot, a police doctor and very influential figure in Swedish drug policy, in his study of the relationship between drug use and drug policy in the period between 1965-1970. Some of his findings included: that changes from restrictive to permissive policy and vice versa was reflected in the rates of intravenous drug use; that this experiment was the origin of the Swedish drug epidemic; and that the experiment did not have the desired effect of crime reduction. His findings are still widely accepted in Sweden even though they have been criticised. Other examples of a more liberal policy include that police focussed their efforts on large-scale drug trafficking and that a Prosecutor General’s instruction provided for the waiver of charges for minor drug offences. Thus, the focus was more on the supply side of drugs.
With increased drug use in 1965, the Committee on the Treatment of Drug Abuse was established: it published four reports from 1967 to 1969. The first report dealt with treatment and the second with repressive measures. It is this second report which led to the adoption of the Narcotic Drugs Act in 1968. The Committee’s reports indicated that the drug problem was on the increase. This finding, in conjunction with the findings of Bejerot, are partly responsible for the more restrictive approach adopted by Sweden in the late 1960s. In addition, since 1968, the government organized a massive media and school campaign against drugs. This led to a generation growing up with messages based on the gateway theory, among others. This theory is used as a justification for being restrictive in relation to cannabis and “Swedish drug policy actually focuses on cannabis, since it is alleged ‘drug careers’ start with this substance.” In addition, the dangers caused by cannabis itself (psychosis, addictive character, higher risk of suicide, etc.) are seen as reasons for having a restrictive policy.
Over time, Swedish policy became more restrictive and repressive. For example, penalties for drug offences have increased several times. The current Swedish policy, with its primary goal of a drug-free society, was instituted in the late 1970’s because of what was thought to be an increasing social problem. “The reason for this, in some respect, unrealistic pursuit, can partly be found in Sweden’s positive experience with the welfare state and its firm belief in being able to change society.” There are other examples of a more restrictive approach. For example, in 1980, a waiver of charges was only available if amounts possessed for personal use were sufficiently small that they could not be subdivided and the waiver would no longer apply to all drugs. In addition, the early 1980’s saw police focusing on street trading. “The aim was no longer to target big dealers, but the drug users, since they are considered to be the motor of the ‘drug engine.’” This more restrictive policy has continued over the years with even more strengthening of penalties, by criminalizing use, and allowing urine and blood tests for those suspected of use, etc. Although the original goal of the urine and blood tests was to detect new users and provide them with appropriate treatment, it would appear that the tests are no longer being used for this sole purpose as known drug users are also being targeted.
Some authors have drawn a link between Sweden’s restrictive drug policy and its restrictive alcohol policy. The temperance movement has a long history in Sweden and the country has developed a fairly restrictive alcohol policy, including a state monopoly on the sale of alcohol. The following has been stated:
Swedish attitudes towards alcohol are relevant since a restrictive alcohol policy makes a restrictive drug policy a logical option. Moreover, the total consumption model on which the alcohol policy is based, is thought to be valid for illicit drugs as well. By limiting the total consumption of drugs, the total harm caused by drugs is alleged to be lower as well. However, it was shown that this correlation is far from clear when it comes to (different) illicit drugs.
NATIONAL DRUG STRATEGY
Sweden is a party to the three international conventions on drug control and has adopted a comprehensive drug control strategy. Its vision is that of a drug-free society and the policy is built on three pillars: prevention, treatment and control measures.
Following the creation of a Commission on Narcotic Drugs, the Swedish government presented a new action plan in January 2002, which is to be valid until 2004. A total of SEK 325 million (approximately $50 million Canadian) has been allocated over the three-year period to combat illegal drug use. The action plan was presented as a means to reverse the disturbing trend in drug abuse.
Sweden’s vision, when it comes to drug policy, has not changed since the early 1980s: it is that of a drug-free society. This vision is reflective of Sweden’s restrictive drug policy. It is based on a balance between reducing demand for, and supply of, drugs. More specifically, the objectives are:
· To reduce the number of new recruits to drug abuse (mainly through prevention directed at young people);
· To encourage more drug users to give up the habit (through care and treatment); and
· To reduce the supply of drugs (through criminal measures).
One of the key new features of the drug strategy is the creation of a national anti-drugs coordinator position. The position was created to have clear leadership in the drug policy area, make it possible to follow up on the plan’s goals, and determine whether new initiatives are required to combat new problems. The coordinator will be responsible for implementing the action plan as well as coordinating the national drug policy in general. The key tasks for the new anti-drugs coordinator are:
· To develop cooperation with authorities, municipal and county councils, NGOs, etc.;
· To shape public opinion;
· To undertake a supporting function for municipal and county councils in the development of local strategies;
· To initiate methods development and research;
· To serve as the Government spokesperson on drugs issues;
· To evaluate the action plan; and
· To report regularly to the Government (at least once a year).
Of the SEK 325 million, 100 million (approximately $15 million Canadian) has been allocated to a special drugs initiative within the Swedish Prison and Probation Service. The goal is to offer care and treatment to all drug abusers in this system. In addition, the National Prison and Probation Administration is required to:
· Develop methods for preventing drugs being brought into institutions and detention centres;
· Investigate the obstacles to treatment outside institutions; and
· Produce special programmes for contract care, i.e. care in accordance with a contract between the person convicted and the community.
With respect to the police, the National Police Board and the National Council for Crime Prevention will be required to carry out their own review of police efforts to combat drug-related crime.
In Sweden, while the national policy is created at the national level, much of the responsibility for implementing the goals of the action plan remains with the municipalities. For example, they have responsibility for the care of drug abusers pursuant to the Social Services Act. In addition, prevention initiatives are also carried out at the local level. Thus, strategies in municipalities will be based on local concerns. Enforcement of the legislation remains at the national level, however, through the police and customs services.
Treatment is one of the three pillars of Sweden’s drug policy. One of the stated goals of Swedish drug policy is to rehabilitate the user rather than to punish them by way of the criminal justice system. Since 1982, it has been possible to force people into drug treatment (also applies to alcohol and other products) for a period of up to six months. The main reason for this type of treatment is to protect the user or others in cases of life threatening situations and to motivate the user to continue treatment on a voluntary basis. The use of compulsory treatment appears to be uncommon and its effectiveness has been questioned.
The goal of treatment in Sweden is generally to obtain complete abstention. In the last several years, there has been a shift from compulsory treatment and institutional treatment towards out-patient treatment. In the past, the emphasis was put on long-term, in-patient programs. The treatment was often done in therapeutic communities based in rural areas of Sweden. Many of the institutions involved in treatment are non-governmental but are paid for their services by the government. This has created a very influential lobby group that obviously requests more resources for treatment initiatives as this is needed for their survival.
Treatment initiatives were very well funded in the past (particularly in the 1980s because this is when HIV/AIDS started to manifest themselves). Pro-active efforts were made to locate drug addicts and provide them with proper treatment. A person could often be in treatment for a period of two years (often in a therapeutic community). It would appear, however, that treatment is less easily available today than it was 10 to 15 years ago. In addition, the time a user spends in treatment has shortened. These changes are due to cutbacks in social service spending at the municipal level that occurred in the 1990s. “Whereas in 1989 there were 19,000 people in treatment centres (for both alcohol and drugs), in 1994 this number had dropped to 13,000. In the same period, the number of people in compulsory care dropped from 1,500 to 900. Due to the budget cuts, 90 treatment homes were closed between 1991 to 1993.”
Methadone substitution programs have been available in Sweden since the end of the 1960s. Currently, approximately 600 people are involved in methadone substitution programs in Stockholm, Uppsala, Malmo and Lund. The programs are strictly regulated and are officially viewed as being experimental. Some of the conditions for participation include that: the patient must be aged over 20 and demonstrate at least four years of intravenous opiate abuse; he or she must have tried several forms of drug-free treatment; the person in question must have entered the program on a voluntary basis (for example, the person must not be detained, under arrest, sentenced to a term of imprisonment or be an inmate of a correctional facility). For those participating in methadone substitution programs, other drugs are not permitted and the patient must visit the clinic on a daily basis. At this time, the maximum number of people that may be in the program at one time is 800. Pilot projects are under way with Subutex.
While Sweden has spent large sums of money on treatment, few of its programs have been properly evaluated. Therefore, it is difficult to provide details of their effectiveness. “The official aim is to rehabilitate drug addicts and a lot of effort and financial means are allocated to achieve this; much more than in many other European countries. However, despite all these good intentions, the reality is that the effectiveness of these very expansive programmes is relatively low. In the long run, the Swedish drug treatment programmes do not show better results than what is found internationally.”
With respect to harm reduction initiatives, there are few low threshold services in Sweden and most are staffed by voluntary organisations. They offer a series of services, but no prescriptions. Needle exchange programs are operated at clinics for infectious diseases in hospitals in Lund and Malmo, and are thus fairly limited. Harm reduction initiatives, such as needle exchange programs, are difficult to promote under a vision of a drug-free society where drug use is not accepted. A proposal in the late 1980’s to introduce needle exchange programs throughout Sweden was quashed by Parliament because it “was felt that a higher availability of needles would not stop the spread of HIV, on the contrary, it was thought to increase intravenous drug use.”
The criminal justice system also plays a role with respect to treatment. In 2000, more than 5,000 drug users were placed in prison. While in prison, offenders have access to treatment programs for drug abuse and some offenders are transferred outside prison for treatment. There are also initiatives to keep drugs out of prisons, for example by conducting searches and urine tests. While in prison, the offender is not offered syringes and substitution treatments are not available.
As previously stated, Swedish legislation allows, under certain conditions, that a sentence may be served outside prison. The necessity of drug treatment is one of the reasons that is often raised. Another alternative to imprisonment is a probationary sentence combined with institutional drug treatment. An example of an alternative to prison is the following:
Since 1998, persons with drug addiction problems who have committed a drug offence can access treatment signing a ‘treatment contract.’ It is a real contract between the drug addict and the Court in which the two parties have rights and obligations like in all contracts. However, certain conditions must be fulfilled by the drug addict: the person must need treatment and he must be motivated to undergo treatment; he/she is a misuser of drugs; and the drug habit contributed to the drugs crime, which should not be serious (less than 2 years foreseen as penalty). The person is not sent to prison and a personalised plan of treatment is established. The health authorities are responsible for the treatment and shall report to the local prison and probation administration and to the public prosecutor if the probationer seriously neglects the obligations stated in the personal plan.
With respect to cannabis, it is viewed as a dangerous drug “and its use is regarded as the beginning of a career in drugs.” This is one of the reasons that prevention measures pay specific attention to cannabis as this should lead to less experimenting with the drug which will prevent new recruits into the drug scene.
With respect to prevention, drug education programs start early and regularly appear throughout the school curriculum. “Without exaggeration, this opinion-forming could be described as a process of indoctrination. Considering the magnitude of these programmes, the contents of them have gradually become something indisputable and conclusive that one incorporates them into one’s own value system.”
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
A. Classes of drugs
The main drug legislation in Sweden is the Narcotic Drugs Criminal Act 1968. The term “narcotic drugs” is defined in section 8: they include medicinal products or substances hazardous to health with addictive properties and which are subject to control under an international agreement to which Sweden is a party or which the Government has declared to be ‘narcotic drugs’ within the meaning of the Act. No distinction is made between soft and hard drugs. As will be discussed later, the nature of the substance is, however, among the criteria to determine the seriousness of an offence. Narcotic drugs are set out in five lists. List I deals with illegal drugs without medical use; lists II to IV deal with narcotic substances with medical usage and regulation of its import/export; and list V deals with narcotic substances outside international controls. Pursuant to the legislation, narcotic medicines may only be supplied on prescription from a doctor, dentist or veterinarian.
B. Offences
In Sweden, almost all forms of involvement with narcotics are prohibited pursuant to the Narcotic Drugs Criminal Act. This Act lists the behaviours and practices which constitute drug offences and includes possession for personal use, supply (which is fairly broadly defined), manufacture, etc. Even consumption (drug use) has been prohibited since 1988. In this case, “it is not addiction which is a criminal offence according to this law, but the act of adding a drug to the human body.” The police are entitled to conduct urine or blood tests in the case of people suspected of having used drugs.
