Drug Control Strategy in Netherlands - Essay Example

 Drug use problems became evident in many world societies in late 19th century through to the mid 20th century when slowly the use of many drugs transformed from acceptable application in medicinal procedures to illicit consumption under deviant environments. At the time, the most common drugs across the globe included cannabis, heroin, cocaine, amphetamines, and opium. These were trafficked mainly from Latin America and Caribbean regions into developed nations in Europe and the United States of America. As a result, many national state governments initiated legislation on the types and amounts of drugs that constitute criminal offences. The emergence of HIV/AIDS and its prevalence among injecting drug users further tightened the international resolve to classify most of the drugs outlined above as hard drugs and illegal. Consequently, there came the formulation of national policies and strategies, international agreements and cooperative strategies between states to tackle trafficking and combat drug use across borders. To date the issue of drugs has become more complex with the emergence of production and trafficking cartels that have global representation and sophisticated smuggling tactics that are capable of evading customs authorities in many parts of the world. Efforts of several governments have borne fruit in controlling the menace while others are still staggering around the issue with no tangible progress (Thomas 142). Netherlands National Drug Strategy With legislation dating back to the early 20th century’s enactment of the opium act in 1928, followed by its fundamental amendment of 1976, the national drug strategy of Netherlands came to effect in 1995 to provide a framework for dealing with illicit drug related problems. The strategy has four major objectives, which include prevention of drug usage, rehabilitation and treatment of addicts, harm reduction among users, public nuisance eradication and diminishing production and trafficking. All these objectives aim at achieving the broader goal of promoting general health in the country. The strategy is restricted to illegal drugs with reinforcement from sector specific strategies such as destruction of drug plantations, interception and stoppage of trafficking through the airlines and shipping agencies as well as health promotion campaigns. The strategy is seen by many policy analysts as too liberal and giving a lot of room for drug use. This is because drug use constitutes a crime if it involves other unlawful practices like stealing and burglary, illegal trade and trafficking. The use of drugs is also permissible outside public places like hospitals, schools, public means of transport and public parks. The strategy also exempts conviction for being in possession of small quantities of both soft and hard drugs that do not surpass the respective thresholds, in which confiscation is the only penalty. With effects of drugs touching not only on the health of the drug users, but also the society in general, the major concern of the strategy has being poor health among drug users, as well as the risk of infectious diseases as HIV/AIDS, which are prevalent among injecting drug users. Studies carried in the major trade cities like Amsterdam indicate that HIV/AIDS is still on the increase among drug users, alluding to the possibility that the strategy used to fight the menace is not adequate. The Preferred Strategy Sweden has a more restrictive strategy in dealing with drug issues with its goal being to provide quality drug-free life for all its citizens. Drug related crimes and violation of statutes bear heavy penalties that discourage the population from engaging in such activities. The issue of harm reduction among users is not a primary objective of the strategy and only comes in during treatment with the aim of making the addicts to turn away from such habits. Possession of any illegal drugs against the law is a very serious crime and attracts serious measures that include long jail periods. Here, authorities carry out tests on blood and urine of suspected users of illegal drugs, with same penalties when positively identified since such violations constitute criminal acts in accordance with the Swedish law. The strategy factors in the role of anti-drug coordinators, a position whose roles include coordination of all government, municipal authorities, NGOs and other actors in implementing drug interventions as well as collecting and disseminating information to the public. It also evaluates the implementation process by various stakeholders and carries out research to improve on its intervention. This approach has made the process more involving in terms of participation of the various interests groups and especially the local populations who face challenges of drug abuse on a daily basis. In the case of Netherlands, government ministries in charge of health, environment and sports are responsible for funding the strategy, whereas the local municipalities work in conjunction with local schools, museums and other local institutions to implement prevention programmes. The focus has being on the public in general although lately more attention focuses on the young section of the population with particular focus on school going youths and their parents. Through using television and radio programmes as well as the internet, drug awareness messages pass directly to the target