Amsterdam Coffeeshop Directory Forums

"Drug decriminalization did reach its primary goal in Portugal of reducing the health consequences of drug use" says Peter Reuter, criminologist at the University of Maryland, "and did not lead to Lisbon becoming a drug tourist destination."

doobydave wrote:I still think they can screw up your life, just not put you in prison.

DECRIMINALIZATION OF DRUG POSSESSION

Decriminalization represents a significant departure from the previous law, and is different from efforts in other countries such as Italy and Spain in that it explicitly separates the drug user from the criminal justice system. The CNDS recognized, and the government explicitly concurred, that imprisonment or fines have so far not provided an adequate response to the problem of mere drug use, and that it has not been demonstrated that to subject a user to criminal proceedings constitutes the most appropriate and effective means of intervention.

The international arena was explicitly addressed in deciding to adopt decriminalization. The national strategy document declared that after a study of the 1988 United Nations Convention against illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, it was consistent with that convention to adopt the strategic option of decriminalizing drug use, as well as the possession and purchase for this use. In the Portuguese view, replacement of criminalization with mere breach of administrative regulations maintained the international obligation to establish in domestic law a prohibition of those activities and behaviors. Moreover, decriminalization as defined by the national strategy was the only alternative to maintaining drug use as a criminal offense that is compatible with the international conventions currently in effect (Government of Portugal, 1999, p.61).

How decriminalization will work

Under the law that has taken effect on 1 July 2001, the use and possession for use of drugs is no longer a criminal offense, but instead is prohibited as an administrative offense. This distinguishes Portugal from Spain, where the policy is de facto decriminalisation, but where a drug consumer will still be judged by a criminal court, although he will never be sent to prison for drug consumption alone. The same holds for the American system of drug courts, which send a drug consumer to treatment only after he has been convicted by a criminal court. Both in Spain and in the U.S. drug court system, the consumer has a criminal record and it is this stigmatization that the Portuguese policy explicitly aims to prevent. There is no distinction made among different types of drugs ("hard" vs. "soft" drugs), nor whether drug use is private or in public. Decriminalization only refers to possession of drugs for personal use and not for drug trafficking. "Trafficking" for purposes of the law is possession of more than the average dose for ten days of use (although what these levels are for specific drugs is not spelled out in the law).

To deal with these administrative offenses, each of the 18 administrative districts in Portugal will establish at least one committee that deals only with drug use in that district (larger districts such as the ones containing Lisboa and Porto will probably have more than one committee). The committees will generally consist of three people, two people from the medical sector (physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists or social workers) and one person with a legal background. Committee members are not supposed to be involved in drug treatment but should be sufficiently knowledgeable to judge what is best for the user.

Drug users will largely be brought to the attention of the administrative committees when the police observe them using drugs. Although police will cite users and send the citation to the administrative committee, they will not arrest users. If the committee determines on the basis of the evidence brought before it that the person is a drug trafficker, then the committee will refer that person to the courts. Although the law states that any doctor who detects a drug problem in a patient may bring this to the attention of the committee in his or her district, it is regarded as highly unlikely; not only is such reporting repugnant to most doctors, but it might violate the doctor’s oath of confidentiality.

The law states that the committee should consider a number of criteria in determining what action to take with a drug user. These criteria include the severity of the offense, the type of drug used, whether use is in public or private; if the person is not an addict, whether use is occasional or habitual; the personal and economic/financial circumstances of the user.
How these criteria are to be used is not stated. Some are of the opinion that the committee may choose not to take any action; others believe that some form of action, even if suspended, is required.

The committees have a broad range of sanctions available to them. These include:
· fines, ranging from 25 to 150 EURO. These figures are based on the Portuguese minimum wage of about 330 EURO (Banco de Portugal, 2001) and translate into hours of work lost;
· suspension of the right to practice if the user has a licensed profession (e.g. medical doctor, taxi driver) and may endanger another person or someone's possessions;
· ban on visiting certain places (e.g. specific discotheques);
· ban on associating with specific other persons;
· interdiction to travel abroad;
· requirement to report periodically to the committee;
· withdrawal of the right to carry a gun;
· confiscation of personal possessions;
· cessation of subsidies or allowances that a person receives from a public agency.
The committee cannot mandate compulsory treatment, although its orientation is to induce addicts to enter and remain in treatment. The committee has the explicit power to suspend sanctions conditional upon voluntary entry into treatment, but because disobedience of committee rulings is not defined as a criminal offense, it is not clear what the further sanctions are if users do not follow either the treatment recommendations or the orders of the committee. Some experts view that the committees will see users repeatedly and should "build up a relationship of trust with the addict." Other experts hold that this is not possible, because the committee is acting as a judge and jury.