LEGALIZATION OR DECRIMINALIZATION
Decriminalization and legalization are not generally advanced as
strategies to reduce drug consumption, but rather as possible ways to reduce the
harm to society from drug abuse, particularly from drug-related crime and
violence. Decriminalization proposals are a response to a belief that neither
supply suppression nor demand reduction efforts will be successful in reducing
drug abuse, and that the continued existence of a prohibition rme imposes
unacceptable costs on society.
Legalization (officially authorizing currently illegal
behaviour) and decriminalization (removing some penalties or at least
looking the other way) may occur at the user, producer or trafficker
levels in the drug chain, and may range from complete abandonment of controls to
the selective relaxation of absolute prohibition. Most arguments in favour of
some kind of liberalizing policy concentrate on decriminalizing or legalizing
consumer drug use; a few advocate the same policies for drug production; hardly
any are in favour of removing penalties for drug trafficking. Most proposals for
drug use decriminalization focus on marijuana, several on cocaine, a few on
heroin, while some would legalize all but crack cocaine. Another variant of the
liberalization approach is medicalization, which allows those who need a certain
drug to obtain it legally. Such a policy would obviously have to distinguish
between different kinds of drugs and their effects both on the individual and on
society.
Beyond reducing systemic crime, the proposals for legalization
appeal to larger moral goals, such as enhancing public health and safety and
invigorating a sense of community. An outright preference for unfettered freedom
to consume psychoactive drugs is hardly ever advanced. Rather than favouring
unqualified personal drug liberties, most proposals are meant to address the
most feared consequence of prohibition policies and their implementation:
drug-related crime. Accordingly, controls (regulation and taxation, perhaps
similar to those for tobacco and alcohol in the United States) are called for,
sometimes with the suggestion that tax proceeds from the legitimate sale of
drugs be dedicated to consumer anti-drug education and to drug-related public
services (for instance hospitals that care for infants who are born with an
addiction to drugs).
If drug use were decriminalized in consuming countries, there
would be no crime tax for traffickers, smugglers and pushers to reap and
therefore no reason for them to carry out turf wars, assault police, terrorize
neighbourhoods and undermine countries institutional integrity. A possible
parallel situation is that of the crime syndicates in the United States after
the prohibition on alcohol consumption ended in 1933: organizations associated
with the production and sale of alcohol faded away, went into other criminal
pursuits or invested their resources in legitimate businesses. With
decriminalization, savings from a cutback in law enforcement expenses could be
spent on other programmes, such as drug education and treatment. In terms of
health, clean drugs, clean needles and a humane environment could reduce the
incidence of drug-related HIV transmission.
A mix of decriminalization in consuming countries, combined with
legalization of the coca-cocaine industry in producing countries, could
eliminate the huge profits traffickers reap from their industry and at the same
time rapidly reduce drug-related violence. In Bolivia, where drug-related
violence has largely been avoided to date, legalization might have adverse
economic effects in some sectors, as the price of coca would fall to roughly the
equivalent of other agricultural crops. However, there is widespread and growing
support in the country for legalization of coca (as opposed to cocaine). It is
believed that legalization would help promote alternative coca products.
The primary opposition to the liberalization of drug policies is
based on the belief that drug use would increase if the penalties on it were
removed, and therefore that the adverse social, political and economic effects
that societies endure would be as great or worse than those suffered under the
present prohibition rme. There is also fear that children would be more
exposed to drug use if the social stigma attached to it were removed. Finally,
there are concerns about the practical difficulties of legal distribution of
drugs to so many users (in the United States alone, there are eight million
regular users of cocaine and heroin).
Increased drug abuse does not, however, appear to be the
inevitable result of the liberalization of drug laws. In several Latin American
countries, for instance, the easy availability of cocaine at low prices has not
given rise to any substantial cocaine abuse problems. In Amsterdam, where both
cannabis and cocaine are easily available, the use of both drugs is
significantly lower than in the United States, where drug use penalties are
severe.