The Role of Drug Couriers and Drug Trafficking Industry - Research Paper Example

 The Role of Drug Couriers and Drug Trafficking Industry Introduction Drug trafficking is a capital offence in most nations across the globe, including the western democracies, Singapore, Thailand, China and Egypt. Drug couriers also known as ‘mules’ “physically transport illegal drugs across international rather than national borders” (Levinson 2002, p.553). They are at a low level in the drug smuggling hierarchy, controlled by commanders of the trade. Border patrols from the Customs, as well as the Drugs Enforcement Agency track drug couriers for arresting them. If arrested and convicted, they are subject to long terms of imprisonment. Transportation of drugs is necessary when production sites are located at distances from consumption sites. The transport of drugs consists of a role that is different from both the production and sale processes. Similarly, the physical transportation or possession of drugs in transit is distinct from the use of cargo including postal services. Those who physically transport drugs are categorised in two groups, according to their role. The first category includes ‘drug mules’ who are paid a fee, wage or salary including the reduction of debts, for transporting drugs, and second category constitutes the ‘self-employed’ or those who derive benefits from the sale or use of the drugs upon arrival at the destination (EMCDDA 2012). Drug couriers commonly smuggle drug packets using one of the following methods: by concealing packets of drugs in hidden luggage compartments; by strapping drug packets to different body parts; or by “swallowing a large number of small, drug-filled condoms or packets” (Levinson 2002, p.553). Drug couriers that use the third method are also known as ‘body packers’. They risk not only their personal liberty if caught, but also face the possibility of death due to lethal doses of the drug entering their bloodstream, if a swallowed packet ruptures. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the global problem of drug use requiring the movement of drugs by means of couriers or ‘mules’ from place of production to the destination country of consumption. Further, the role of drug couriers or mules in the international drug trafficking industry will be examined. International Smuggling of Drugs The global problem of drug use causes their illegal trafficking to countries overseas. The prohibition of illegal drugs is challenged in numerous ways. For example, the movement of cocaine from Brazil to the United States is difficult to monitor because of the great size of the Caribbean sea. Further, Decker and Chapman (2008, p.161) reported “a widely held lottery mentality among our subjects; they believed they were going to hit it big on the next shipment”. The main reason for the rise in cocaine smuggling is because of the high demand in the States for the drug. The most significant and difficult way to effectively address international drug smuggling would be to control that demand. Over a period of fifty years, West Africa has moved to the forefront of international drug trading. Penetrating drug markets in every continent, West African drug traders led by Nigerians, dealing in cocaine, marijuana, heroin and other drugs, have built up a key role in the competitive business (Ellis 2009). Besides the seemingly unlimited profits to be made, the apparent ease of successfully smuggling drugs, as well as the widespread availability of drugs in the United States are other motivators for involvement in the illegal drug smuggling trade. Therefore, the “organizational structure of drug smuggling, the management of risk by those involved in such enterprises, and the potential response by law enforcement” were examined by the researchers, Decker and Chapman (2008, p.145). They found that drug smuggling efforts were not well organized except at the points where large sums of money transactions took place, and that smuggling operations frequently involved low-level offenders recruited for temporary roles requiring little specialization. Specialization can be episodic in the international drug trade and smugglers can be engaged in other forms of criminality. According to Schiray (2001), specialization occurs more frequently in the area of money laundering, where it is associated with businesses operating on the margins of legality. Thus, it is evident that the organization of international drug smugglers more closely resembles that of street vendors than it does a corporate structure. Drug smuggling in Sao Paolo, Brazil is by forming “ad hoc organizations… precarious, provisional, short-lived and contingent” (Schiray 2001, p.355). It was found that their lack of stability or permanence helped them adapt to changing internal and external conditions; and consequently made them more difficult to suppress or eliminate. Further, the lack of an organisational structure to support drug smugglers leads to the non-emergence of specialization among co-offenders or members of loosely connected groups. Schiray (2003) observes that Brazilian drug smuggling groups have horizontal organizational structures that lack formal roles for the members, as a result of the absence of group structure, stable leadership, and permanence. Such drug smuggling groups may have occasional relationships with