audience in successions. The strategy also dedicates much of its focus on treatment and rehabilitation of abusers and reintegration back to the society. Achievement of this goal is through establishment of restricted jail like detention centers where those convicted of drug abuse and addiction remain for correction until full rehabilitation from drugs. There also is intervention by non-governmental organizations that reach out for active drug users to convince them to leave the vice while still in the society. All these measures have seen considerable achievements of the strategy in respect to promoting health awareness and abstention from drugs. However, this liberal approach to drug and substance abuse has seen the country remain with high prevalence rates of abuse as compare to countries like Sweden where the approach is more restrictive. Perhaps it will be great reprieves for the Dutch government to adopt measures that are stringent consider drug abuse an alien behavior that warrants stopping at all costs, other than dealing with effects without first addressing the causative reasons. Promoting harm reduction on the abusers and elimination of public nuisance as part of the strategic objectives indirectly entrenches the practice into the society by way of creating a mentality that condoning drug abuse is okay in as far as the negative impacts are in to control, which is serious flaw of the strategy. The overall goal of the strategy is narrow in that it focuses more on health, turning a blind eye on the social and economic implication of drug abuse. The goal should be more encompassing to cover these aspects and take a social welfare dimension in which ensuring a normal drug free life is the area of focus. Focusing on harm reduction is another aspect of the strategy that makes it remain behind in assuring a complete turn from drug abuse to a normal healthy society. This is because the approach tends to promote continued use while keeping impacts within a certain threshold. Instead, the policy should out rightly strive to reduce the number of people involved, eliminate traders in the dirty business, and encourage people to quit and keep away from drugs. Treatment and rehabilitation of drug addicts should be geared towards complete abstention and where necessary using coercive methods. About use of drugs by members of the public outside medical institutions, the strategy should expand the definition of what amounts to criminal acts to exclude any alleged use for medicinal purposes. Penalties for offences related to drug should be harsher to not only deter aspiring recruits from joining the practice but also to inflict fear among young people, which will help poster a restrained behavior towards the whole issue of drug usage. These factors if rightly incorporated into the Netherlands’ drug strategy will go a long way in ensuring that the country fights drug and substance abuse more effectively. Historically, formulation of the Dutch drug strategy emanated from the grave impacts that drugs were having on the health of the abusers and the public as numbers of the affected rose exponentially across the country. The central government through the ministry in charge of health took up the task of combating the menace through proposition of health intervention on the affected people, which took a largely curative approach than it evaluated preventive measures. This formed the basis upon which the current drug strategy anchors, with its goal being the promotion of good health among all citizens across the country. Overtime the strategy included other key stakeholders in the name of the ministries in charge of the environment and sports. The ministry of environment came on board following the understanding of the social dimension and effects that increased usage of drugs was having on the environment of the nation. Checking cultivation of drugs like cannabis on farmlands as well as air pollution implications associated with smoking was placed under the watch of the authorities responsible for the environment docket. Since the most severely affected section of the population were youths, the ministry of sports that focuses more on youth affairs, plays a key role in designing and implementing projects that actively engage youths in productive activities keeping them away from drugs. It also features prominently in intervention measures of non-governmental organizations and other private sector interventions that target the youth, drug free campaign in the media and religious organizations. The other major stakeholder in this strategy is the local municipal governments, which coordinate all activities of school authorities and other public institutions charged with drug use regulation. It also has responsibility over treatment and rehabilitation centers within its areas of jurisdiction as well as carrying out campaigns and arresting offenders. It is worth noting that throughout the structure of formulation, responsibility and enforcement of the drug policy, participation of the grass community is not clearly established. Promotion of good health being the primary goal of the strategy, the key players in this strategy as discussed above believed that targeting manifestations of the problem is vital to resolving health issues associated with the menace. Adoption of harm reducing interventions among drug users as well as reduction of public nuisance caused by abusers appeared helpful in assuring healthy