Article 15

AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 38 OF THE SINGLE CONVENTION AND ITS TITLE

General comments

1.   A system of administrative controls and penal sanctions established for the purpose of keeping narcotic drugs from actual or potential victims forms the essence of the Single Convention.

2.   The new article 38 reflects the general acceptance of the view that that system, and consequently also the implementation of the international drug control treaties alone, is not sufficient, and should not form the sole subject of international co-operation in the campaign against drug abuse.

3. The new article 38 takes over, with minor drafting changes and mutatis mutandis, the text of article 20 of the Vienna Convention. The 1972 Conference adopted article 38 because it held that a multi-disciplinary approach to the problem of the abuse of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances was required, as did the 1971 Conference which adopted the Vienna Convention.

4.   The provisions of the new article 38 are couched in general terms so as to present guidelines for the policies to be adopted by Governments in the field rather than mandatory rules requiring the adoption of specific measures.

5. The article under consideration deals with measures to be applied to individuals abusing narcotic drugs,' with the training, i.e., with the development of the required professional skills of the personnel dealing with the problems of those individuals? and with the promotion of an understanding of the manifold aspects of those problems on the part of that personnel and where appropriate, also on the part of the general public. 3

6.   It is suggested that Governments may often find it advisable to carry out joint programmes under the new article 38 of the Single Convention and under article 20 of the Vienna Convention.

1 The principal content of para. I.

2 Para. 2.

3 Para 3.

Introductory paragraph of article 15 of the 1972 Protocol, title and paragraph 1 of article 38 of the amended Single Convention

Article 38 of the Single Convention and its title shall be amended to read as follows:

"Measures against the Abuse of Drugs

"1. The Parties shall give special attention to and take all practicable measures for the prevention of abuse of drugs and for the early identification treatment, education, aftercare, rehabilitation and social reintegration of the persons involved and shall coordinate their efforts to these ends. "

Commentary

1. Only such measures need to be taken as the Government concerned considers to be "practicable".' What may be "practicable" in some countries may not be "practicable" in other countries. Measures which are within the competence and the means of the country concerned are not necessarily "practicable" in the sense of paragraph 1. A Government may consider them not "practicable" if in order to carry them out it has to divert sparse skilled personnel or financial means or both from tasks which it considers to deserve higher priority in the light of its special economic and social conditions. That may in particular be the case of developing countries. One may say that "practicable" is normally what can reasonably be expected of a Government in the light of its resources and the degree of seriousness of its problem of drug abuse.

2. Treatment, after-care, rehabilitation and social reintegration present four stages of remedial measures which are widely held to be necessary to restore the well-being and social usefulness of abusers of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances.2 Those four terms are not always used in exactly the same sense. It is sometimes also not possible to draw a dividing line between the measures to be applied at each of those four stages. The following comments on the meaning of those terms therefore should be considered to be only tentative.

3. The term "treatment" in a broad sense is sometimes applied to the entire process consisting of the four phases to which the paragraph under consideration refers. 3 It is held that in the narrow sense in which it is employed in that paragraph it covers the process of withdrawal of the abused narcotic drugs, or where necessary that of inducing the abuser to restrict his intake of narcotic drugs to such minimum quantities as might be medically justified in the light of his personal condition. 4

4. It is submitted that the term aftercare refers to that stage of treatment (in the broad sense) of the abuser of narcotic drugs which consists mainly of such psychiatric, psychoanalytical or psychological measures as may be necessary after he has been withdrawn from the drugs which he abused or, in the case of a "maintenance programme", after he has been induced to restrict his intake of narcotic drugs as required' under the programme; but such measures may be needed also in the first phase, referred to as "treatment" in paragraph 1..

5.   It is suggested that the word "rehabilitation" covers such measures as may be required to make the former abuser of narcotic drugs physically, vocationally, morally and otherwise fit for living a normal life as a useful member of society (cure of diseases, physical rehabilitation of disabled persons, vocational training, supervision accompanied by advice and encouragement, measures of gradual progress to a normal self-reliant life, etc.). 5 Such measures of "rehabilitation" may however have to be taken also in the first and second stages referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the present comments. Measures which have been referred to as "after-care" may and quite often have to be continued during the stage of "rehabilitation".

