|
Frequently
Asked Questions and our answers
|
| |
|
| 1. |
|
| QUESTION: |
What
do we understand by the term 'drugs' ? |
ANSWER:
|
"Drugs"
are illicit stimulants and intoxicants. Drugs can be distinguished
into soft drugs and hard drugs. Soft drugs are products obtained from
the cannabis (or hemp) plant: marihuana (from the flowering tops of
the cannabis plant, to roll "joints") and hash (resin).
The most widely-used hard drugs are cocaine (made from the coca plant),
heroin (from poppy plants), amphetamine (known as pep pills or "speed"
or "whizz") and ecstasy (known as "E" or "XTC",
it's official name is MDMA). |
| |
|
| 2. |
|
| QUESTION: |
What
is the current drug policy in the Netherlands ? |
ANSWER:
|
The
Ministry of Justice in the Netherlands officially "tolerates"
the sale of soft drugs in so-called "coffee shops". Under
the regime of tolerance the sale is subject to restrictions. For instance,
cannabis can only be sold to adults, and only in limited amounts,
viz. 5 grams at a time. There are no such regulations for hard drugs.
The use of hard drugs is not prosecuted, but the production and sale
are prohibited. People with a heroin addiction can, through support
agencies, receive a substance called a substance calle methadone as
a replacement for heroin. Two years ago an experiment was started
to dispense heroin to a small number of addict in whose case methadone
did not work. This experiment seems to be successful: improvement
of health, fewer drug-related problems and a reduction of crime. In
the course of this year the experiment will be reviewed in order to
decide whether controlled heroin distribution may become part of standard
community care services. There is also a needle exchange programme,
offering the opportunity to addicts to exchange used needles for clean
ones, and several injection rooms were made available. |
| |
|
| 3. |
|
QUESTION:
|
Does
the Netherlands have a more serious drug problem than other countries
as a result of the "tolerant" Dutch policy on drugs ? |
ANSWER:
|
The
answer is 'no'. Compared to most other countries the Netherlands is
doing rather well. Drug use in our country is average compared to
that of other European countries. The number of addicts and drug casualties
is one of the lowest in Europe, and the same is true for the number
of people with Aids. Far fewer people have been convicted for selling
or using drugs than in other countries, because drug use has been
decriminalised and so has the sale of soft drugs in coffee shops. |
| |
|
| 4. |
|
QUESTION:
|
In
that case, is there be any reason why we should be concerned about
drug policy in The Netherlands? |
ANSWER:
|
Most
definitely! Although the situation here is less serious than in the
majority of countries where drug prohibition is applied much more
strictly, drug prohibition has catastrophic effects in our country
as well.With regard to soft drugs, the major problem is the fact that
although coffee shops are allowed to sell soft drugs ("at the
front door"), they are not allowed to purchase drugs "at
the back door" to be able to supply their customers. As a consequence,
cannabis is grown illegally in private homes. Sometimes electricity
is illegally tapped, and in residential areas nuisance may be caused
by the smell. In addition, illicit cannabis cultivation can be a fire
hazard. In some cities criminal gangs control cannabis production.
Hard drugs are smuggled into our country, a -very- small part of which
by body packers. XTC and amphetamine are manufactured in illicit "labs",
that cause damage to the environment and very dangerous. Production
and trade are a goldmine for criminals.Some heavy users are driven
to crime by the high prices, and cause much nuisance to residential
areas. An estimated fifty per cent of the total number of crimes committed
in our country results from the prohibition of drugs (the same holds
true for other countries)! And, last but not least: the ban on drugs
means that there is no quality control whatsoever to protect the 500,000
regular drug consumers, and contributes to the miserable conditions
of addicts. |
| |
|
| 5. |
|
| QUESTION: |
Aren't
drugs far more dangerous than alcohol and tobacco ? |
ANSWER:
|
The
number of drug addicts and casualties is very small compared to that
of either alcohol or tobacco. The number of alcoholics in our country
is 13 times higher than the number of drug addicts, 15 times as many
people die as a result of alcohol abuse (not even counting traffic
casualties), and 133 times as many people die through tobacco ! |
| |
|
| 6. |
|
QUESTION:
|
Isn't
it because of the drug prohibition that the damage to public health
is relatively limited ? |
ANSWER:
|
No.
