Jean-Luc Robert, parliamentary assistant, European Parliament

Introduction

In a report published 10 February 1993, the International Narcotics Control Board evaluated the results of the present strategy to control drug abuse as follows: "measures taken nationally and internationally to reduce drug abuse and trafficking have yet to yield more universally visible and decisive results". At the same time, with one clean sweep it discarded any thought of a fundamental review of the strategy: "Legalization advocates", the report says, "have not yet presented a sufficiently comprehensive, coherent or viable alternative to the present system of international drug abuse control".

The initiative to publish this first report arose, in fact, from the International Antiprohibitionist League's wish to answer the challenge launched by the INCB - to present models that address the drug phenomenon via the legalization of these substances, and to examine whether these models are more reliable than policies based on prohibition and repression.

Prior to such an endeavour, the effectiveness of the present model must be evaluated. This incited us to measure the impact of policies currently followed in various countries by a comparative study of statistics. This undoubtedly ambitious project was fraught with enormous bureaucratic obstacles. Official statistics, when available, are for the most part unreliable, inexact, outdated and hard to compare. The study conducted by the IAL is nonetheless the first of its genre. And despite its limitations, certain conclusions can be drawn from it. Although the initial objective - to measure country-by-country the impact and costs of prohibition - had to be scaled down, this relatively modest study does provide elements to assess the phenomenon and highlights certain elements, which all lead to confirm that a liberal approach is more apt than those focused on repression to curb drug abuse.

On this subject, despite the accumulation of official agencies, both national and international - having financial and human resources infinitely superior to those of the IAL and devoted in one way or another to increasing knowledge of the situation for a more effective control of drug abuse - it is somewhat surprising that not one of these agencies has conducted a large-scale comparative study of the real effectiveness of the policies followed. Progress has barely moved beyond statements of intention, and even false assertions. But isn't it said that asking the question is already an answer?

Things being as they are, in addition to the statistical study, this report has a twofold aim: to discuss the latest developments in the antiprohibitionist campaign and dialogue, and to present policies currently followed and the rising trend in drug abuse and related problems. The objective was not to present an exhaustive report. This would have been impossible in view of the abundance of documents and analyses on the subject. Thus, to illustrate major developments in the drug phenomenon, we felt it would be useful to focus on an example that is both largely unknown and especially disquieting - the situation in Central and Eastern Europe, a region where both the production and consumption of drugs, as well as money laundering and Mafia-type criminality are becoming major issues.

The same logic was followed in dealing with the question of antiprohibition. Not wishing to present another complete history of the evolution of the movement and its theories, we decided to restrict ourselves to examining the latest developments in the movement and in antiprohibitionist thought.

For this reason we have assembled a few of the most significant texts that reflect the most advanced thoughts both on the collateral effects of prohibition, especially on delinquency, and worldwide organized crime, and on the very role the prevailing structures play in the volume of substances available, the expanding market, drug traffic turnover, consumption rates, and the health and social situation of drug addicts as well as of society on the whole.

As the debate on this subject has become particularly fertile, studies are no longer limited to highlighting all the adverse effects of prohibitionism. Viable alternatives are now advanced, no longer based on theory alone, but also on the results of pilot experiments that have been conducted here and there, almost exclusively in Europe.

And lastly, as such a research must be forward-looking, we have also sketched broad lines the movement should follow in the future. Indeed, the numerous studies and analyses produced by the prohibition side of the debate have amply demonstrated its failure and perversity. At the same time, the pilot experiments in harm reduction, although generally conclusive, are hamstrung by limits imposed by the UN Conventions of 1961, 1971 and 1988. We thus propose to study and implement the legal measures needed to go a step beyond these conventions. This strategy, albeit ambitious, appears to be the only one capable of clearing the deadlock which threatens the antiprohibition movement.