1 / 31

Legal aspects of cannabis in the EU and Norway Brendan Hughes

Legal aspects of cannabis in the EU and Norway Brendan Hughes. Lisbon, 2 October 2007. Presentation. European Legal Database on Drugs: structure and contents What the laws say: consumption, possession, quantities, treatment alternatives, driving, workplace…

zared
Download Presentation

Legal aspects of cannabis in the EU and Norway Brendan Hughes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Legal aspects of cannabis in the EU and NorwayBrendan Hughes Lisbon, 2 October 2007

  2. Presentation • European Legal Database on Drugs: structure and contents • What the laws say: consumption, possession, quantities, treatment alternatives, driving, workplace… • What happens: some sentencing statistics

  3. National laws - European Legal Database on Drugs (ELDD) • ELDD is a free database on a public website. • Specific objectives : • Availability and updating of the relevant texts of drug-related legislation in the EU Member States; • Country Profiles, brief Topic Overviews and in-depth Legal Reports show research and analysis on selected subjects within the drug legislation sphere, in order to exchange good practices and inform policymakers. • Legal Correspondents: • National experts, probably from a Ministry • Appointed by each country • Validate the content of the ELDD

  4. Classification – UN Narcotics Convention 1961

  5. Classification – UN Psychotropics Convention 1971

  6. Government reports on cannabis in 100 years • Cannabis is not harmless • The dangers have been overstated • Civil sanctions, fines, compulsory health assessments should take the place of criminal penalties

  7. Classification systems – national • May be classed by • Narcotic or psychotropic (echoing UN), • level of harm, • medicinal use or not • links to punishment or not Some countries have one table, some have 12!

  8. Distinctions between cannabis and other drugs • Classification by law • Cyprus, Netherlands, UK (unique among 17 Sch.IV substances) • Specific exemption to the law • Ireland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Greece (cultivation) • Exception by guidelines • Denmark (prosecutors), Germany (Constitutional Court), UK (police) • Exception due to judicial discretion • The nature of the substance is one of the criteria (together with the quantity, previous criminal records, and other circumstances) considered by prosecutorial or judicial discretion

  9. What offence; use, or possession for use? Slightly academic distinction (can’t use without possessing), but: • UN asks to criminalise possession, not use • Possession always retains the possibility of trafficking • Positive blood or urine test – criminal charge? • Police suspect a crime being committed – what extra powers?

  10. Criminal offence (7) Non-criminal offence (4) Not an offence (15) Drug use/consumption – an offence?

  11. Drug possession Various combinations of the following main factors: • Possession / • of a certain amount / • with intention / • of a certain drug / • by an addict.

  12. Possession of drugs for personal use The legal status Offence

  13. Criminal, prison possible (14) Non-criminal / no prison (8) Cannabis – non-criminal/ no prison; Other drugs – criminal, prison possible (4) Possession of drugs for personal use Penalties in Laws

  14. Criminal, prison possible (11) Non-criminal / no prison (8) Cannabis – non-criminal/ no prison; Other drugs – criminal, prison possible (7) Possession of drugs for personal use Penalties in Laws and Guidelines

  15. Hypothetical penalties: possession of small quantity of drugs for personal use, without aggravating circumstances • Fines for possession of cannabis for personal use: • BELGIUM 1st€75-125 ; 2nd €130-250  ; 3rd €250-500 • DENMARK 1st– fine; 2nd €40 for 0-10g / €67 for 10-15g / €135 for 50-100g • SPAIN (in a public place)between €301 and €30,000 or suspension of the driving licence • IRELAND 1st €63; 2nd €127; 3rd €317 or up to 1 year prison • LUXEMBOURG €250- €2500 Source: EMCDDA 2004, Illicit drug use in the EU; Legislative approaches

  16. Recent legal changes • 2000 – Portugal (drugs) • 2001 – Luxembourg (cannabis) • 2003 – Belgium (cannabis) • 2004 – UK (cannabis) • 2004 – Denmark (drugs) • (2005 – Netherlands) • (2005 – France) • 2006 - Italy

  17. The role of the quantity in the prosecution of drug offences – April 2003 • Should be an aid to distinguish between personal use and trafficking • “Small” (defined) / “small” (not defined) / not mentioned. • Defined by street value, doses, weight, active principle… • Different status / consequences of offences • 2006: Italy / Bulgaria / UK • 2006: UK Home Office: “There are difficulties in establishing prescribed amounts which are universally applicable and appropriate.” • There is no right answer!!