The Smuggling Criminal Act 2000 regulates illegal import and export of drugs. Other relevant legislation includes: the Doping Criminal Act 1991 which regulates the importation, supply, possession of performance enhancing drugs for example; the Act on Prohibition of Certain Substances which are Dangerous to the Health 1999 which regulates possession and supply of substances that entail danger to life or health and are being used, or can be used, for the purpose of intoxication – this legislation does not regulate substances regulated by other Acts.
There are also a number of relevant laws outside the criminal law area. They include: the Social Service Act 1980 which covers the possible forms of care for drug users; the Act on the Forced Treatment of Abusers which provides that an addict who is dangerous to himself or to others may be ordered by a court to undergo compulsory treatment (which involves deprivation of liberty for up to six months for adults and even longer for those up to the age of 20). Other legislation deals with possible expulsion from school for students who abuse drugs, revocation of a driving licence for drug addiction, etc. There is zero-tolerance with respect to driving under the influence of drugs.
C. Penalties
Punishment is determined by rules contained in the Swedish Penal Code. There are three degrees of penalties for drug offences: minor, ordinary and serious. Penalties for minor drug offences consist of fines or up to six months’ imprisonment, for ordinary drug offences, up to three years, and for serious offences, two to ten years imprisonment. The penalties regulated under the Smuggling Criminal Act, are identical to the penalties listed above.
The seriousness of the offence is based on the nature and quantity of drugs and other circumstances. The government has stated that the term “minor drug offence” is to be reserved for the very mildest of offences. For example, it should generally only involve personal use or possession for personal use of very small amounts. In these cases, a fine may be warranted. The fine is based on the offender’s income. Minor offences include: amphetamine up to 6 g, cannabis up to 50 g, cocaine up to 0.5 g and heroin up to 0.39 g; ordinary offences include: amphetamine from 6.1 g to 250 g, cannabis from 51 g to 2 kg, cocaine from 0.6 g to 50 g and heroin from .04 g to 25 g; and serious offences include: amphetamine 250 g or more, cannabis 2 kg or more, cocaine 51 g or more and heroin 25 g or more. The trafficking of drugs will generally led to imprisonment.
With respect to smuggling, in determining whether the offence is serious, one must consider whether it formed part of an activity pursued on a large scale or on a commercial basis, involved particularly large quantities of drugs or was otherwise of a particularly dangerous or ruthless nature.
In 1996, of the 5,862 people sentenced for drug-related offences, 3,760 were sentenced for minor offences, 1,708 for ordinary offences and 391 for serious offences. Of the 1,274 who were sentenced to imprisonment, 54 were for minor offences, 893 for ordinary offences and 326 for serious offences.
As in other countries, there are several alternatives to imprisonment. For example, the court can choose other sanctions including probation, conditional sentence or compulsory treatment. These sanctions appear to be used frequently in drug cases. The following has been stated with respect to compulsory treatment:
Generally a drug addict who is found guilty of any type of crime can in certain circumstances be ordered to undergo detoxification treatment. Treatment can take place in conjunction with a prison sentence or else together with probation, a conditional sentence or conditional release from prison. The consent of a convicted person to undergo treatment under certain conditions may constitute a reason for ordering probation instead of imprisonment (so-called contract treatment). In practice, probation and conditional sentencing in connection with compulsory treatment are usually used for drug offences of normal severity, that is in cases where imprisonment would otherwise be imposed.
Swedish legislation also allows for the forfeiture of any drugs used in the commission of an offence, any gains made, the property used as an aid in an offence, etc.
D. Prosecutorial discretion
The following is a description of prosecutorial discretion is Sweden:
The prosecutor has an absolute duty to prosecute. This means that the prosecutor must initiate proceedings for the prosecution of an offence. This is a principal rule to which there are a number of exceptions. For minor drug offences, the sanction imposed is imprisonment for a maximum of six months. In the Circular of the Prosecutor-General on Certain Questions regarding the Handling of Narcotics Cases, the Prosecutor-General stated that the dropping of prosecutions for narcotic drug offences should be limited to cases involving only possession for personal use of indivisible amounts or corresponding to at most a roll-up of cannabis resin or a dose of some stimulant of the central nervous system, with the exception of cocaine, i.e. such a small amount of a narcotic substance that it would not normally be further divided and sold. Having regard to the difficulties in individual cases of determining the magnitude of this quantity, prosecutions should go ahead in cases of doubt. If circumstances give grounds for assuming that the possession, despite the small amount, is not intended for personal use, the prosecution should not be dropped. As a consequence of these remarks, prosecutions should also not be dropped where an abuser is found in possession of narcotic drugs amounting to personal use for a certain period. In addition, it is of great importance that the dropping of prosecutions should be mainly limited to occurrences of the nature of first offences.
DEBATE IN SWEDEN
The Swedish vision of a drug-free society is so widely accepted that it is not questioned in the political arena or the media. The drug policy has support from all political parties and, according to the opinion surveys, the restrictive approach receives broad support from the public. For example, a survey in 2001 revealed that 96% were opposed to legalizing any drug that is classified. In addition, another survey in 2000 revealed that 91% were against decriminalizing cannabis use. The state of Swedish public opinion has been described as follows:
The role of public opinion is central to understanding the attitude of the different political parties. Opinion polls show that a large majority of the people subscribe to a restrictive drug policy. The same polls indicate that drugs are perceived as one of society’s main social problems. The moral panic surrounding drugs is such, that no political party dares to speak out against any measures that may appear to move in the direction of a more liberal drug policy. Supporting the restrictive policy, or even asking for more restrictive measures to curb increase in the drug problem are essential for a political party to win votes. Saying the contrary, to back a more liberal approach, is not an option for a political party and would almost mean its political death. It has been pointed out that anti-drug pressure groups have been the driving forces behind influencing public opinion, and through them the political parties. It has also been shown that besides the social movements, the media have also contributed to the drug scare that exists today and the defining of drugs as a major social problem.
Thus, the Swedish population in general has a negative view of drug use and is convinced that drugs pose a major threat to society. These themes have been advanced by government, the media and other organizations in Sweden, and others do not often criticize them. Scientists are generally the only group that raises doubts with respect to the current policy. Criticism of the drug policy can have negative consequences on a person. For example, they may be professionally and personally criticized, they may be regarded as a traitor, and, such a stance can have a negative impact on their employment situation. Much of the prevention in Sweden is based on providing information about the dangers of drugs. The purpose of these messages is to scare youth away from drugs. This has fostered a view in the Swedish population that drugs are evil and should be avoided at almost all costs.
In recent years, the consequences of downsizing preventive and treatment efforts have dominated the debate.
RECENT REPORTS OR STUDIES
In 1998, the government created a Commission on Narcotic Drugs. Its mandate was to evaluate Sweden’s drug policy and to propose, within the concept of a restrictive drug policy, measures for its strengthening and streamlining. The Commission was not to deviate from the overall aim of a drug-free society. The terms of reference were to:
· propose improvements of methods and systems to assess the drug situation and to evaluate the goal of a drug-free society;
· evaluate and propose measures to strengthen and streamline drug prevention measures;
· analyse the development of treatment programmes, including those in the prison and probation system, and propose measures to improve treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers;
· evaluate the extent and focus of national funds for the development of treatment and of measures to prevent drug-related crime,
· analyse the need for changes in the working methods in the judicial system and in penal and criminal procedural legislation;
· review existing research, propose how research can be stimulated, strengthened and organized and identify important but neglected areas for research in the drug field;
· frame strategies for targeted information measures and for the formation of opinion.
The Commission recently published a report entitled The Crossroads (referring to one direction that calls for a significant increase of resources in the form of commitment, direction, competence and funding and another that implies a lowering of goals and considerable acceptance of drug abuse).
The Commission noted that the drugs issue was not a political priority in recent years which has led to reduced funding for all sectors involved while the drug problem has become more severe and widespread. The following are some of the Commission’s main findings and recommendations.
Leadership: The Commission noted that there is a need for stronger priorisation, clearer control and better follow-up of drug policy and of concrete initiatives at all levels of government. Thus, it recommended stronger leadership in relation to drug policy, with the Government playing a more active role, both nationally and internationally. In addition, it recommended a model for stronger local initiatives and improved local co-ordination. Despite the shared responsibilities, the Commission saw no reason for altering the basic allocation of responsibilities where drug questions are concerned. It was of the view that national leadership should be reinforced by the appointment of a minister specifically charged with the direction of drug policy activities. In addition, to facilitate and intensify development and co-ordination of local initiatives, it was proposed that local drug policy strategies be put in place by municipalities and county councils.
Demand reduction: The Commission noted that there are no hard boundaries between preventative measures, care and treatment, and the restriction of supply. For preventative measures to succeed, they must be “included in a system of measures restricting availability, and there must be clear rules which include society’s norms and values, as well as effective care and treatment.” The Commission views schools as the most important arena for drug prevention work and proposed that guidelines be set out for all school instruction concerning tobacco, alcohol and narcotic drugs. It also noted that preventative strategies were also required for young adults and are lacking in most municipalities. The Commission proposed that all young persons and their parents have access to local counselling on alcohol, drugs and abuse-related issues. The Commission made several other comments regarding prevention, including the need for reinforcement of specialist competence regarding young persons and substance abuse. It also added that for those who had started drug abuse, early detection and a clear reaction is important.
The Commission viewed care and treatment as an essential element of drug policy measures as they help reduce drug abuse and also the harm to drug abusers. It found that this is a field which has been subject to extensive spending cuts and downgrading by the municipalities in recent years, and that availability of treatment was not uniform throughout the country. The deficiencies in the system were most apparent for severe abusers and for long-term treatment measures. Severe abusers, in particular, need to be the subject of long-term, co-ordinated initiatives involving all agencies that are able to provide initiatives tailored to the individual needs of the client. In addition, the Commission found a need for improving the competence of those in the field of care and treatment. It set out the following guiding principles regarding care and treatment:
· All drug abusers shall be reached by an offer of help and, if necessary, care for the abuse.
· Advice, support and assistance shall reach people at an early stage of abuse.
· Measures of care shall be aimed at achieving a life free from substance abuse and illegal drugs.
· Care and other measures on behalf of substance abusers shall be of good quality.
· Measures to combat substance abuse shall be sustainable and long-term.
The Commission also noted a downscaling of measures to channel drug abusers into care and rehabilitation in the prison and probation system. This is important due to the intensive contact that system has with drug abusers. Thus, the Commission saw an urgent need for more resources for the maintenance and improvement of measures and also for an intensification of measures to combat drug abuse. It also made recommendations with respect to controlling availability of drugs in prisons, including increased search powers and increased penalties for refusing a blood test.
Supply reduction: The Commission did not find any real deficiencies in the legislation or the working methods used by drug authorities although it was found to be imperative that these authorities be allocated more resources. Police and customs have not gained control over the illegal market. In fact, indicators show that supply is more generous, prices are lower than in the past and the variety of drugs has expanded. Some minor recommendations were made with respect to minimizing the possibility of legal drugs entering the illegal market. With respect to combating illegal drug trade, the Commission recommended that the organizational structure of the police be examined (for example, the way in which the dissolution of specialized drug squads has affected the quality of police investigations) and that any shortcomings be followed-up. The Commission also recommended that special investigation methods (such as controlled deliveries) be reviewed and that the findings lead to the drafting of guidelines on the subject.
Competence development and research: The Commission was of the view that it was important to improve knowledge concerning different aspects of narcotic drugs, measures used to combat drug abuse and the effect of drug policy. For example, knowledge of the drug situation is necessary for planning measures and evaluating drug policy. The Commission found that knowledge and methods used in prevention and treatment were deficient and that measures should be based on knowledge and documented experience. Therefore, recommendations were made to increase knowledge and competence regarding those involved with drug issues, particularly those involved in prevention and treatment. The Commission stated that documentation, follow-up and evaluation should be improved and warns “against belief in simple solutions of the ‘cookbook’ variety.”
COSTS
As in other countries, systematic figures on drug-related costs are not readily available.