tightly formed organizations that have vertical structures, but the relationships are task-specific and generally do not change the inherent characteristics of the horizontal groups. The drug smuggling organizational form is that of a small cell or network of connected nodes. These organizational forms are effective because of their versatility, dynamism and flexibility. The core and several peripheries of the network facilitate the flow of information. “The peripheries are the network’s most vulnerable locus” (Decker and Chapman 2008, p.146), being exposed to law enforcement surveillance activities. The organizational structure may change for the purpose of survival, sometimes acquiring a new form that contradicts the earlier structure of its predecessors. A hostile external environment often makes adaptation and change imperative, thereby causing increased effectiveness of the drug trade network. Zaitch (2002) studied the social organization of international drug smuggling in the Dutch context, conducting fieldwork in Colombia and the Netherlands, to examine the transfer of cocaine from Colombia to Europe, particularly the Netherlands. The evidence indicated that in the Colombians’ drug smuggling network vertical hierarchies were absent, the structure of drug distribution was flexible rather than rigid, more horizontal than vertical, and trust was generated through kinship and ethnicity which facilitated transactions based on affective relations. The transaction groups were found to be dynamic, insulated and capable of changing their tactics while maintaining their isolation from the subsequent steps in the chain of smuggling. To prevent getting caught, drug smugglers like most offenders undertake risk management. They attempt to ensure that the odds of getting away with the crime are in their favor, by reducing the risk of being detected or, if detected of being held legally liable. Such a comfort zone is created by a system of reasoning that “identifies known risks, creates a series of steps to reduce those known risks, and tests the likely effectiveness of such steps” (Decker and Chapman 2008, p.151). Further, the gains are conceptualized as immense, even if it does not turn out to be so, in order to raise others’ and one’s own beliefs regarding the prospects of reward. However, the myth of large gain helps to keep members of a network together and promotes large risk taking. Risk management is central to continued participation in drug smuggling. Seven key techniques for reducing risk in networked groups as identified by Zabludoff (1997) include the following: Changing methods quickly and frequently, outsourcing when possible, obtaining collateral from others in the distribution chain, providing payments in product rather than cash, dividing the smuggling operation into compartmentalized functions, reducing the amount of time that the product and money are in transit, and by clearly identifying the payee for lost product. The compartmentalization of smuggling ensured that individuals from one function were unaware of those from another function, this fragmentation of the process and insulation helps reduce the risk of identification and detection of others in the network in case of some members such as the drug couriers or mules being caught. Risk management is crucial and includes learning the risks that exist, their possibility of occurring, and the development of strategies to manage those risks. For law enforcement, this forms the basis for understanding the organization of international drug smuggling. It is useful for disrupting drug smuggling. Law enforcement introduce unknown risks or disorder into the process of smuggling to cause powerful disruption beyond the specific individual deterrence that is produced. Uncertainty increases the difficulty in carrying out the various stages of smuggling, including the recruitment of trans-shipment teams of couriers. “Such market uncertainty can come from using snitches or undercover agents, making changes in enforcement and surveillance techniques, and using conspiracy charges” (Decker and Chapman 2008, p.153). The Role of Drug Couriers or ‘Mules’ in International Drug Trafficking Drug mules or couriers may carry out their role of carrying drugs willingly for the compensation, or as unwilling or partially willing participants. Drug mules not only transmit the goods by swallowing them, and carrying the drug packets within their alimentary canal; they may also carry backpacks full of illegal narcotics and cross vast distances on foot. For example, such drug mules walk across isolated regions in the Mexico-United States border, to transfer large quantities of drugs from Mexico to the United States. Significantly, drug mules are often unaware of the actual nature of the product they carry; they may be under the impression that their load consists of precious stones, foreign currency or other item. Thus, they are often ignorant of the dangerous nature of the packets they swallow, because if even one of them ruptures within their body, they can be adversely even fatally impacted. According to Lehman and Phelps (2005), they are also kept in the dark about the other stages of the smuggling operation and drug trade, and do not know anything about the other members of the network. This ensures safety for the rest of the network in case the courier