Drug Laws of the Netherlands
Essay Preview: Drug Laws of the Netherlands
Report this essay
Summary: 5 pages. 4 sources. MLA format.
This paper examines the attitude of law enforcement in The Netherlands regarding soft drug use and assesses if their permissive system is a successful one.
-Drug Laws of The Netherlands –
Is a Permissive Legal System Better than a Restrictive One in the Case of Drugs?
Introduction
The Netherlands is one of the most highly developed countries in the world. It is an international, well-integrated country with policies that are among the worlds most liberal. In fact, The Netherlands has perhaps the most liberal view on drug use than any other country and has even gone to the extreme of extraordinarily relaxing its laws regarding soft drugs.
However, a common misconception about drugs in the Netherlands is that people believe they have been legalized there. Rather, cannabis and its by-products, marijuana and hashish, have merely been decriminalized. This means that the sale and use in moderate amounts of marijuana and hashish is not prosecuted.
This begs the question: Is a permissive legal system more effective than a restrictive system in the case of soft drugs? This paper examines the attitude of law enforcement in The Netherlands regarding soft drug use and assesses whether or not The Netherlandss permissive system is a successful one.
Soft Drug Decriminalization in The Netherlands
Contrary to popular belief, when the Dutch parliament revised the countrys drug laws in 1976, it did not actually legalize any narcotic substances. Rather, it separated illegal drugs into two distinct categories: drugs with unacceptable health risks (such as heroin and cocaine), which were classified as “hard drugs,” and drugs with a lesser medical risk (such as cannabis), which were classified as “soft drugs” (Bransten, para. 3). The Dutch Parliament then decided to decriminalize soft drugs.
Because of this determination, throughout The Netherlands so-called “coffee shops” have opened. In these coffee shops, people are able to purchase limited amounts of cannabis and smoke a marijuana joint without fear of prosecution (Bransten, para. 4). These activities are not legal per se, but the local police do not monitor or prosecute them.
The rationale behind the Dutch parliaments decision was that the use of marijuana among the Dutch population was increasing, and rather than bog down the legal system, Dutch politicians decided to decriminalize marijuana (Bransten, para. 4). The other benefit of the policy, as the Dutch politicians and general public see it, is that “it isolates the hard drug market from the recreational userbecause cannabis consumers no longer regularly come into contact with street dealers and more harmful drugs” (Bransten, para. 5).
Dutch drug policy is guided by the principle of what is best described as “harm reduction” (Bransten, para. 8). This means that drugs are perceived as a public health issue and the goal should be to minimize the harm those drugs do to individuals and to society — not to criminally punish soft drug users.
With respect to users of hard drugs, they are monitored and encouraged to turn to the public health system for treatment, but unless they commit other crimes, they are not prosecuted in The Netherlands (Bransten, para. 7).
Consequently, the Dutch spend their time and money on prevention and education instead of criminal prosecution (Bransten, para. 8). This has allowed the Dutch authorities to concentrate their efforts policing activities elsewhere. In fact, since the policy was implemented, the Dutch police have concentrated on pursuing drug traffickers, drug laboratories, and all other crime related activities.
Therefore, would it be fair to say that the decriminalization of soft drugs been a success in The Netherlands? Several decades have passed since soft drugs were decriminalized and it is still somewhat difficult to make a final determination of its success.
The results (positive or negative) of decriminalizing drugs and instituting a permissive legal system with respect to drugs, are disputed and somewhat unclear. The next section of this paper attempts to sort out the conflicting data that has emerged assessing results of The Netherlandss permissive soft drug policy.
Results of Decriminalization in The Netherlands
The Dutch claim that their permissive drug policy has worked. Some statistics that have been generated have indicated that marijuana and hashish use among Dutch teenagers and young adults has not grown. In fact, according to some sources, it is lower than in many other Western countries (Bransten, para. 9).
Tim Boekhout van Solinge, a criminologist and drug-policy expert at the University of Amsterdam has stated:
“Eighty-five percent of the Dutch population have never, in their life, tried cannabis. So its 15 percent (of people) who have what you call lifetime experience prevalence. Its lower than in the UK, or the U.S., lower than Ireland, about the same level as Germany, Belgium, France. France is a bit higher, Spain is a bit higher — its kind of in the average, you could say” (Bransten, para. 10).
These statistics have led many to ask why hasnt the use of marijuana increased in The Netherlands after it was decriminalized? One factor to consider is the concept of the “forbidden fruit”. That is, decriminalizing soft drugs has made them less attractive to people.
According