A. Public Costs
Treatment for alcohol and drug abuse has been estimated to cost municipalities SEK 3.7 billion (over $500 million Canadian) per year (55% of which is for institutional care). The police used 6% of its budget to combat drugs during 2000 (for a total of SEK 702 million – over $100 million Canadian). The police had 869 people involved in drug issues while customs had 1,080 involved in border defence. No costs were available for customs.
B. Social Costs
The Commission on Narcotic Drugs estimated the social costs at SEK 7.7 billion per year (does not take into account prevention, training and evaluation).
ADMINISTRATION
As discussed above, the coordinator will now be responsible for coordinating the national drug policy. In the past, this role had been played by the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs. With respect to the legal distribution of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, the Medical Products Agency is responsible for issuing authorizations for the import and export of drugs. This Agency also provides drug related statistics to the UNDCP.
The Swedish National Police have responsibility for drug enforcement. The Drug Offences Division of the National Police Board conducts criminal investigations in relation to organized crime, or other drug-related offences, on a national or international scale. The Swedish Customs Service is responsible for points of entry.
The National Institute of Public Health coordinates demand reduction activities. It is also the National Focal Point in the REITOX network. Operational activities are coordinated at the regional and municipal level. There is also local coordination with the participation of social services, the police, prison and probation services, medical services, schools and other concerned parties. Thus, in prevention and care and treatment, local groups and municipalities play a key role.
Because of its encompassing nature, the drug issue also involves many other ministries, for example the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
STATISTICS
A. Use
Pursuant to surveys among youths in the 9th grade (15-year-olds) and among 18-year-old military conscripts, an obvious trend in the 1990s is the increase in lifetime prevalence use of drugs among teenagers, particularly older teenagers. There has also been an increase in recent use (last year, last 30 days) among teenagers and younger adults. For example, the percentage of 15 year olds who have tried drugs has risen from 4% to 9% from 1992 to 2000. It is interesting to note that the number was 14% in the beginning of the 1970s and had decreased to around 8% in 1982. With respect to military conscripts, the trend is similar. According to these surveys, consumption of illegal drugs is low compared to other European countries, although the trend points to an increase in use. It should be noted that these numbers have been criticized. First, they are applicable to only 15-16 year old students and 18-year-old conscripts. Thus, these prevalence rates do not consider older groups where some first-time experimentation with drugs will occur. In addition, it has been argued that there will be underreporting of drug use when drugs are viewed in such a negative light and the questionnaires are filled out at school (where some will feel they are being observed by their teachers).
In 2000, a running three-year average of lifetime prevalence for the 15-64 age group was 12% (with the highest at 17% for the 24-44 age group). Since 1988, last year prevalence has never been over 1%. Overall, males are twice as likely to have used drugs than females although the difference is not as high in lower age groups.
Most who have experimented with drugs have tried cannabis and the majority of these have tried only cannabis (in Sweden, cannabis is usually taken in the form of hashish). The second most popular drug in Sweden are amphetamines. Cocaine would be the third most popular drug for older people while for youths it would be ecstacy and LSD. During the 1990s, the availability of drugs has increased, in particular amphetamine and heroin. In Sweden, as was discussed earlier, the typical drug addict uses amphetamines intravenously. It would appear, however, that heroin use is on the increase in Sweden.
In general, the surveys indicate that overall drug use is fairly low in Sweden. With respect to severe drug abusers (defined as intravenous or daily drug use), it would appear that Sweden has a fairly serious problem with a range from 14,000 to 20,000 people. This is close to the European Union average. As discussed earlier, one distinction is that the main problem drug is amphetamine rather than heroin as is the case in many other countries, although most drug abusers are multiple drug users and heroin use appears to be on the rise.
B. Offences
The number of suspected people who were reported has increased from 6,567 in 1985 to 12,470 in 1999. The police registered 32,423 violations of the Narcotic Drugs Criminal Act in 2000 which is similar to the numbers in the last decade. The number of violations to the Goods Smuggling Act has decreased by 85% since 1980, to 350.
In 1998, 92% were suspected for use or possession (from 76% in 1975). In addition, the number of those suspected of selling or manufacturing is now 19% (from 40% in 1975).
The number of sentences for violations of the Narcotic Drugs Criminal Act or the Goods Smuggling Act is now 12,470 in 1999 (from 2,601 in 1975). Cannabis was involved in 51% of sentences in 1998. In 1998, the sentences were divided in the following fashion: 38% for fines; 27% for prison; 14% for prosecution waivers; 14% for probation; and, 8% for other sanctions. Imprisonment was generally from two to six months.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/index.asp?Language=E&Parl=37&Ses=2
DEA Afghanistan drug intelligence briefing – November 2002 Afghanistan drug intelligence briefing
Published by U.S. Department of Justice - Tuesday 19 November, 2002
Copyright: Drug Enforcement Administration
Drug Situation Report - September 2001
STATUS IN INTERNATIONAL DRUG TRAFFICKING
The Islamic State of Afghanistan is a major source country for the cultivation, processing and trafficking of opiate and cannabis products. Afghanistan produced over 70 percent of the world's supply of illicit opium in 2000. Morphine base, heroin and hashish produced in Afghanistan are trafficked worldwide. Narcotics are the largest source of income in Afghanistan due to the decimation of the country's economic infrastructure caused by years of warfare. Afghanistan was invaded by the Soviet Union in 1979. Following the withdrawal of the Soviets ten years later, civil strife ensued in Afghanistan. There is no recognized national government in Afghanistan and opposing factions continue to battle for control of the country. The Taliban, a fundamentalist Islamic group, now controls over 90 percent of Afghanistan, while a loose coalition of opposition forces (referred to as the Northern Alliance ) maintains control of portions of northern Afghanistan.
DRUG CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING
Opium: According to the official U.S. Government estimate for 2001, Afghanistan produced an estimated 74 metric tons of opium from 1,685 hectares of land under opium poppy cultivation. This is a significant decrease from the 3,656 metric tons of opium produced from 64,510 hectares of land under opium poppy cultivation in 2000.
The United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP) also estimates opium production in Afghanistan. The UNDCP estimated a reduction in 2000 opium production from 1999, pointing to a 10 percent reduction in land under opium poppy cultivation and the impact of a protracted drought in the area as the causes for the smaller opium production. Estimates for 2001 have not been released.
AFGHAN OPIUM PRODUCTION: METRIC TONS
2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996
USG 74 3,656 2,861 2,340 2,184 2,099
UNDCP N/A 3,276 4,581 2,102 2,804 2,248
For a number of years, there was a significant difference between U.S. Government and UNDCP estimates, with UNDCP estimates considerably higher than U.S. Government estimates. These differences are related to the differing methodology used. The U.S. Government estimates rely on imagery-based sample survey assessments, while the UNDCP utilizes a ground-based census survey. The UNDCP estimates more hectares under opium poppy cultivation than does the U.S. Government and bases yield estimates on farmer reports. The U.S. Government completed an opium poppy yield study in 2000. The study led to an increase in the yield per hectare figure used to determine total opium production. U.S. Government estimates for 1996 through 1999 were then revised using the new yield figure. Consequently, U.S. Government and UNDCP production estimates are much closer.
On July 28, 2000, Taliban leader Mullah Omar issued a decree banning future opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan. The decree states that the Taliban will eradicate any poppy cultivation found in the 2001 growing season in areas under their control. Reportedly, this ban applies to any territory seized from the Northern Alliance. In February 2001, the UNDCP declared that the opium poppy cultivation ban was successful and that the 2001 crop was expected to be negligible. This marks the first real effort by the Taliban to reduce opium production. In 1999, the Taliban decreed that opium poppy cultivation would be reduced by one-third in 1999-2000. However, this did not occur. The Taliban did report that opium poppies were destroyed in Qandahar and Helmand Provinces. This eradication effort was apparently in response to an agreement with the UNDCP, which agreed to fund alternative development projects on the condition that cultivation be reduced in Qandahar. In fact, there was a 50 percent reduction in the three UNDCP target districts in Qandahar, but there was not a one-third reduction overall as promised by the Taliban.
According to press reports dated August 31, 2001, Taliban leader Mullah Omar extended the opium poppy cultivation ban for another year, to the 2001-2002 growing season.
Cannabis: Cannabis grows wild and is also cultivated in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a major producer of cannabis, much of which is processed into hashish. According to INTERPOL, Afghanistan and Pakistan together produce about 1000 MT of cannabis resin each year, with Afghanistan producing the bulk of the product.
Heroin Processing: Laboratories in Afghanistan convert opium into morphine base, white heroin, or one of three grades of brown heroin, depending on the order received. Large processing labs are located in southern Afghanistan. Smaller laboratories are located in other areas of Afghanistan, including Nangarhar Province. In the past, many opium processing laboratories were located in Pakistan, particularly in the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP). These laboratories appear to have relocated to Afghanistan, both to be closer to the source of opium and to avoid law enforcement actions by the Government of Pakistan.
Morphine base is usually produced for traffickers based in Turkey. The morphine base is then shipped to Turkey, where it is converted to heroin prior to shipment to European and North American markets. Laboratories in Afghanistan also produce heroin for the world market. Chemists in the region are capable of producing heroin hydrochloride with extremely high purity levels.
Taliban officials claim to have destroyed a large number of heroin processing labs in Nangarhar Province in the spring of 1999. However, reports suggest that heroin processing continues in Nangarhar. Laboratories are located throughout Afghanistan, with a significant number of conversion laboratories located in Helmand Province. Taliban officials also reportedly destroyed two heroin conversion laboratories in Helmand Province in October 2000. It is unlikely that the reported destruction of two laboratories had any impact on opiate conversion in the region.
TRAFFICKING
Afghanistan is landlocked and drug traffickers must rely on land routes to move morphine base and heroin out of the country. Opiates are consumed regionally, as well as smuggled to consumers in the west. It is estimated that 80 percent of opiate products in Europe originate in Afghanistan.
Morphine Base: The primary market for Afghan morphine base is traffickers based in Turkey. Morphine base is transported overland through Pakistan and Iran, or directly to Iran from Afghanistan, and then into Turkey. Shipments of Afghan-produced morphine base are also sent by sea from Pakistan's Makran Coast. Routes north through the Central Asia Republics, then across the Caspian Sea and south into Turkey are also used.
Heroin: Heroin is trafficked to worldwide destinations by many routes. Traffickers quickly adjust heroin smuggling routes based on political and weather-related events. Reports of heroin shipments north from Afghanistan through the Central Asian States to Russia have increased. Tajikistan is a frequent destination for both opium and heroin shipments, although Tajikistan serves mostly a transit point and storage location rather than a final destination. While some of the heroin is used in Russia, some also transits Russia to other consumer markets. Heroin transits India en route to international markets. Heroin also continues to be trafficked from Afghanistan through Pakistan. Seizures are frequently reported at Pakistan's international airports. Heroin is also smuggled by sea on vessels leaving the port city of Karachi. Heroin produced in Afghanistan continues to be trafficked to the United States, although generally in small quantities.
Hashish originating in Afghanistan is trafficked throughout the region, as well as to international markets. Although the bulk of the hashish intended for international heroin markets is routed through Pakistan and Central Asia and sent by sea, train or truck, hashish has also been smuggled in air freight in the past.
Afghanistan produces no essential or precursor chemicals. Acetic anhydride (AA), which is the most commonly used acetylating agent in heroin processing, is smuggled primarily from Pakistan, India, the Central Asian Republics, China, and Europe. According to the World Customs Organization, China seized 5,670 metric tons of AA destined for Afghanistan in April 2000. The AA was reportedly found in 240 plastic boxes concealed in carpets.
DRUG-RELATED MONEY LAUNDERING
Money laundering is not an issue in Afghanistan. The unsophisticated banking system which previously existed has been damaged by the years of war. It is likely that the informal banking system used extensively in the region, usually referred to as the hawala or hundi system, is also used by drug traffickers. This system is an underground, traditional, informal network that has been used for centuries by businesses and families throughout Asia. This system provides a confidential, convenient, efficient service at a low cost in areas that are not served by traditional banking facilities.
