la significant reduction or even elimination of the production, consumption and trafficking of narcotic drugs on the basis of the principle of “war on drugs” [expression utilisée, notamment aux Etats-Unis, pour désigner les efforts des gouvernements pour lutter contre le trafic et la consommation de drogues] Not only did it demonstrate its inability to achieve its own goals, but it also brought with it its share of unexpected consequences. The first is the very existence of a global illegal market estimated at more than 400 billion euros a year (between 3.5 and 6 billion in France), according to Global Financial Integrity (Washington-based NGO): a resilient market to all police and judicial responses, and responsible for the increase in violence.
In the long term, the prohibition model in force in almost the entire world should be questioned, because it has not been able to prevent the growth of the illegal drug market. But this questioning is a debate that requires social acceptance.
In the current framework, repression remains part of a comprehensive response. Even countries with public policies described as lenient, such as Switzerland, recognized for the strength of its “four pillars” (prevention, treatment, risk reduction and repression), or even Portugal, famous for its decriminalization of personal consumption, dedicate the majority of its programs to combat trafficking.
Weak public responses
However, punitive measures against drug users have demonstrated their limits when it comes to discouraging consumption and preventing the treatment, where appropriate, of consumers who suffer from dependence. This criminalization of consumption only superficially affects demand in the drug market. This has been repeatedly demonstrated in France (as indicated by reading the reports of the French Observatory on Drugs and Addictive Trends or the European Union Drugs Agency), despite the inflation of measures and positions adopted by different governments during the last five years.
A new anti-drug plan may certainly be necessary, but an aggressive narrative supports the weakness of public responses and undermines the ability of those in power to provide nuanced, comprehensive and effective solutions. Such solutions require clarifying who would be subject to criminal sanctions and prioritizing responsibilities in the drug criminal chain. Harassment of street traffickers only results in the geographical displacement of trafficking without affecting gang leaders and, above all, provokes a violent reaction on the part of criminals.
You have 58.27% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
