In 2001, a small European country, Portugal, took a brave step, changing its drug policies and refocussing its efforts away from arresting and criminalising drug users, towards smart public health interventions. How did the political establishment of a Catholic-Conservative country come to such an agreement about decriminalization? How does the system work? Is it effective?
D. Thanki, J. Matias, P. Griffiths, A. Noor, D. Olszewski, R. Simon, J. Vicente
14 နိုဝင်ဘာလ 2012
This report brings together, for the first time in Europe, an integrated overview of the prevalence of intensive cannabis use, defined as daily or almost daily cannabis use (use on 20 or more days in the month preceding survey). Self-reported data regarding frequency of cannabis use from large, probabilistic, nationally representative samples of general population surveys from 20 countries, representing more than 83 % of the population of EU and Norway, were collected through two rounds of ad hoc data collection in 2004 and 2007 and through a routine, standard data collection instrument since 2010.
In recent years there has been much talk of the so-called “Portuguese model,” based on an initiative that led to the use of illicit drugs being decriminalised in 2001. In fact, it is often said that Portugal was the first country in Europe to decriminalise drug use de jure, while Spain, for example, took that step de facto for the first time in 1974, except that it was not through a specific law but rather as a result of a Supreme Court ruling.
Two observers and scholars of the 2001 Portuguese drug policy reform consider divergent accounts of the reform which viewed it as a ‘resounding success’ or a ‘disastrous failure’. Acknowledging from their own experience the inherent difficulties in studying drug law reform, Caitlin Hughes and Alex Stevens take the central competing claims of the protagonists and consider them against the available data.They remind us of the way all sides of the drug policy debates call upon and alternatively use or misuse ‘evidence’ to feed into discussions of the worth, efficacy and desirability of different illicit drug policies.In doing so they provide pause for thought for those of us who operate as drug policy researchers and drug policy advocates.