DRUG ABUSE/TREATMENT
No drug abuse or treatment statistics are available. The UNDCP states that heroin, opium and hashish are the most commonly abused drugs, along with pharmaceutical drugs (for which no prescription is required). Heroin use is by smoking, not injection. Reportedly heroin addiction is a growing problem in the cities of Jalabad, Kabul, Qandahar and Heart, and the only hospital providing even limited treatment is in Kabul. The Taliban have initiated a drug awareness campaign using leaflets, radio broadcasts and the newspapers. The UNDCP has distributed anti-drug materials in Badakshan Province, where reportedly the rate of opiate addiction is high at perhaps 10-25 per cent of the population.
DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES/LEGISLATION
The Taliban maintain effective control of nearly all of the opium poppy growing areas in the country, even though they are not internationally recognized as the official Government of Afghanistan nor do the control the entire country. Islamic law (Shari'a) has been imposed in territory controlled by the Taliban, and local Shari'a courts have been established throughout the country. In 1997, the Taliban re-activated the State High Commission for Drug Control, which was originally established in 1990 by the legitimate interim government. Prior to the UNDCP reports indicating that implementation of the 2000-2001 opium poppy cultivation ban has been effective and the release of the U.S. Government estimate indicating a dramatic reduction in opium production, the Taliban made only token gestures toward anti-drug law enforcement.
TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS
Afghanistan is a party to the 1988 UN Drug Convention, but lacks a national government to implement the country's obligations.
Note: The United States Government has no presence in Afghanistan; the U.S. Embassy in Kabul is closed due to security concerns. The Drug Enforcement Administration covers Afghanistan from its Islamabad, Pakistan Country Office. In addition to Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Islamabad Country Office also includes Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, the United Arab Emirates and Oman in its area of responsibility.
STATISTICAL TABLES
Prices: No official prices are available. Press reports indicate that the cost for raw opium, heroin, hashish and precursor chemicals are relatively low in Afghanistan. For example, the Iranian press reports that one kilogram of heroin can be purchased for US $2,000 on the Tajikistan-Afghanistan border, but the price rises to US $15,000 per kilogram in Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan. The same kilogram of heroin can be sold for US $150,000 in Moscow, Russia according to press reports.
Prices have reportedly increased significantly in Afghanistan and Pakistan since the opium poppy cultivation ban has been in effect. White export quality heroin purchased in Pakistan has doubled in price to approximately US $4,000 since July 2000.
KEY JUDGEMENTS
Drug trafficking in the Golden Crescent appears to depend on the Taliban at this point. Although they have reportedly now banned opium poppy cultivation, the Taliban have long relied on drug trafficking for financial support.
In order to gain international recognition as the legitimate government of Afghanistan, the Taliban must make a convincing effort to halt drug trafficking activities. Roadblocks to international support for the Taliban remain even if the opium ban is proved successful, due to concern about harsh treatment of women, human rights abuses, and support for extremist organizations.
Opium production may resume if the Taliban believe that the international response to their opium ban is inadequate.
Should the opium poppy cultivation ban continue to be effectively implemented in future years, opium production may migrate to countries bordering Afghanistan.
For the short term, an adequate supply of opiates remains available in Afghanistan despite the ban. According to UNDCP reporting, farmers have traditionally stored up to 60% of each year's crop for future sale, which suggests that farmers themselves may have a significant amount of opium still available.
Prepared By:
Europe, Asia, Africa Strategic Unit (NIBE)
Intelligence Division
Drug Enforcement Administration
http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/
DEA India drug intelligence briefing – November 2002 India drug intelligence briefing
Published by U.S. Department of Justice - Tuesday 19 November, 2002
Copyright: Drug Enforcement Administration
Drug Intelligence Brief
INDIA COUNTRY BRIEF - MAY 2002
STATUS IN INTERNATIONAL DRUG TRAFFICKING
India is the world’s largest producer of licit opium; however, a portion of the licit opium poppy crop is diverted to the illicit market. Opium, obtained both through diversion and from illicit poppy cultivation, is processed into heroin in India. Heroin is most often found in the form of a crudely refined heroin base called “brown sugar,” although white heroin hydrochloride (HCl) is also produced.
India’s large chemical industry produces a wide variety of precursor and essential chemicals, including acetic anhydride (AA), potassium permanganate (PP), ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and other chemicals used to produce amphetamine-type stimulants.
India serves as a minor source country for heroin, and also serves as a transit country for Southwest Asian (SWA) heroin from Afghanistan that often enters India from Pakistan. The transit of Southeast Asian (SEA) heroin from Burma is not believed to be significant at this time. Heroin from Burma is found primarily within the addict population of northeastern India.
India’s large population includes a significant number of drug abusers, although precise estimates are not available. Heroin, hashish, and pharmaceutical drugs are readily available and widely abused. Brown sugar heroin is primarily produced for domestic heroin users, since there is little market for this type of heroin outside of India.
DRUG CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING
Opium
India is the largest producer of opium for the world’s pharmaceutical industry. In 2001, India produced 726 metric tons of opium from 19,393 hectares planted with opium poppy. This amount fell short of the targeted 900 metric tons, reportedly due to severe drought conditions. In 2000, India produced 1,302 metric tons of opium gum, which was an increase from the 970 metric tons produced in 1999. India is the only country that permits the legal extraction of opium gum rather than using the concentrate obtained from the poppy straw (CPS) processing method. 1 The traditional method of collecting opium gum allows for the extraction of thebaine, an alkaloid used to produce the pain reliever oxycodone. Since thebaine is not present in CPS, other morphine-producing countries were effectively excluded from the thebaine market. However, the synthetic production of thebaine has become commercially viable in recent years.
In 1981, the United States applied the “80-20 rule” to guarantee that India and Turkey (also a traditional opium producer) have a combined 80-percent share of the U.S. pharmaceutical market’s annual purchases of morphine. The 80-20 rule reflected the realities of the morphine market, as in 1981 when Australia, France, and other licit opium producers were considered new or nontraditional producers and provided less than 20 percent of global production. While India and Turkey still share 80 percent of the U.S. market, they now share closer to half of the global market. The 80-20 rule will remain in effect until January 2006, at which time it may be extended, modified, or discontinued.
Licit opium poppy cultivation is a labor-intensive and geographically dispersed industry in India, with opium poppy cultivation permitted under government control in the States of Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. The Central Bureau of Narcotics (CBN), which is part of the Department of Revenue, is responsible for all facets of the opium industry. In addition to monitoring the industry to prevent diversion, the CBN each year determines the number of licensed growers and areas of cultivation, collects opium gum from farmers, and operates two processing centers, one in Madhya Pradesh and the other in Uttar Pradesh, where the opium is purified, dried, weighed, and packaged. Farmers, if found to have diverted opium to the illicit market, lose their licenses to cultivate opium and are subject to fines and imprisonment.
The exact amount of opium diverted to the illicit market is unknown; however, the most frequently reported estimates are that from 10 to 30 percent of the licit crop may be diverted. Using these estimates, diversion from the 2000 crop may have ranged from 130 to 390 metric tons, which means more illicit opium was available in India than in other heroin-producing countries, such as Colombia, Mexico, or Laos. The United States and India are collaborating on a study that will enable the Government of India (GOI) to better estimate the amount of diversion. A joint licit opium poppy survey is expected to provide a scientific basis for determining a minimum-qualifying yield, which is the figure that farmers must meet when turning in opium gum to the GOI. Should the minimum qualifying yield not be met, the GOI will have a basis for investigating the discrepancy. However, the large size and geographic scope of opium cultivation hampers enforcement efforts.
Illicit opium cultivation also occurs in India. The GOI began eradication efforts in northeast India in 1996 due to concern about increased illicit cultivation. Reportedly, illicit cultivation occurs in the States of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, and Himachel Pradesh, as well as Arunachal Pradesh and other parts of northeastern India. Indian officials continue to pursue detection and destruction of illicit opium crops and the prosecution of illicit cultivators. Indian officials reported that 378 hectares of illicit opium poppy plants were destroyed in 2000.
Cannabis
Cannabis cultivation is illegal, yet widespread, in India. No estimates as to the size of this illicit cultivation are available. Both marijuana and hashish are processed in India. The Kullu Valley in Himachel Pradesh is known to produce marijuana with a high THC content, which makes it attractive to foreign hash ish buyers. However, the majority of Indian-produced marijuana/hashish is likely for domestic use, although a percentage is destined for the international market.
Illicit Drug Production
Opium is processed into heroin in illicit laboratories located in India. These laboratories generally produce a low-quality brown heroin base (referred to as brown sugar). Based on seizures and intelligence reports heroin HCl, including export-quality white heroin, is also produced in India. According to recent reporting of multikilogram seizures of white heroin, it appears that Indian drug traffickers may be producing a greater amount of white heroin than in the past.
Chemicals and Pharmaceutical Drugs
Chemicals such as AA, N-acetylanthranilic acid (N-AAA), ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, ergonavine, PP, methylendioxyphenyl-2-propanone (MD2P2), phenyl acetone (P2P), and other chemicals are legally manufactured in India. Indian officials fully control access to a number of chemicals (such as AA, N-AAA, ephedrine, and pseudoephedrine), but do not control all 22 chemicals listed in the annex of the 1988 U.N. Convention. The GOI will consider controls on additional chemicals when evidence is presented that locally produced chemicals are being diverted. India is an active participant in DEA’s Operation TOPAZ and Operation PURPLE, which are international initiatives designed to prevent the diversion of AA and PP.
Both ephedrine and pseudoephedrine produced in India are legally exported to many countries, including the United States, Canada, Germany, and Mexico. Ephedrine and pseudoephedrine can also be used for the illicit production of methamphetamine. In 1999, Indian law was amended to include controls on ephedrine. In most cases, ephedrine is diverted for illicit use from pharmaceutical companies, as opposed to licensed producers or wholesalers in India.
There are at least 12 legal producers of AA in India. AA is used to produce licit pharmaceutical drugs and is also used in the textile industry. It is the most commonly used chemical to convert morphine into heroin, and can be used to synthesize the methaqualone precursor N-AAA and the methamphetamine and amphetamine precursor, 1-phenyl-2-propanone. Despite GOI controls, Indian-produced AA continues to be seized both en route to Afghanistan’s heroin laboratories and to Burma’s methamphetamine and heroin laboratories.
India is the world’s largest producer of illicit methaqualone. Methaqualone is one of three categories of depressants, and is usually marketed under the brand name Mandrax. Large seizures of Mandrax are not uncommon. For example, in September 2000, over 2 metric tons of Mandrax powder was seized near Hyderabad. In February 2001, 1.4 metric tons of Mandrax tablets were seized in Bombay. A serious Mandrax abuse problem exists in South Africa and, although methaqualone laboratories and tableting operations have been seized in South Africa, India remains the source for a substantial amount of the Mandrax abused in South Africa.
A wide range of pharmaceutical drugs are legally produced in India, including phensidyl (a cough medicine containing codeine), buprenorphine (a narcotic), and diazepam (a sedative), all of which are widely abused throughout India.
TRAFFICKING
The United States remains a very minor market for heroin from India, whether it has been produced or has transited through India. Heroin produced in India is trafficked to international locations, although the total amount is negligible compared to the quantities of heroin produced in Burma, Afghanistan, or Colombia. The most common type of heroin produced in India, brown sugar, has only a limited market outside of the region. However, seizures of shipments en route to and within Sri Lanka suggest that there is a market for heroin produced in India.
India is both a transit country and a destination for heroin and hashish originating in neighboring Nepal, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Although the border is closely monitored, and tensions remain high between India and Pakistan, opiates continue to enter India overland from Pakistan. Sea and air routes are also used to bring heroin from southern Pakistan. An unknown percentage of this heroin remains in India, but some also transits India en route to international destinations, especially from New Delhi or Bombay by couriers traveling on commercial airliners. Little information is available on heroin and hashish smuggling by sea, although this is believed to occur.
Hashish, produced in India, is also smuggled to North America, although the destination is generally reported as Canada and not the United States. In August 2000, 2 metric tons of hashish from Nepal were seized in India; this hashish was reportedly destined for the United States.