living conditions for all. This assertion however was not conscious of other effects that drugs have on the society as a whole. This strategy therefore views health impacts of drug use as the real cause of alarm and its effect being a weak society that is not capable of assuring quality life for the current and future generations. Adoption of more restrictive approach to policies on drugs is the most effective way to curb the continued usage among members of the public. This involves the expanding the classification of what constitutes drug abuse to encompass all illegal substances at whatever concentrations. This will involve shelving discussions on the use of illegal drugs like cannabis, amphetamines and ecstasy by non-medics outside hospitals for medicinal purposes. Further, the setting of thresholds that one should have at any given time and the lenient penalties issued has a negative impact of encouraging abuse on cumulative basis. Concerning the issue of treatment, there is an urgent need to ensure that the sole objective is making the victim quit completely (Clayton 214). Since the country is a major transit point for international trade especially for cocaine and heroin, the national strategy should actively involve the national police department and customs regulatory authorities to check on entry of such substances into the local market. Retaining overall control of policies that form the strategy to the national government and municipalities taking up the implementation mandate is another way to ensure success of the strategy. Stakeholders involved in this strategy need to take up an overall goal of protecting life and assuring quality standards for all citizens as opposed to the narrow view of considering the health aspects in isolation. Arguably, this will help stakeholders to view the whole issue in varied respects and come up with a realization that selective adoption of intervention measures targeting one element of human life is not enough. Consideration of the social and economic spheres of life is crucial in facilitating the adoption of a more restrictive approach to fight illicit drugs. Involvement of local societies and civil organizations is a key ingredient in ensuring success of such strategies. Current interventions consider these sectors of the society as recipients of information and policies and not as part of planning and implementing agents. Local community groups as well as opinion leaders in any community are very effective in pinpointing areas of concern and in creating a flat form for easy conveyance of messages and decisions. The role of civil society and community activists in creating awareness and stimulating behavior change should feature prominently in formulating and implementing strategies. Therefore, stakeholders in the process should include the participation of these key sectors of the society in all intervention measures. International policies like the European plan on eradication of drugs, which is unilaterally accepted by member states of the union is of great help in implementing a national drug policy. The plan proposes formation of an overall drug enforcement agency to coordinate efforts of individual member states in fighting drug abuse as well as collectively reinforcing each other in cross border cases. This helpful tool enables external assistance in tracing and dismantling activities of cartels that operate in more than one country. On the aspect of establishing national drug control councils, bilateral policies help countries to learn from each other and share experiences and expertise in dealing with difficult situations. Drug and substance abuse being an issue of great concern in many countries, such agreements come in handy to boost national strategies’ efforts of reaching grass root levels in enforcing legislations. The essence of these policies being unilateral is to facilitate for similar operational standards that assure understanding in pursuit of a common goal. By providing performance indexes and comparing them amongst members, unilateral policies are helpful in keeping the individual national polices under constant chase for improvement and attaining of set standards In evaluating the efficiency of a drug policy, there should be consideration on its overall output against a set benchmark. Ideally, if the policy is responsive and living to the mandate ascribed, there should be visible and tangible evidence of reduction in the number of people joining drug use as well as on the number of related arrests and convictions. Public nuisance and crimes related to drugs will have to subside due to reducing numbers of addicts in the society. In conclusion, the Netherlands drug strategy is not sufficient in tackling the issue of illicit drugs among its population due to its liberal approach. Although the health approach that it takes is significantly consistent with the improvements achieved so far, much more is attainable by making it embrace freeing the society of illegal drugs as its main goal. Involvement of local level civil societies and activists another sure way of making it more responsive to the course it champions for. Work cited Clayton, J. Mosher and Scott Akins. Drugs and drug policy: the control of consciousness alteration. California: Sage, 2007. Print. Thomas, Babor and Jonathan P. Caulkins, Griffith Edwards: Drug policy and the public good. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print. Read More