How addicted is Europe?
HOW THE EU HAS MANAGED HIS DRUG POLICY AND HOW IT COULD BE IMPROVED UPON
Drug policies have always been a flammable topic, between those who call for prohibitionism and those who deem it necessary to legalize various drugs into the European market.
We must face drug policy not from a political point of view, based on the perceived morality or immorality of the subject matter, but start from the facts. Nowadays, more than 60 Million Europeans are usual consumers of drugs — the same in number as the whole Italian population. How have we come to this?
NOWADAYS
What is the European drugs policy like? I think we all got to know it: in the majority of Member States every type of drug is deemed illegal, except for scientific or medical purposes. That is to say that the average citizen cannot buy them for recreational purposes: this way fewer drugs enter the market. But the real question to be asked is: how much, if any, is this policy effective? Let’s look at the data throughout history.
THE STORY SO FAR
Have drugs always been illegal? Actually no.
Before the 19th century their use was quite wide-spread. Cannabis specifically had three distinctive purposes: firstly as a cloth fibre (Levi used it much for its durable jeans for miners), then as a construction material (the ropes used to lift the S. Marco tower) and for medical purposes (in this case it is called marijuana).
Moreover, there have been found some canapa ropes dating back to 8000 BCE. Marijuana had a medical purpose in China in 2700 BCE, and it arrived in Araby in 1000 CE. In the meantime, Indian monks have been using it since 2000 BCE.
Europe experienced then a long period of a free market for drugs. This lasted until the WWI Peace Treaties of 1919.
THE EFFECTS OF PROHIBITIONISM
To be able to see prohibitionism effects, let’s look again at other examples history offers to us.
Firstly, the War on Drugs. It started on the 18th of June 1971, after one of President Nixon’s press conferences with the aim of stopping the use of drugs. It started just as a metaphor, but soon turned into a real war against the “Public enemy number one”, as defined by Nixon. The War of Drugs caused 2,2 Million prisoners on the whole, the majority of which is African-American, thus earning the nickname “New Jim Crow Laws”. Furthermore, the number of prisoners skyrocketed since the beginning of the War on Drugs, hovering around the 1.5 Million in 2021.
Secondly, the prohibition of alcohol in both the USA and USSR (former Russia). In America, the 18th Amendment passed in 1919 barred the selling of alcohol, deeming that this would improve situations of poverty and social issues. Significant is the thought behind it: the ‘real problem’ is alcoholism, not the reasons — maybe trauma — because of which one becomes addicted to it.
Needless to say, that was the only Amendment ever repealed.
However, in each case, it stands the core rule of the market: if there is demand, there is a bond to be supplied. So here comes also the Iron Rule of Prohibitionism: “If there is a shortage of a low-commodity substance, a high-commodity substance will substitute it”.
For instance: if there is no Cannabis people will switch to Heroin or other more dangerous substances (most of the time synthetic). Precisely that happened in our jails. Since marijuana can be found by its smell, inmates now tend to use Spice, a synthetic drug that is far more dangerous for its side effects. That occurs because the latter is not usually criminalized — for its more recent synthesis — whereas the least dangerous instead is illegal. People will buy drugs, whether they are legal or not, so why are we putting them more at risk instead of helping them?
MARIJUANA IS A GATEWAY DRUG
A gateway drug is a drug that leads you to take more dangerous drugs. Is marijuana a gateway drug? Yes, 45% of people who take marijuana have tried harder drugs. But the real gateway is much earlier on: cigarettes. Those who smoke before the age of 15 are 80% more likely to use drugs later on, and 3 times more likely to binge drink.
Should we then ban Alcohol and Cigarettes? Alcohol kills more than 3.3 Million people, whereas Smoking kills more than 6 Million.
Nobody seriously thinks of banning them, otherwise, we would fall into the above-mentioned historical cases. Instead, usually the State takes responsibility for Alcohol and tobacco and aims to regulate them to inform and reduce their lethality.
HOW LEGALIZATION OF DRUGS REPRESENTS THE WAY FORWARD
The aim of nowadays legislations is the same as 1919: reducing the number of drugs in the illegal market and ensuring the safety and health of our citizens. How to do it? Let’s look at the other EU States!