TRAFFICKING GROUPS
Trafficking groups operating in India include nationals from India, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nepal. Even though India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh are no longer combined into one country (as they were prior to 1947), family connections remain strong in the region, and provide a network of contacts that facilitate cross-border trafficking.
Nigerian traffickers are present in India, particularly in Delhi. In some instances, Nigerian-controlled couriers transit through India enroute to international destinations. This is apparently an effort to avoid law enforcement authorities at the destination airport, as passengers arriving from major drug-producing or transit countries are subject to greater scrutiny. Pakistani officials continue to arrest couriers, who are ticketed to India, at airports in Lahore, Karachi, and Islamabad. In other cases, West African traffickers reside in India and primarily sell heroin and hashish in-country to other Africans and Indians.
There are only two authorized border crossings on India’s northeastern border with Burma, but the border is fairly porous. This region is connected to the rest of India by only a 32-kilometer strip of land, while bordered by Bangladesh, Bhutan, and Burma. This region is home to a number of insurgent groups and reporting suggests that, while these groups are not involved in drug production or drug trafficking, they may profit from some aspects of the drug trade. For example, several groups in Nagaland, including the Isaac-Muivah and Khaplang factions of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland, reportedly tax and extort money from traffickers in return for protection or the right to conduct traffic in drugs. These groups in Nagaland are of Tibeto-Burmese ethnic origin, with Nagas 2 living in remote parts of northwest Sagaing District in Burma, and in the State of Nagaland in India. The People’s Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak, a leftist group headquartered in Manipur, and the All Tripura Tribal/Tiger Force in Triura are other groups that reportedly profit from extortion and may facilitate cross-border drug trafficking.
Ethnic Tamils in the southern India State of Tamil Nadu are involved in trafficking between India and Sri Lanka, an independent island off the southern coast of India. Heroin destined for Sri Lanka is regularly seized in India and in the Gulf of Mannar between India and Sri Lanka. Some reports suggest that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), a Sri Lankan separatist group, receives funding from drug trafficking, although no direct nexus between the LTTE and drug trafficking has been confirmed.
Organized Indian crime syndicates, such as the organization headed by the well-known Indian criminal Dawood Ibrahim, are also reportedly involved in drug trafficking and money laundering activities.
DRUG-RELATED MONEY LAUNDERING
India is not considered an international or regional financial center, but money laundering does occur in the country. The banking system is likely used to some extent, especially as anti-money laundering legislation has not moved beyond draft form. However, the primary means used to transfer and launder drug proceeds is the informal banking system known as hawala. The hawala system is an underground banking network composed of businesses that engage in international commerce. Through these companies, large sums of money can be transferred internationally with little paperwork and no physical movement of funds.
DRUG ABUSE AND TREATMENT
The exact number of drug abusers in the country is not known. India is the second most populous country in the world with an estimated population of over 986 million people (1999 National Geographic estimate). Drug abuse is widespread throughout the country. The GOI and the U.N. Drug Control Program are conducting a nationwide study on narcotics addiction and initial results are soon to be released.
Cannabis, heroin, and Indian-produced pharmaceutical drugs are the most frequently abused drugs in India. Cannabis products, often called charras, bhang, or ganja, are abused throughout the country. In fact, crushed marijuana (bhang) is used to season foods and spice drinks during religious ceremonies and on festival days in some parts of India. Cocaine, LSD, and MDMA are available, but not widely used due, in part, to their high cost.
Heroin is readily available in India. Most users smoke a locally processed heroin called brown sugar by breathing in the smoke (known as, “chasing the dragon”.) In the northeast, high-purity, low-cost heroin from Burma dominates. Intravenous drug use is highest in northeastern India. In addition to heroin abuse, the intravenous injection of proxyvon is also a problem in the States of Manipur and Mizoram. Proxyvon is a legally produced analgesic and opium derivative. Users inject a suspension of proxyvon powder and water, which leads to a very short yet intense high. Other pharmaceutical drugs are also abused. Morphine derivatives, such as buprenorphine, diazepam, and codeine can be obtained relatively easily from pharmacies, even though prescriptions are technically required. Phensidyl is heavily abused in the Indian State of West Bengal.
Burmese-produced methamphetamine tablets appear to be a relatively minor problem in India; however, seizures do occur. For example, in September 2000, 1,985 tablets were seized from two Indian males as they were crossing the border from Burma into India. In another incident, in September 2000, 75 amphetamine tablets were seized from a Burmese male who crossed the border at Moreh, India.
DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES/LEGISLATION
The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), established in 1986, is the primary drug law enforcement agency and is responsible for coordinating antidrug activities of all of India’s law enforcement agencies. The NCB is currently under the Ministry of Finance, but the NCB will be transferred to the Home Ministry in April 2002. The CBN, staffed with approximately 1,600 personnel, is responsible for all aspects of the opium industry and is responsible for preventing illicit trafficking in precursor chemicals. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence is also part of the Ministry of Finance and responsible for information relating to smuggling of goods—including drugs—into or out of India. The Customs Commission has a wide variety of drug law enforcement tasks and falls under the Ministry of Finance’s Central Board of Excise and Customs. The Border Security Force, under the Home Ministry, is a paramilitary force that controls India’s land borders and frequently interdicts drug shipments.
In October 2001, the GOI amended the Narcotics Drug and Psychotropic Drug Act of 1985. The most significant amendments include changing the law to allow for sentencing to be based on the size of the drug seizure and to formally authorize controlled deliveries inside and outside of India. Prior to this change, individuals found with small amounts of illicit drugs were subject to the same penalties as large-scale drug traffickers.
Drug Seizures
1998 1999 2000 2001
Heroin (kilograms) 655 861 1,236 813
Morphine (kilograms) 19 36 37 23
Opium (kilograms) 2,031 1,635 2,540 2,321
Hashish (kilograms) 10,106 3,391 4,936 5,164
Marijuana (kilograms) 68,221 40,113 96,6827 75,943
Sources: 1998-1999: Department of State's International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR)
2000-2001: DEA's New Dehli Country Office
TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS
India has bilateral agreements on drug trafficking with 13 countries, including Pakistan and Burma. Prior to 1999, extradition between India and the United States occurred under the auspices of a 1931 treaty signed by the United States and the United Kingdom, which was made applicable to India in 1942. However, a new extradition treaty between India and the United States entered into force in July 1999. A Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty was signed by India and the United States in October 2001. India also is signatory to the following treaties and conventions:
1961 U.N. Convention on Narcotic Drugs
1971 U.N. Convention on Psychotropic Substances
1988 U.N. Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
2000 Transnational Crime Convention
India is a member of the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
KEY JUDGMENTS
Indian authorities must continue to control diversion of the licit opium crop. This situation is dependent, to some extent, on events in Afghanistan, previously the world’s largest producer of illicit opium. If opium poppy cultivation remains low in Afghanistan, it would be more lucrative for Indian traffickers to process opium diverted from their licit or illicit markets. Additionally, enhanced border controls may reduce the amount of Afghan heroin available in India. However, due to geographic proximity, India will definitely continue to be a transit country for SWA heroin originating in Afghanistan.
Indian heroin production may increase if tensions between India and Pakistan lead to even closer control of the traffic of people and commodities on the border between the two countries, which would reduce the amount of SWA heroin smuggled through Pakistan into India.
India will continue to be a major supplier of chemicals diverted to the illicit market. India actively seeks to control diversion and cooperates effectively with other countries. However, chemical traffickers are expected to find ways to evade law enforcement authorities, which may require enhanced monitoring of the large chemical industry.
India’s large population is at risk for increased drug abuse due to easy availability and low cost of both domestically produced drugs and drugs smuggled into the country from Burma, Nepal, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
1 In the CPS process, poppy pods are dried on the stalk in the fields, and then crushed in order to remove the seeds. The seeds are used for a food product and the crushed pods are processed in a factory in order to extract the alkaloids. In India, however, farmers lance poppy pods in the fields in order to remove opium. Farmers then turn in the collected opium gum to the government.
2 The term Naga is used for the many tribes living in this region, who speak different and mutually unintelligible dialects.
This report was prepared by the DEA Intelligence Division, Office of International Intelligence, Europe, Asia, Africa Strategic Unit. This report reflects information received prior to May 2002. Comments and requests for copies are welcome and may be directed to the Intelligence Production Unit, Intelligence Division, DEA Headquarters.
http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/
Dutch drug policy fact sheet – September 2002 Dutch drug policy fact sheet
By Justitie Fact Sheets - Sept 18 2002
Copyright: Justitie Fact Sheets
DUTCH DRUGS POLICY
What is this fact sheet about?
This fact sheet provides information about:
The main aim
Dutch society
The basic principles of the Opium Act
Indictable offences and maximum penalties
Investigations and prosecutions policy
The burgomaster may order a coffee shop to be closed
International cooperation
Results of efforts to counter drug trafficking
Safety and public order
Care
Prevention
Results of public health policy
Research and monitoring
Further information
The main aim
The main aim of Dutch drugs policy is to protect the health of individual users, the people around them and society as a whole. Priority is given to vulnerable groups, and to young people in particular. Policy also aims to restrict both the demand for and supply of drugs. Active policies on care and prevention are being pursued to reduce the demand for drugs, while a war is being waged on organised crime in an attempt to curb supplies. A third aim of policy is to tackle drug-related nuisance and to maintain public order. The Netherlandsnow has twenty years' experience of working with these policies on drugs.
Given the importance of an integrated approach, responsibility for drugs policy is borne by a number of ministries. The Ministry of Justice is responsible for matters falling within the scope of criminal law and the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport for policy on prevention and care services and for coordinating drugs policy as a whole. The Ministry of the Interior is responsible for matters relating to local government and the police. An integrated approach to drugs policy has been adopted at local level too.
Dutch society
In order to appreciate the Dutch approach to the drugs problem, certain characteristics of Dutch society must be kept in mind. The Netherlands is one of the most densely populated, urbanised countries in the world. It has a population of 15.5 million, occupying an area of no more than 41,526 km2. The Netherlands has a long history as a country of transit: Rotterdam is the largest seaport in the world, while the country has a highly developed transport sector. The Dutch firmly believe in the freedom of the individual, with the government playing no more than a background role in religious or moral issues. A cherished feature of Dutch society is the free and open discussion of such issues. A high value is attached to the wellbeing of society as a whole, as witness the extensive social security system, and the fact that everyone has access to health care and education.
The basic principles of the Opium Act
Regulations on drugs are laid down in the Opium Act. The Act draws a distinction between hard drugs, (e.g. heroin, cocaine and XTC) which pose an unacceptable hazard to health, and soft drugs (e.g. hashish and marihuana), which constitute a far less serious hazard. The possession of drugs is an offence. However, the possession of a small quantity of soft drugs for personal use is a summary, or minor, offence.
Importing and exporting drugs are the most serious offences under the provisions of the Opium Act, although manufacturing, selling and attempting to import drugs are also offences. As is the case in other countries, the cultivation of hemp is prohibited, except for certain agricultural purposes (e.g. to form windbreaks, and for the production of rope). New legislation is currently being drafted to raise the maximum penalty for commercial hemp production from two to four years' imprisonment.
On the principle that everything should be done to stop drug users from entering the criminal underworld where they would be out of the reach of the institutions responsible for prevention and care, the use of drugs is not an offence.
Indictable offences and maximum penalties
The maximum penalty for importing or exporting hard drugs is 12 years' imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 guilders. Anyone found in possession of a quantity of hard drugs for personal use is liable to a penalty of one year's imprisonment and a fine of 10,000 guilders. The maximum penalty for importing or exporting soft drugs is four years' imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 guilders. Habitual offenders are liable to a maximum penalty of 16 years' imprisonment and a fine of 1,000,000 guilders. Moreover, offenders may be deprived of any advantage gained from the offence.
Investigations and prosecutions policy
As is the case in many other countries, the expediency principle is applied in Dutch policy on investigations and prosecutions. This means that the public prosecutor may decide not to institute prosecution proceedings if it is in the public interest. The highest priority is given to the investigation and prosecution of international trafficking in drugs; the possession of small quantities of drugs for personal use is accorded a much lower priority. Anyone found in possession of less than 0.5 grammes of hard drugs will not generally be prosecuted, though the police will confiscate the drugs and consult a care agency.