gets apprehended by law enforcement personnel in the form of Customs Police, Border Patrol, Drug Enforcement Administration or the Coast Guard. The couriers or mules who swallow the drugs packed into small cylindrical shapes are also known as body packers, swallowers, or internal carriers. Besides transporting cocaine and heroin, “body packers may smuggle amphetamines, 3,4- methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), marijuana or hashish” (Traub, Hoffman and Nelson 2003, p.2519). Sometimes couriers ingest more than one type of drug, leading to greater chances of fatality, as found by the study conducted by Gill and Graham (2002). Body packers carry approximately 2.2 lb. of drug, divided into 50 to 100 packets of 0.3 to 0.4 ounces each. The quantity of cocaine, heroin, or amphetamine in each packet is a life-threatening dose. After the events of September 11, 2001 making conventional smuggling more difficult due to increased border security, the incidence of body packing has increased greatly. As a result, there is increased airport security, and a rise in body-packing arrests. The study conducted by Traub, Kohn, Hoffman and Nelson (2003), reveals the use of children as body packers, in contrast to earlier mules predominantly being young men. Similarly, Greenberg and Shrethra (2000) found that pregnant women also participated in the role of bodypacking couriers. In fact, women mules carried out their task with great efficiency, swallowing as many or more drug packets than men. Compensation was either in the form of cash amounting to several thousand dollars per trip, or safe passage into a foreign country. Additionally, “family members or personal property may be held as collateral to ensure the body packer’s cooperation” state Traub et al (2003, p.2519). Significantly, the packing of the drug packets has become automated, ensuring precision in size and shape, greater safety through multiple layers of wrapping, and the use of appropriate wrappers to prevent detection. In the European context, the EMCDDA (2012) states that current definitions of drug mules in relation to drug trafficking do not clearly differentiate drug trafficking elements such as production and transportation; the latter in turn may be import or export, either at European Union (EU) or United Nations (UN) level. Further, the levels of coercion that drug mules undergo are neither well-defined nor well studied. However, the Home Affairs Committee (2010) assert that compulsion and coercion play a part to some extent, even when drug mules are paid for their services. Caulkins, Burnett and Leslie (2009) studied the payment of mules in greater depth. The evidence indicates that the rate of pay depends on the type and weight of drugs transported. Whether smuggling is by plane or other transport, payment per shipment is the system used universally. The amount paid to the mule is usually only a fraction of the retail price of the drugs. The system of payment for service indicates that any drugs found in the possession of a mule are not their own property, but rather the property of someone else in the supply chain. Zaitch (2002), Caulkins et al (2009), and Decker and Chapman (2008) note that there are organizations that exist particularly for transporting drugs from the producing country to the destination location. However, these researchers have focused mainly on the trafficking of cocaine; the existence of such organisations for trafficking other drugs is stated to be unknown. The second courier type, the self-employed courier has been examined by the company Gruppo Abele (2003). It explores the trafficking of synthetic drugs in the three European cities of Amsterdam, Barcelona, and Turin, and includes drug dealers who transport consignments of synthetic drugs by road, for sale and for personal use. The EMCDDA (2012, p.19) states that the category of “self-employed couriers includes those who organise the purchase of drugs from producers or brokers, and the transport and sale of drugs in the target country”, where they either sell the drugs themselves or develop associations with a wholesaler or broker. The role of the self-employed courier exposes them to a higher risk of apprehension. However, because the courier owns both the distribution networks and the drugs, the potential for profit is much higher. Classifying couriers as mules or self-employed types, distinguishes them by physical actions or roles and not by by offences or participating individuals. This enables the removal of distinctive geographical, social or temporal variables, facilitating comparisons and understanding. Thus, EMCDDA (2012, p.20) state that by “decontextualising the roles of drug traffickers from local and national experience, we create categories” that are not constrained by the views of law enforcement, or by the interpretation of national legislation or sociologists, but which are actually strengthened by these groups. When a drug leaves its country of production by means of mules, it becomes open to increased surveillance and suppression efforts, although enforcement efforts also face difficulties. The arrival of the drug in the destination country is another point of high vulnerability for disrupting the smuggling operation, and preventing entry of the drug. Zabludoff (1997) argues that the distribution chain is the most vulnerable