  18. Treatment alternatives to conviction or punishment • Usually an option: occasionally obligatory for a first offence.  • Some countries have 1, others may have 5 • Depends on type of offence • Not only a drug consumption/ possession offence: can be used for property crime or any “minor” offence – avoid imprisoning an addict. • Depends on type of offender • In Europe, approximately twice as many alternatives for problem drug users (“addicts”) as for simply “users” (occasional users). • Austria, Germany – occasional cannabis users were blocking “real” treatment places…

  19. Young people and drugs - October 2003 • Minor as victim; selling to minors, encouraging minors, selling near schools or sports facilities. • Minor as dealer; age of criminal responsibility, lower penalties or diversion, responsibility of parent • Minor as user; almost always education or treatment.

  20. Zero (7) ET, FR, LI, PL, SI, SK, SE (but no liability if in accordance with prescription) 2-tier system (4) BE (Any substance causing impairment, but 7 subject to zero tolerance; both criminal offences) CZ (Impairment is criminal, trace (zero tolerance) is non-criminal. Complex!) DE (Any substance causing impairment, but 7 subject to zero tolerance; former is criminal, latter is non-criminal) FI (Any substance causing impairment, but non-prescribed products are subject to zero tolerance; both are criminal) Impairment (13) DK, ES, GR, IE, IT, CY, LU, HU, NL, AT, PT, UK, NO Drugged driving – Tolerance

  21. Testing in the workplace • Normally covered by general health and safety, privacy, and/or data protection laws • 3 countries have adopted specific legislation on drug testing in the workplace: Finland, Ireland, and Norway. • In Italy, the main drug law contains an article addressing specifically drug testing in the workplace.

  22. Testing in the workplace – on what basis? • Safety risk – BE, DK, FR • When necessary – DK, NO • Proportionate – DK, NO • When justified – BE, NL, NO • When reasonable – IE, NL • When suspicion – LV, LU, FI • Germany; Federal Labour Court considered that armed guard did not justify regular blood tests without cause

  23. Testing in the workplace - who can be tested? • Job applicant: BE (where drug use presents a safety risk), FR, LV, NL (prohibited for all applicants), SK, FI, NO (when necessary)… • Employee: FR, FI, IR, NO…

  24. However… Existence of an option in the law is no indication of actual frequency of use by the judiciary. What really happens?

  25. Prosecution of drug users in Europe (2002) • Questioned 10 experts in each country – “what is likely to happen?” • Police, prosecutor, court stages • Most countries look to deal with possession of small amounts by police or prosecutor, not in court • Retail sale will usually be prosecuted, unless there is a close link to addiction

  26. NEW PROJECT - Implementation of laws • What’s written in the law vs. what actually happens; “Liberal / repressive countries” • EMCDDA monitors entry to criminal justice system (DLOs). What about exit; police warning, fines, prison, diversion, case closed? • Diversion to treatment; how many are actually used? • National statistics of “CJS outputs” not always kept, or clear. • Subject of Selected Issue, November 2009

  27. UK – Disposal of drug possession offences by type of drug, England and Wales, 2004 Source: Home Office Statistical Bulletin, 23/05

  28. Portugal – Commissions for Dissuasion of Drug AbuseRulings of 3192 cases in 2005 (from 6260 started) Offences 3 500 3 000 Provisional Suspension, non addict. 2 500 2 000 Provisional Suspension with treatment. 1 500 1 000 Punitive. 500 Aquittal. Suspension of the ruling/ execution of the sanction. 2005 2002 2003 2004 2001 (2.º semester) Source: NFP report, 2006

  29. Portugal – Commissions for Dissuasion of Drug AbuseType of drug involved in administrative offences by year 4 500 Offences 4 000 3 500 3 000 2 500 2 000 1 500 1 000 500 2001 (2.º semester) 2002 2003 2004 2005 Heroin Cocaine Hashish Polydrugs Source: NFP report, 2006

  30. Sweden – Convictions and sanctions for drug offences in 2005 • almost 19 200 persons were convicted of drug offences in 2005 • 48% use, 30% possession, 4% smuggling and 5% distribution. • 73% minor offences, 24% non-minor offences, 2% serious offences • 36% cannabis, 30% amphetamines… • 56% awarded fines (by prosecutor or court), 19% waivers of prosecution, 16% prison sentences Source: NFP Report 2006

  31. Thank you for listeningBrendan Hugheshttp://eldd.emcdda.europa.eu/

More Related