The expediency principle is applied to the sale of cannabis in coffee shops in order to separate the users' markets for hard and soft drugs and keep young people who experiment with cannabis away from hard drugs.
The sale of small quantities of soft drugs in coffee shops (which are not allowed to sell alcohol) is therefore technically an offence, but prosecution proceedings are only instituted if the operator or owner of the shop does not meet the following criteria:
no more than five grammes per person may be sold in any one transaction;
no hard drugs may be sold;
drugs may not be advertised;
the coffee shop must not cause any nuisance;
no drugs may be sold to minors (under the age of 18), nor may minors be admitted to the premises.
The burgomaster may order a coffee shop to be closed.
While the Opium Act is designed to tackle drug trafficking directly, a number of measures have been taken to counter the problem indirectly, such as legislation which makes it easier to investigate and confiscate the proceeds of drug trafficking and prevent money laundering. Dutch banks, for instance, are obliged to report any unusual financial transactions. Since 1995, legislation has been in force which enables monitoring of the trade in precursors (i.e. substances which are not in themselves illegal but which may be used in the manufacture of drugs).
International cooperation
Those factors which have made the Netherlands into an attractive transit country for legitimate traders unfortunately apply equally to traders in illegal products. The government is making every effort to counter the illicit use of the Dutch infrastructure. In March 1995 controls were abolished at the internal borders of the Schengen countries, i.e. the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, France, Spain and Portugal. As a result, controls at the external borders have been stepped up:
customs and police officers and members of the Royal Military Police have formed a special drugs squad at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport to combat drug smuggling;
a special scanner is used to screen containers held in terminals in the port of Rotterdam. Similar equipment will also be purchased for the port of Amsterdam and Schiphol Airport. In combination with the successful risk analysis system developed by the Dutch customs authorities, the scanner has increased the chance of finding drugs concealed in containers. Close cooperation has been established between the customs authorities of the EU member states;
the police and criminal justice authorities in the Netherlands, France and Belgium are working closely together to counter drug tourism and drug couriers operating on the route between Lille, Antwerp, Hazeldonk and Rotterdam;
agreements have been concluded with Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg on police cooperation, and with France on cooperation between the customs authorities. Exchanges are organised between French and Dutch police and customs officers and public prosecutors;
Dutch drug liaison officers are stationed in a number of countries and police officers from other countries have been posted to embassies in the Netherlands to act in the same capacity;
a special team has been formed to tackle the production of and trade in synthetic drugs.
Results of efforts to counter drug trafficking
351 kg of heroin were confiscated in 1995. The Netherlands is not a major transit country for heroin and most consignments that are confiscated come through other European countries.
In 1995, 4,851 kg of cocaine were confiscated - 23% of the total amount confiscated in the EU in that year. In 1994, 215 kg of amphetamines were confiscated, in addition to 143,000 pills containing other synthetic drugs (mainly MDMA, MDA and MDEA). 17 illegal laboratories for the production of synthetic drugs were dismantled in 1995, while a total of 50 were dismantled in the EU in the same year. In 1995 too, 549,337 hemp plants and 332 tonnes of cannabis were confiscated - 44% of the total amount confiscated in the EU in that year. In 1994, 323 illegal hemp nurseries were dismantled. With these confiscations, the Netherlands occupies a leading position in the international war on drugs.
Safety and public order
The number of coffee shops has increased, and some have given rise to considerable nuisance, while some have links with criminal organisations. For these reasons, the Dutch government has decided to tighten up controls.
Policy on coffee shops is largely decided at local level - by the local authorities, the police and the public prosecutions department. The municipalities have gained wider powers to tackle the problem of nuisance by limiting the number of coffee shops operating within their district. As a result, the past 18 months have witnessed an 11% drop in the total number of coffee shops. This vigorous policy will continue to be pursued until the number of coffee shops has reached the minimum at which the objective of separating the markets can be achieved.
Liveable conditions and safety are a high priority in the major cities. In the past four years, the Netherlands has invested an extra NLG 60 million in projects to tackle drug-related nuisance and in facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of the addicts who cause it. Addicted offenders are now given the option of detoxification treatment or serving a prison sentence.
Drug tourism gives rise to serious nuisance, and efforts to counter it have been accorded a high priority. Agreement has been reached with France on a simplified transfer procedure for drug tourists, while foreign drug tourists may be expelled from the country. One of the objectives of reducing the number of coffee shops and the quantity of cannabis that may be sold is to counter drug tourism. From time to time, investigations will be conducted targeting foreigners who export quantities for sale in their own countries.
Care
The protection of the health of drug users is a major priority, and a wide range of facilities are available. The Netherlands spends more than NLG 300 million a year on facilities for addicts. Over half of this amount is used to combat the drug problem. There are 12 clinics for the treatment of addicts, and their capacity has been increased, from 500 places in 1980 to 961 in 1995.
In the past ten years, care services have become increasingly accessible. They now reach an estimated 75% of all addicts. Their aim is to reach as many addicts as possible to assist them in efforts to rehabilitate, or to limit the risks caused by their drug habit. Social rehabilitation is an essential element.
To achieve these aims, an extensive network of services has been established. Methadone programmes enable addicts to lead reasonably normal lives without causing nuisance to their immediate environment, while needle exchange programmes prevent the transmission of diseases such as AIDS and hepatitis B through infected needles. The services also provide counselling.
Prevention
Prevention plays an important role in Dutch drugs policy. Schools in particular are targeted in efforts to discourage drug use, while campaigns are conducted in the mass media to reach the broader public. In late 1996, a campaign was launched to counter the use of cannabis, while XTC will be the subject of a similar campaign in early 1997.
The objective of these campaigns is to discourage the use of cannabis and XTC. The use of XTC is particularly popular among young people attending raves and discos. In 1995, to prevent accidents occurring during such large-scale events, municipalities were issued with guidelines on ways of maintaining public order and safety and limiting health risks, which many now apply when issuing licences. As a result, far fewer accidents now occur during these events.
Results of public health policy
There were 2.4 drug-related deaths per million inhabitants in the Netherlands in 1995. In France this figure was 9.5, in Germany 20, in Sweden 23.5 and in Spain 27.1. According to the 1995 report of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction in Lisbon, the Dutch figures are the lowest in Europe. The Dutch AIDS prevention programme was equally successful. Europe-wide, an average of 39.2% of AIDS victims are intravenous drug-users. In the Netherlands, this percentage is as low as 10.5%.
The number of addicts in the Netherlands has been stable - at 25,000 - for many years. Expressed as a percentage of the population, this number is approximately the same as in Germany, Sweden and Belgium. There are very few young heroin addicts in the Netherlands, largely thanks to the policy of separating the users markets for hard and soft drugs. The average age of heroin addicts is now 36.
In most EU countries, such as the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Sweden and the Netherlands, the use of cannabis has increased in the past few years. A similar trend is, unfortunately, discernible with regard to synthetic drugs. Evidently, international youth culture has more influence on the use of these substances than government policies. International cooperation is therefore vital if this problem is to be tackled.
Research and monitoring
Though Dutch policies in the field of health protection have been relatively successful, some adjustments are needed. The nature of the drugs problem is constantly changing and a ceaseless effort must therefore be made to seek the best means of limiting the damage drugs can cause to health. Monitoring (following and recording trends) as well as scientific research are therefore essential if an adequate response is to be given when new risks emerge.
The Netherlands occupies a leading position internationally in research and monitoring, as witness the 1995 report of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction in Lisbon. A national drugs monitoring system will be set up in the course of 1997.
To supplement the European Monitoring Centre's work, a number of international comparative studies have recently been conducted to analyse the extent of the drugs problem and the policies pursued. Studies were published on the policies pursued on cannabis in the Caribbean, Germany, France and the United States, and these were compared with Dutch policy. A study was also conducted of policy on hard drugs in France. A bilateral study of the situation in Sweden and the Netherlands is currently under preparation.
An extensive study has been launched of the nature and extent of XTC use, the results of which will be published in the spring of 1997. The study will examine factors such as the pharmacological and toxicological effects of this drug, as well as its social and epidemiological impact.
Policies are continually amended in response to such studies.
Further information
The following fact sheets are available on Dutch drugs policy:
Cannabis policy
Hard drugs policy - Opiates
Hard drugs policy - XTC
Care services for addicts
Education and prevention - Alcohol and drugs
Policy on drug-related nuisance - (under preparation)
These fact sheets can be ordered from:
Trimbos Institute
Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction
P.O. Box 725
3500 AS Utrecht
The Netherlands
Tel.: 31-30-2971100
Fax.: 31-30-2971111
http://www.minjust.nl:8080/index.htm
Irrational Fear of ECSTASY, Not Real Danger, Inspires Measure – September 2002 High Anxiety: Irrational Fear of Ecstasy, Not Real Danger, Inspires Measure
By Daily Journal - Thursday September 5 2002
Copyright: Daily Journal
During the 1980s, in every election year, the U.S. government enacted new anti-drug laws. But in the 1990s, as the costs from the election-year drug-war pandering began to come due, we thankfully did not build on those mistakes. This year, the big drug fear is ecstasy (MDMA). The U.S. Senate seems to be rushing toward enacting an election-year anti-ecstasy bill. The bill is called the Reducing Americans Vulnerability to Ecstasy Act of 2002 (S2633) (the RAVE Act).
The RAVE Act already has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee - without any hearings and without a recorded vote. Its sponsor, Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE), the author of many of the extreme drug-war measures of the 1980s - wants the full Senate to vote by unanimous consent, avoiding a recorded vote. A brief look at this bill indicates that it has not received careful attention; it is based on exaggerated fears of ecstasy and is sloppily written.
Deaths due to ecstasy are rare. The federal government reports a total of 27 deaths over five years from ecstasy. (In contrast, 85 people died in 1999 from taking acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol.) Many ecstacy deaths could have been prevented by controlling two major factors that contribute to injuries or fatalities in conjunction with the use of MDMA: heat and dehydration. If concert venues had increased ventilation to reduce heat and provided easy access to water, it is quite likely that some of these deaths would not have occurred. Unfortunately, the RAVE Act would make these problems worse, as such actions would be used to prove a violation of the law.
MDMA "episodes" at hospital emergency rooms are still near almost trivial levels. According to the government, there were 636 MDMA-related emergency room episodes - and 2,214 in which MDMA was used in combination with other drugs. This is out of a total of 554,932 emergency room drug episodes in 1999.
Some anti-drug officials are exaggerating - either by accident or deliberately - ecstasy's lethal consequences. The Orlando Sentinel analyzed a report on deaths due to ecstasy issued by the "drug czar" of Florida, James McDonough, and a former top aid to Gen. Barry McCaffrey at Office of National Drug Control Policy. The article found almost unbelievable exaggerations; persons who actually died of cancer, elderly persons dying in nursing homes and toddlers dying in hospitals were reported as ecstasy deaths. Even people who died after being hit by a car were among those counted, even though these people were known to have died of other causes.
The British House of Commons appointed a special committee to study the problem of drug abuse in Britain. Great Britain is a useful source of information, since ecstasy has been common there since the early 1980s. The term "rave" originated in Britain, and Britain now has two decades of experience with widespread use of ecstasy.
The report noted that the Police Foundation Independent Inquiry (a recent study by the independent Police Foundation, a charity chaired by Prince Charles) consulted members of the Royal College of Psychiatrists' Faculty of Substance Misuse about the relative harmfulness of controlled drugs and found that ecstasy "may be several thousand times less dangerous than heroin ... there is little evidence of craving or withdrawal compared with the opiates and cocaine."
The RAVE Act re-enforces America's mistaken approach to controlling ecstasy by relying on law enforcement rather than on effective education. An important article in the Journal of the American Medical Association highlighted this criticism of the law enforcement-dominated approach and recommends honest education, not scare tactics.