SOME EU STATES
It is worth remembering the drug policy in Portugal. For instance, if you are found by the police in possession of a small quantity of drugs, there are not any legal consequences (e.g. Prison), but only administrative fees; instead of be sent to prison, people who are found in possesion of drugs are sent to support centres. This is because drug addiction is not considered a crime but a chronic disease. The result was that the number of people who tried and kept using drugs has fallen from 44% in 2001 to 28% in 2012
Portugal offers street assistance to drugs addicts, pushing away the stigma of drugs. Specifically, they offer clean syringes and Methadone (an alternative to Heroin, which has fewer side effects). Creating a safety net, Portugal offers a secure alternative to take drugs, being able to help its citizens at the same time
The government of the Netherlands has taken a different turn. They wanted to criminalize not the consumers, but the international traffickers and the smugglers. Thus they made the decision to decriminalize the selling and consuming of marijuana under the 5 grams. What has happened to the general drug consumption?
Contrary to popular belief, the use of cannabis after decriminalization has not risen over time. Firstly, it did spike, for the poor health literacy, but after the citizens had grown accustomed to the drugs and their effects (much like alcohol), the number then plateaued.
Furthermore, Luxemburg wanted to decriminalize cannabis, but for the current pandemic decided to postpone the legal changes.
Legalisation does not mean endorsing drugs. It means taking responsibility for the risks it poses.
IF WE WANTED TO, COULD WE?
In truth, there’s a major problem found in national treaties. Specifically, in the UN Drug Control Conventions. These impose strict control on drugs and drug trafficking, prohibiting any form of legalisation in the ideology of the time -the conventions were signed in 1961, 1971 and 1988.
When asked about it, Alex Klein, a historical member of the International Drugs Policy Consortium, stated that neither EU nor any Member State can officially break away from these conventions. Why is that? For their diplomatic standing; if we decide to change our policy on drugs breaching and ignoring the conventions, also other states will say they are validated to do the same. The problem arises if the ‘other state’ is China, Russia or Egypt and the convention is the Convention on Human Rights. Not ideal.
Given the above, how come then that Uruguay and Canada get to legalize drugs? They stated that they still respect the intention of the treaties, to control and limit the use of drugs. Even though, they are continuously pestered about their not-respect of the treaties.
THE 4-FOLD WAY FORWARD
So, what paths may we tread going forward? The first two have just been mentioned:
1. Exiting the conventions, taking on board all its drawbacks
2. Following in Canada’s footsteps: still, pursue the spirit of the convention
3. The third way is shown to us by the Netherlands: Decriminalization, a de facto legalization.
4. The last one is the same as Arizona, Nevada and California. In the US, the central government lets each Member State vote on its drug policy every 2/4 years. This way you let people normalize it, let them create health literacy and deconstruct the stigma on drugs using.
WHAT SHOULD BE LEGAL?
First of all, WHAT should be legal? Even the pro-legalization party has some limits.
Citing again our expert, Alex Klein, we should, first of all, legalize largely used drugs, such as Marijuana, Cocaine and Cocaine Leaves. And the other drugs?
Even opioids and harsher drugs. But with care, letting people gain their literacy on the matter. We could try legalizing it on a small scale, and then see — if the situation is under control — whether to enlarge the testing area or retreat the drugs from the market.
WHAT IF IT WERE LEGAL?
- Safer standards & regulations, thus control.
As for alcohol and tobacco, the EU could and should impose regulations and limitations on the supply, for example, a minimum age; standard levels of THC and CBD for Marijuana; clearer specifications on what contain the drug, etcetera.
- More specific support and less stigma for drug-addicts
We should definitely take the Luxembourg initiative on board: treating drug addicts as patients and giving them alternatives will definitely boost their safety and of the whole EU population
- Less money to mafias, more to the Member States
By establishing a legal route for people to buy their drugs, we will also hinder international drug trafficking and the influence of local gangs and Mafias on the territory. Each Member State would also benefit from a new flow of revenue.
It must also be noted that the majority of funds to combat drugs are given to the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Internal Affairs (used to impede these traffickings — so from the supply side). Only a meagre amount is allotted to the Ministry of Health for school education and the rehabilitation of former drug addicts. This too could change, maybe reversing the quotas.
WHAT’S NEXT?
Now, having a clearer view of the topic, do make your mind on this crucial topic. This is important, because your choices will shape the future we will be living in. You are the European People, and it will be up to you to decide.
by Francesco Bortolussi