where money is exchanged, hence law enforcement efforts to suppress and disrupt drug distribution must be focused at these points. Katz and Webb (2006) reiterate that the problem of a fixed image of international drug smuggling is reflected in the criminal justice response to gangs and enforcement of drug policies. The reality is different from the assumption of drug smuggling being highly organized, paying high rewards, finding recruits easily, and the area for law enforcement for surveillance being large. Further, the challenges include the use of unconnected small cells in the networks, the absence of connections to institutions in the United States, “the lack of specialization, the use of multiple pathways to smuggle the drug into the United States, the dynamic nature of the organizations, and the self-contained nature of most of the networks”, state Decker and Chapman (2008, p.158). Conclusion This paper has highlighted the global problem of drug use which gives rise to the transportation of drugs such as cocaine, marijuana, heroin, and other products by couriers or human mules to countries where there is a demand for the drug. The role of drug couriers or mules in the international drug trafficking industry was investigated. The evidence indicates that across the world, the producers of various drugs provide buyers in other countries with the required supplies. Policies and governmental interventions to ban the transfer of drugs are circumvented by those attempting to amass wealth in the illegal drug trade. The lure of extensive profits is the root cause of many couriers or mules taking the risk of smuggling drugs in their body by consuming the packets. With greater airport security measures being established after the events of September 11, 2001, drug smugglers have increased their use of body packers or couriers carrying swallowed packets of drugs, to avoid detection. The swallowed packets contain life-threatening amounts of drug, which are packed securely to prevent leakage into the carrier’s body. In this high-risk smuggling environment, where both personal freedom as well as the mule’s life are in danger, the lure of large sums of money whether true or false, motivates the couriers to undertake the drug bodypacking and carrying work. Mules consist of men, women as well as children. Significantly, they are not provided with any information regarding the other stages of the operation, and are kept separated from other individuals in the network. This prevents any leakage of information to law enforcement. Thus, it is concluded that although the drug courier or mule plays an important role in the smuggling operations as the actual carrier of the smuggled goods, their place in the hierarchy of the trade is at a low level. Bibliography Caulkins, J, Burnett, H and Leslie, E 2009, ‘How illegal drugs enter an island country: Insights from interviews with incarcerated smugglers, Global Crime, vol.10, pp.66-93. Decker, SH and Chapman, MT 2008, Drug smugglers on drug smuggling: Lessons from the inside, Temple University Press, Philadelphia. Ellis, S 2009, ‘West Africa’s international drug trade’, African Affairs, vol.108, no.431, pp.171-196. EMCDDA (European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction) 2012, A definition of drug mules for use in a European context, viewed 25 May 2012, http://www.ofdt.fr/BDD/publications/docs/OEDTdrugMules.pdf Gill, JR and Graham, SM 2002, ‘Ten years of ‘bodypackers in New York City: 50 deaths’, Journal of Forensic Science, vol.47, pp.843-846. Greenberg, MI and Shrethra, M 2000, ‘Management of the pregnant body packer’, Journal of Toxicology – Criminal Toxicology, vol.38, pp.176-177. Gruppo Abele 2003, Synthetic drug trafficking in three European cities: Major trends and the involvement of organised crime, Gruppo Abele, Turin. Home Affairs Committee 2010, The cocaine trade, The House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, London. Katz, C and Webb, V 2006, Policing gangs in America. Cambridge University Press, New York. Lehman, J and Phelps, S 2005, West’s encyclopedia of American law, Volume 9, Edition 2, Thomson/ Gale, The United States of America. Levinson, D 2002, Encyclopedia of crime and punishment, Volumes 1-4, Sage Publications, California. Schiray, M 2001, Introduction: Drug trafficking, organised crime, and public policy for drug control, UNESCO, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford. Schiray, M 2003, ‘Integrating case-studies lessons in business modeling narcotics trafficking enterprises. Globalisation, drugs and criminalisation’, in C Geffray, G Fabre and M Shiray (eds), Research from Brazil, Mexico, India and China in an international perspective: Report of the MOST-UNESCO/ United Nations, ODCCP Research Projects, Paris-Vienna. Traub, SJ, Hoffman, RS and Nelson, LS 2003, ‘Body packing – the internal Concealment of illicit drugs’, New England Journal of Medicine, vol.349, no.26, pp. 2519-2526. Traub, SJ, Kohn, GL, Hoffman, RS and Nelson, LS 2003, ‘Pediatric “body packing”’, Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, vol.157, pp.174-177. Zabludoff, S 1997, ‘Columbian narcotics organizations as business enterprises’, Transnational Organized Crime, vol.3: pp.20-49. Zaitch, D 2002, Trafficking cocaine: Colombian drug entrepreneurs in the Netherlands, Kluwer, The Hague, Netherlands. Read More