JAMA notes: "ehavioral researchers are recommending control strategies that may seem antithetical to ever-expanding law enforcement efforts. Instead of focusing on eradication and punishment, these social scientists take another tack: they encourage harm reduction that acknowledges the realities of Ecstasy." JAMA recommends truth, not fear - education not incarceration.
The RAVE bill itself is profoundly overbroad in its sweep. It provides for severe criminal penalties for conduct carried out exclusively by another person. Business owners should be concerned about this bill, especially landlords or property owners. The bill makes landlords, theater owners and operators - indeed, any property owner - criminally and civilly liable for the conduct of other people on their property if that other person uses illegal drugs. The bill would assign liability to anyone who has a relative who uses illegal drugs in their home or on their property.
The bill creates a new crime requiring only a state of mind of "knowingly" for the conduct of those who "open, lease, rent, use or maintain any place, whether permanently or temporarily, for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or using any controlled substance." According to this provision, if a landlord knowingly (the phrase "intentionally" is not included in this new crime) made a lease with someone or knowingly gave someone the right to enter their property, then the property owner could be liable.
This new crime creates an impossible burden for any property owner. Property owners allow people on their land to visit, establish homes, spend the night, camp, shop, swim, bicycle and listen to music; sometimes people who enter the premises use drugs. Owners can maintain some level of security, but they can never stop most persons who enter from smoking pot or taking illegal pills if those persons desire to do so and sneak the drugs in. Certainly the government cannot expect theaters, campgrounds or homeowners to institute the kind of security that we see at the airports or the border - and people still smuggle in drugs at those locations. Landlords and property managers are not police. And that is the way it should be in a free country.
Considering the ease with which someone could innocently run afoul of this new law, the penalty, of up to 20 years in prison - more than for being a drug trafficker in many instances - seems excessively harsh. The bill also authorizes the government to charge the property owner civilly, using a much lower standard of proof, denying accused property owners the right to trial by jury and obtaining a civil fine of $250,000.
There are very serious collateral penalties that exist with drug offenses like those created by the RAVE Act. These include: criminal forfeiture of property, a presumption against bail and the use of such a conviction as an aggravating factor to authorize the death penalty if, on some future occasion, the accused is charged with homicide. Not only would a person convicted not be able to acquire a firearm, but also, because it is a serious drug offense, the person would face a mandatory 15 years for a gun violation.
We have seen how unexamined drug scares and election-year drug legislation can do more harm than good. Do we really want to repeat that mistake again? Hopefully, the Senate will ignore Biden and not enact a law that we will regret later.
http://www.dailyjournal.com/
Clubbed by the drug ECSTASY – June 2001 Clubbed by the drug
By RNW.nl - June 2001
Copyright: RNW.nl
Since Ecstasy emerged as the popular party drug of choice during the 1980s, it's been swallowed by untold numbers of people. And it seems that there's no sign of a decrease in the use of these illicit tablets. But what about the long-term effects? This is still a relatively small field of research, but the number of scientists getting involved has increased in recent years. Some of the most recent findings come from Amsterdam.
‘Nathalie' (not her real name) was curious about the effects of all the Ecstasy she had taken over the years, so when she heard about research going on in Amsterdam, she jumped at the chance to take part. At the Department of Nuclear Medicine in the Academic Medical Centre, she and 68 other people underwent tests to assess their memories and certain kinds of cells in their brains.
Dr Liesbeth Reneman explains why she did the research: "We're concerned about the effects of Ecstasy in people, because there have been a number of studies in animals which have shown that Ecstasy or ‘MDMA' causes selective damage to serotonergic brain cells - cells that communicate through a neurotransmitter called serotonin. The doses used to induce these neurotoxic changes in animals approach those used by humans, so the data is very relevant."
Testing Time:
Dr. Reneman and her colleagues divided the test subjects into four groups - non-users, moderate-users with a lifetime exposure of less than 55 tablets, heavy-users, and ex-users who indicated using their last tablet more than a year earlier. They used a brain scanning technique called SPECT (single photon emission tomography) to measure the number of serotonergic brain cells present. And they assessed memory performance, for example by testing how many of fifteen spoken words the volunteers could remember.
Future Problems?
The results were published recently in the Lancet and the Archives of General Psychiatry. The SPECT studies showed that female Ecstasy users are particularly vulnerable to damaging their serotonergic system, with heavy users showing the greatest loss of cells. However in people like ‘Nathalie' who had stopped taking the drug at least a year before, the number of serotonergic cells appeared to have recovered in many areas of the brain.
The memory studies revealed less encouraging news. Unlike people who had never taken the drug, all Ecstasy users showed signs of memory loss - to an extent that Liesbeth Reneman says is clinically significant. Unlike the SPECT results, there was no difference found between men and women and there was no sign of any memory improvement in those people who had already given up. Dr. Reneman is worried that, while these subjects are not currently noticing these effects, the memory loss could become more apparent and more significant in the longer term, as the number of serotonergic cells decreases naturally as a result of ageing.
Study Limitations:
Certain aspects of Dr. Reneman's research are controversial. Sixty-nine subjects is not a large number on which to base statistical evidence. Some of her techniques have also been criticised by other researchers in the field. However, her results fit well in the larger picture of what is known about Ecstasy - according to Dr. Alex Gamma of the Psychiatric Department at Zurich University Hospital in Switzerland.
But he, like a number of other scientists, is also concerned about the future of Ecstasy itself - or rather, it's main ingredient ‘MDMA'. He thinks that while Ecstasy abuse may cause long-lasting damage, this should not obscure the fact that MDMA itself is a drug with considerable potential benefits.
Baby and Bathwater:
"What people may not realize is that before MDMA became a recreational drug it was used for many years in psychotherapy in the USA. The reputation it has gained as a recreational drug has certainly prevented efforts to use it in this way. There have been struggles going on to get official permission to use MDMA as a therapeutic agent, which have now proven successful. For example, in Spain a study is going on and in the USA the Federal Drug Administration has recently approved a similar study where the drug is to be used for the treatment of post traumatic stress disorder."
With evidence on one side of the harm that Ecstasy seems to cause, Dr. Gamma is keen to point out that therapeutic MDMA would be given under very different circumstances. "It would be given only once or twice in a place where the well-being of the patient was being monitored all the time. We have conducted many studies in which MDMA was given in a single dose and we didn't find any evidence for lasting psychological, psychiatric or cognitive consequences - nor that single doses cause any toxic changes in the brain."
http://www.rnw.nl/
UK: Home-grown CANNABIS outstrips imports from Morocco – Q2 2003 Home-grown cannabis outstrips imports from Morocco
Published by The Guardian - Monday 21 April, 2003
Copyright: The Guardian
The majority of cannabis now consumed in England and Wales has not been smuggled in but is actually grown here, according to a study to be published next month.
The research for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation reveals that there has been a sharp rise in recent years in domestic cultivation, particularly in home-grown cannabis for personal use.
It appears a new breed of British gardener has emerged. But rather than messing about in the back garden they spend their time in the cupboard under the stairs tending their plants. In their case the answer doesn't lie in the soil but in trays of water under lights as their crop is produced hydroponically, without soil.
It has become such a popular pastime that for the first time domestically cultivated cannabis has overtaken Moroccan hash or resin as the major product in the British cannabis market. At least 3 million people a year now use the drug.
The rise in home-grown British "grass" has led to a thriving legal business in cannabis seed, which is available from UK-based seed companies, and specialist growing equipment which is legally available from gardening outlets, "hydroponic growshops", and over the internet.
The research by South Bank University's criminal policy research unit and the national addiction centre at Kings College, London, is partly based on interviews with 37 home cultivators, mainly men in their 20s and 30s. Most had jobs or were students.
It says that the government's strategy of focusing on the more harmful drugs, such as heroin and cocaine, means there is now a strong case for the law to treat the small-scale cultivation of cannabis for personal use or use by friends in the same way as simple possession, and only attract a fine or warning. The
study says this would not clash with Britain's obligations under international drug treaties.
The research identified five types of cannabis growers in Britain, but says many of them did it to ensure quality of product, to save money, or as a way of avoiding contact with dealers. There is a wide variety of growing technique.
There has been a trend to use premium seeds rather than imported cannabis bush seeds, and to grow them under more lights, with an average of 4.5 bulbs generating 1067 watts, compared with two bulbs pumping out 421w four years ago.
The types identified were:
· Sole-use growers: cultivate cannabis as a money-saving hobby, for personal use. Have 12 to 24 plants, using natural fertilisers and soil mixtures more often than hydroponics.
· Medical growers: motivated by perceived therapeutic value. All those interviewed were supplying multiple scelerosis sufferers and had been charged by police.
· Social growers: grow to ensure good-quality supply for themselves and their friends. They give it away or charge nominal price. Average two dozen plants.
· Social/commercial growers: grow for profit but restrict sales to social networks. Motivation is to supplement income. Have between two and 100 plants.
· Commercial growers: sell to any customer. Grow their own crops to guarantee high quality to secure supply and premium prices. All use hydroponics. One said he earned £2,500 a month out of it.
The study says police forces differ in how they deal with cultivators. Some are cautioned, some charged with trafficking under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act which on third conviction carries a minimum seven year sentence, and others are charged with the lesser offence of cultivation.
The report says there were 1,960 cannabis production offences in the UK in 2000, with just under a quarter dealt with by police caution. The rest went to court, with 240 ending in a prison sentence.
Mike Hough, of South Bank University, said the study showed that if the government treated cultivation for personal use in a similar way to possession,and introduced administrative fines for non-commercial cultivation, it could be done within the limits of UN drug conventions.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
UK: Zero tolerance conceals drug use in schools – Q2 2003 Zero tolerance conceals drug use in schools
Published by The Guardian - Monday 21 April, 2003
Copyright: The Guardian
Schools' zero tolerance policies towards drugs may be counter-productive because they encourage children to conceal drug problems, according to Home Office research.
Experts who studied the drug habits of 300 hardcore young offenders concluded that low or zero tolerance policies "may not be helpful".
The research was published as the drugs minister, Bob Ainsworth, unveiled a new £40m programme of drug treatment services for young offenders.
Mr Ainsworth also announced £30m for drug work in young offenders institutes' secure units, £22m for councils to provide specialist youth workers, and £15m for schemes that use sport to steer young people away from drugs.
He said: "Vulnerable young people need prevention and treatment before the problems escalate."
The Home Office report said that zero tolerance policies encouraged "children to conceal rather than deal with their drug use".
It warned that those pupils excluded from school as a result of using drugs were not necessarily the only or the worst offenders.
The study's conclusions contrast sharply with guidance from the Department for Education and Skills, which has increased headteachers' powers to expel drug dealing pupils.
The charity DrugScope said the research showed that zero tolerance drug policies led to drug problems being ignored rather than dealt with effectively.
Helen Wilkinson, director of information and policy at the charity, said: "Research shows drug use among excluded children is much higher than for those in school.
"A range of disciplinary and supportive measures is necessary. We should be helping children with problems. Throwing them out simply exacerbates the problem."
But general secretary of the Secondary Heads' Association, Dr John Dunford, said: "We would reject any notion that drug people should not be excluded from school.
"I think schools can safely ignore the views of this Home Office research.
"Selling drugs is a crime outside school and it has to be dealt with severely inside school as well."
Last May the DfES said children caught dealing drugs at schools should be expelled with no chance of a reprieve, even for a first-time offence.
A fifth of the group studied for the Home Office report had dealt drugs, shoplifted, sold stolen goods or gone joyriding at least 20 times in the previous year.
More than 85% had used cannabis, alcohol and tobacco but heroin and crack cocaine use were still comparatively low.
"There was no evidence of a progression towards heroin or crack cocaine use or dependence despite the diverse drug use amongst the group," said the report.
The 293 young people surveyed by researchers from Essex University were all being supervised by youth offending teams - 52% were 15 or 16 years old while a handful were under 14.
The Home Office today also published reports showing 42% of young homeless people had taken heroin and 38% crack cocaine - about 20 times the average.
Young people who had been in care also reported higher than average drug use, with 10% using crack or heroin.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
World: Escape from Loneliness May Drive ECSTASY Use – September 2002 Escape from Loneliness May Drive Ecstasy Use
By Yahoo News - Thursday September 5 2002
Copyright: Yahoo News
CHICAGO (Reuters Health) - Many young people drawn to the "party drug" Ecstasy may use it as a way to banish feelings of loneliness, according to new research.