First of all, the prohibition is not effective. Despite the prohibition,
and despite the fact that the police and prosecution services spend
half their time on issues related to the enforcement of drug prohibition,
drugs are still available in this country to anyone who wants to buy
them, and that situation is not just limited to the big cities. The
same holds true for other countries: in Britain and the U.S, where
there is an even stricter observance and enforcement of prohibition,
more drugs are used and there are more addicts relative to their populations.
The Netherlands has roughly half a million regular drug takers. Secondly,
the decriminalisation of the sale of soft drugs in coffee shops proves
that it does not increase drug consumption. |
| |
|
| 7. |
|
QUESTION:
|
But
doesn't prohibition to a certain extent have a preventative effect?
If the ban on drugs was to be lifted would this not imply the government
saying: "go ahead, do as you please" ? |
ANSWER:
|
Not
if a sensible form of regulation has been chosen. Actually, the opposite
is true. Banning drugs just means that criminal organizations will
produce and sell them. The government is not able to prevent this,
and as a result of the prohibition the government evades its responsibilities
with regard to public health and safety. The fact that there are risks
involved in using drugs is all the more reason not to leave the market
to (organized) crime. Only if the government regulates drugs it will
be credible when it warns about the dangers of drugs. |
| |
|
| 8. |
|
QUESTION:
|
If
drug dealing is no longer a criminal offence, you might as well decide
to stop prosecuting other crimes like, say, theft too ! |
ANSWER:
|
The
drug trade fundamentally differs from theft and other such criminal
offences. Criminal law aims to protect us against others. With regard
to drugs, the fundamental issue is protection against ourselves. If
adult citizens want to take drugs the government tells them: "you
are not allowed to do that to yourselves; you are too weak to say
'no' to drugs yourselves, that's why we prohibit the sale ".
The thing is, though, that the seller offers the buyer something that
the buyer wants to buy ! The prohibition of drugs, therefore, in fact
is the odd one out in criminal law. |
| |
|
| 9. |
|
QUESTION:
|
If
drugs are regulated instead of prohibited, drug dealers won't suddenly
be model citizens and start playing backgammon, will they? Isn't it
likely that they will simply start trading arms and be involved in
other criminal activities? |
ANSWER:
|
If
that were true, why aren't they involved in those criminal activities
now? The answer is simple: because the drug trade is easier and much
more lucrative. History tells us as much. In the U.S. there was a
ban on alcohol from 1920 to 1933, the "Prohibition". When
prohibition was lifted, about a third of the "bootleggers"
(dealers) reverted to other criminal ways of making money, whilst
a third continued selling alcohol which was now legal, and a third
disappeared from the criminal scene altogether. |
| |
|
| 10. |
|
| QUESTION: |
What
would such a regulation look like ? |
|
ANSWER:
|
Cannabis
growers should be able to get a licence for growing and selling
soft drugs, allowing them supply certified coffee shops only. In
this way, minimum quality standards can be introduced, and growers
would be paying taxes. The SDB outlined these plans in its pamphlet
Coffee shops out of the shadow - a plan for the regulation of the
"back door".Other drugs may be sold by chemists or special
drug shops. As long as prohibition is not lifted in other countries,
only Dutch consumers would be allowed to buy, and only in limited
amounts, in order to prevent drugs being smuggled to other countries.
Further information on these issues can be found in our report "Drug
Control through Legalization".
|
| |
|
| 11. |
|
QUESTION:
|
Can
our country operate independently in this respect ? Or can regulation
only be realized with regulation taking place on an international
level ? |
ANSWER:
|
The
Netherlands is a party to the international conventions that prescribe
the prohibition of drugs. That has not proven to be an obstacle for
the regulation of the sale of soft drugs through coffee shops in our
country over the past 25 years. The policy on coffee shops is based
on the expediency principle: something that is illegal does not necessarily
have to be prosecuted when the public prosecution service does not
consider this to be advisable, or in other words, expedient. According
to the same legal principle, regulation may be extended. Political
opposition is to be expected, especially from the U.S., who are waging
their disastrous "war on drugs". An increasing number of
countries, however, recognize that drug prohibition is a dead-end
road. Eventually, the policy of tolerance should be replaced by legislation.
This requires an amendment to the UN conventions. The Netherlands
should initiate an international debate on this issue. |