"Given the subjective effects of Ecstasy in promoting 'togetherness,' it is likely taken by people who feel socially isolated and perhaps unable to feel a sense of belonging in other ways," said researcher Dr. Ami Rokach, of York University in Toronto, Ontario.
She presented the findings here Thursday at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association.
Use of Ecstasy, also known as MDMA, has surged in recent years among youth, who often consume it at dance clubs and "rave" parties. Numerous reports of serious adverse reactions and even deaths linked to the drug have heightened public concern.
In their study, Rokach and co-author Tricia Orzeck sought to determine which types of personalities might be at especially high risk for frequent Ecstasy use. Ecstasy users often report a heightened sense of "belonging" while on the drug, so the Toronto team focused on loneliness.
They had 106 regular Ecstasy users, 88 users of other drugs (such as pot, alcohol or cocaine) and 624 people who didn't use drugs complete detailed psychological questionnaires. The questionnaires asked study participants to report on the means they used to cope with feelings of loneliness.
The result? "Drug users, in particular those who consume Ecstasy, do indeed cope with the distressing effects of loneliness differently" than non-drug-users, the researchers report. Ecstasy users were much more prone to relying on networks of friends to help them feel less alone, and were also more likely to deny or distance themselves from their feelings of loneliness by using drugs or alcohol, compared with non-users.
"The locations in which the drug is most popularly consumed, namely at Raves and parties, are also conducive to a feeling of oneness," the researchers point out. "A lonely individual who attends a Rave and takes MDMA may find himself suddenly surrounded by hundreds of 'friends,' most of whom are also taking the same drug, wearing similarly styled clothing, and seeking connection with others."
The findings could have implications for the treatment of those with serious Ecstasy abuse problems. According to Rokach and Ozeck, counselors may need to address core feelings of loneliness, "especially when counseling Ecstasy abusers in their teens or young adulthood years."
http://www.yahoo.com/
US: Seattle is first in trips to ER for drug use – September 2002 Seattle is first in trips to ER for drug use
By Seatle PI - Thursday September 5 2002
Copyright: Seatle PI
The Seattle area had the highest rate of drug-related emergency-room visits in a government survey of 21 metropolitan areas, according to results released yesterday.
The Seattle area also had the highest increase -- 32 percent -- in the number of drug-related visits. The increase stemmed from almost all types of drug use.
Overall, drug-related emergency-room visits rose to a record level of more than 600,000, with sharp increases because of heroin and club drug ecstasy use, according to the survey by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
The study includes data from such metro areas as San Francisco, Baltimore and Philadelphia, and from hospitals in King and Snohomish counties.
"The survey is a cause for us to continue our ongoing concern about the impact of substance abuse, and to expand our treatment capacity and prevention capacity," said Dr. Alonzo Plough, director of Public Health -- Seattle & King County.
But Plough said the survey should be interpreted with caveats.
It doesn't sort out multiple visits by one person. It doesn't show information on direct drug use, and deals only with hospital visits. And its results are partially at odds with local surveys.
From 1999 to 2000, the number of drug-related emergency room visits in the Seattle area increased from 8,426 to 11,116. There were 563 such visits per 100,000 population.
Visits for marijuana or hashish last year, at 1,414, increased by 75 percent. There were 540 meth-related visits, up by 53 percent. And the 3,338 cocaine-related visits were up by 32 percent.
Seattle also ranked high in the rate of hospital visits for ecstasy and LSD.
Drugs such as ecstasy, Rohypnol and Ketamine are called club drugs because of their growing popularity among young people, who tend to use them at dance clubs.
Plough said the increase in hospital visits, particularly for cocaine, may stem from public campaigns for drug users to get help.
"Our first message is 'don't use.' Then if you do use, get into treatment. And if you are using and there are signs of overdose, get to the emergency room," he said.
"It could be the same prevalence of drug use, with more emergency room, health-seeking behaviors."
Traditionally, Seattle has ranked high in increasing heroin visits. But last year, those visits inched up only slightly to 2,522. Coupled with the decline in local heroin overdoses, Plough said the data may show "incremental headway."
He said the survey's data on marijuana conflicts with local school surveys that show a decline in marijuana use. And he said the data on meth visits reinforces other indicators that the drug's rise is continuing. "Our metro area of 3 million has the same kind of problems as Baltimore, Los Angeles and New York," he said. "Just like those other cities, we need to continue to rally for access to treatment."
At Harborview Medical Center, Chris Martin, administrative director of emergency services, said drug abuse cuts through all demographic groups. In particular, she is alarmed at the rise in ecstasy use at raves by younger drug abusers.
"When there's a rave, we get inundated here," she said. "The kids are totally dehydrated, and medics can't manage them at the scene."
Overall, the annual report recorded 601,776 emergency room trips related to drugs in 2000, up from 554,932 a year earlier and the highest since the statistics first were collected in the mid-1980s.
"This report shows again that we face serious gaps in preventing and treating substance abuse, especially with club drugs," said Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson.
"Our first line of defense against substance abuse must be prevention. We need to reach out to people before they become statistics in emergency departments -- or worse, in the morgue," he said in a statement.
Nationally, the study found a 15 percent rise in emergency room visits related to heroin and morphine, jumping from 84,409 in 1999 to 97,287 last year.
And the increase for ecstasy was 58 percent, from 2,850 to 4,511.
Boston and Los Angeles ranked second and third among cities reporting increases in overall drug-related emergency room trips.
Other findings of the report:
Cocaine-related visits constituted 29 percent -- 174,896 -- of all drug-related emergency room visits in 2000, more than any other illicit substance measured.
Marijuana-hashish visits increased in Seattle, Boston, Miami, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Denver and Chicago.
Emergency department mentions of prescription drugs containing oxycodone increased 68 percent from 6,429 to 10,825. One brand of oxycodone, OxyContin, has been blamed in several deaths, though it is not the only drug containing oxycodone.
http://www.seattlepi.com/
UK: ECSTASY law change ruled out – June 2002 Ecstasy law change ruled out
By BBC News - 22 May, 2002
Copyright: BBC News
Calls from a powerful MPs' committee for dance drug ecstasy to be downgraded in an overhaul of drugs laws have been rebuffed by ministers.
Home Secretary David Blunkett said moving ecstasy from class A to class B is not on the government's agenda, but he welcomed other parts of the study.
In Wednesday's report, MPs on the Home Affairs committee backed Mr Blunkett's moves to make cannabis a class C drug.
They also recommended trials of heroin prescription programmes for addicts and the provision of safe injecting rooms for heroin users.
The home secretary rejected the proposal for so-called 'shooting galleries' for drug injectors.
The committee said the past 30 years showed policies based mainly on enforcement were bound to fail and more stress must be put on treating addicts.
But it stopped short of pressing for any illegal drugs to be legalised or decriminalised.
Drug differences
They said such a move would inevitably result in a "significant increase in the number of users, especially among the very young".
Committee chairman Chris Mullin urged the government to "follow the science" when it came to their drug policies.
There was "no point in pretending that ecstasy was as harmful as heroin" and to suggest it was would undermine the credibility of drugs advice handed out to children.
Mr Mullin - a former Labour minister - insisted that nobody was suggesting ecstasy could not be dangerous and stressed that class B drugs still carried stiff penalties for dealers and users.
"All drug taking is bad for you and should be discouraged but we need to get real and focus on the 200 to 250,000 or so problematic drug users ... who mainly use heroin," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
The committee's recommendation that ecstasy should become a class B drug would put it on the same level as the current classification for cannabis and amphetamines.
'Totally misinformed'
The reclassification would reduce the maximum sentence for those found carrying ecstasy from seven years to five.
Those supplying or making the drug would be jailed for 14 years at most rather than facing the current possible life prison term.
The report prompted Janet Betts, whose daughter Leah died after taking ecstasy, to accuse the committee of being "totally misinformed".
Mrs Betts urged Prime Minister Tony Blair to "have the balls" to stick by his pledge not to downgrade the drug.
Mr Blunkett stuck by that pledge in his response to the MPs' report.
"Ecstasy can, and does, kill unpredictably and there is no such thing as a safe dose," said the home secretary.
"I believe it should remain class A. Reclassification of ecstasy is not on the government's agenda."
Mr Blunkett did, however, welcome the report as "thought provoking" and said it was right to urge a new focus on reducing the harm caused by drugs.
'Shooting galleries'
The home secretary wants more heroin made available on prescription.
But he urged caution on how far this should be extended - the MPs want trials of carefully supervised prescription, as happens in the Netherlands and Switzerland.
That idea is part of the committee's drive to focus on Britain's 250,000 "problem" drug users, who need £13,000 a year from crime to feed their habit.
The MPs also want a new offence of "supply for gain" to be introduced to draw a new distinction between dealers and those who give drugs to friends for personal use.
The report has been welcomed by civil rights groups and some drugs charities.
Roger Howard, chief executive of charity DrugScope, said it represented the next steps for UK drugs laws.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/
UK: Police back softer line on drug users – May 2002 Police back softer line on drug users
By BBC News - Thursday, 2 May, 2002
Copyright: BBC News
Police chiefs say they would have a better chance of winning the war on drugs if addicts were given treatment instead of punishment.
The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) also believes it would be better to adopt a more relaxed stance towards people caught with small amounts of cannabis.
ACPO unveiled its proposals in a report, carried out by its influential drugs committee, saying in some circumstances, treatment should be considered instead of prosecution.
Drugs' groups have welcomed the report, saying ACPO had been moving in this direction for some time.
And the Home Office has pledged to study the findings.
Commander Andy Hayman, chairman of the ACPO committee that produced the report, said: "It is predominantly a health issue so what we're saying is that we should be matching the health issue with the health option.
"Rather than just putting people through the courts, surely it's sensible to try and put them into treatment and try and treat their habit."
Treatment supported
Roger Howard, chief executive of Drugscope, a research and drugs policy advisory body, said the proposals came as no surprise.
He said: "We strongly support efforts to get drug users quickly into treatment rather than using a prosecution and pressing criminal charges.
"It is something Drugscope has already recommended to the Home Affairs Committee.
"This is a new and welcome departure in how we respond to the heavy end drug users.
"The police are recognising that treatment works rather than just processing addicts through the courts."
Dave Roberts, head of Liverpool rehabilitation centre the Independence Initiative, also welcomed the police chiefs' call.
"It makes sense to treat, train and develop people who have developed a problem of substance mis-use because they can break with it and they can create a new life," he said.
Enforcement call
But among critics former shadow home secretary Ann Widdecombe described the move as "the policy of surrender" and advocated tougher application of the law.
Speaking on BBC News 24, she said: "The law isn't properly enforced.
"Unless you send out the message, not only that there is a law, but also that it will be enforced and then you enforce it properly with extra manpower and dedicated resources, then the present law won't work."
She stressed the need for a dual policy of punishment and treatment.
She said: "You could perhaps make an agreement to treatment a case to mitigate or lower the punishment, but you still do both."
There was also a cautious response from some in the medical profession.
Drugs treatment specialist Dr William Shanahan told BBC News there was "anxiety" that people who simply wanted to avoid prison would take advantage of treatment if offered as an alternative.
But he added: "This doesn't mean they won't do well with treatment and I think it is a good idea to offer more people treatment."
More options
Commander Hayman, who is a Scotland Yard deputy assistant commissioner, said his committee's report was "timely" given recent government announcements, which have included the downgrading of cannabis.
He stressed that the overall aim of ACPO's drugs policy was to disrupt and reduce supply while working to achieve reduction in demand.
Last December, it emerged that police chiefs had examined proposals to issue heroin at police stations, to addicts.
However, chief constables reportedly remain opposed to the decriminalisation of drugs and are also against the downgrading of Ecstasy from class A to class B.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/
Forums›Drugs›Drugs Research, Drugs Studies & Media Requests
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.YesNoPrivacy policy
You can revoke your consent any time using the Revoke consent button.Revoke cookies