6. It is particularly difficult to draw a dividing line between what paragraph 1 calls "rehabilitation" and what it calls "social reintegration". It is suggested that the term "rehabilitation" mainly refers to those measures which are intended to improve the personal qualities of the abuser (health, mental stability, moral standards, vocational skills), while the term "social reintegration" includes measures intended to make it possible for him to live in an environment more favourable to him. The term "social reintegration" may thus cover such measures as provision of a suitable job and appropriate housing, and perhaps also enabling the former abuser of narcotic drugs to leave his former environment and to move to a social atmosphere less likely to produce such social evils as drug addiction. Change of the environment may also be advisable in order to reduce the harm which the social stigma attached to drug abuse may cause the former abuser. It is also held that measures of "after-care", "rehabilitation" and "social reintegration" will often have to be overlapping.

7.   It has been pointed out that the four stages of treatment referred to in the amended article 38, paragraph 1 cannot easily be separated in time or content. It is also admitted that other views may be held on the exact dividing lines between those four stages. It is however submitted that it is not necessary to agree on those lines for the purpose of appropriately implementing that provision. Its authors used the terms "treatment", "after-care", "rehabilitation" and "social reintegration" normally applied to different stages of the treatment (in the broad sense) of abusers of narcotic drugs in order to indicate that the Parties should take all "practicable" measures-no matter to which discipline they may belong-which may be required for a successful treatment of the abusers. The employment of overlapping terms appears to be useful for achieving that comprehensive meaning.

8. The term "identification" may apply not only to the discovery of actual abusers of narcotic drugs, but also to that of particular groups whose members are specially prone to abuse them .6 Inspection of the prescriptions retained by retail distributors of narcotic drugs and, where possible, a reporting system patterned on that of reporting communicable diseases may, by way of example, be mentioned as means of identification.

9. The term "education" in this paragraph seems to apply only to education on the harmful consequences of the abuse of narcotic drugs. Such education may also be part of the promotion of an understanding of the problems of drug abuse among the general public under paragraph 3. As used in paragraph 1, the term "education" does not appear to cover that enlightening of the general public, but rather to refer to imparting information to actual abusers of narcotic drugs, to classes in schools and to special courses intended for groups found to be specially prone to abuse narcotic drugs. It would be desirable that in planning programmes of education Governments should not overlook the danger that spreading of knowledge about narcotic drugs may in some situations lead to the spread of their abuse. That risk may have to be kept in mind specially where such abuse does not exist or is only rare.7

10. The administrative control measures and penal sanctions for which the Single Convention provides are intended to prevent the abuse of narcotic drugs and therefore constitute measures of "prevention". When using the very broad term "prevention" in paragraph 1, the authors of that provision however thought of other additional measures suitable to keep people, from abusing narcotic drugs. "Prevention" as used in this place would include all practicable economic and social measures capable of changing a social atmosphere or subcultural conditions responsible for the development of personality traits finding expression in the abuse of narcotic drugs. Early identification of groups prone to abuse narcotic drugs and education may also be measures of prevention.

11. It is submitted that Governments need not engage directly in the treatment, education, after-care, rehabilitation and social reintegration referred to in paragraph 1. They may leave the implementation of those measures to private facilities.

12. Paragraph 1 requires Parties to co-ordinate their efforts in the various disciplines in question on the national as well as on the international level. That co-ordination would on the national level be part of the arrangements made for maintaining a "special administration" pursuant to article 17. Regional arrangements such as those for which the new article 38 bis provides may sometimes be helpful in ensuring effective international co-ordination for the purposes of article 38, paragraph 1.

I The French text used the word "possibles" and the Spanish text the word ' "posibles" for the English "practicable". It is held that in view of the nature of the provision the English text is to be given preference.

2 Article 1, para. (e) of the Vienna Convention.

3 See also 1961 Commentary, para. 4 of the comments on article 38 (p. 446).

4 In the case of medically justified "maintenance programmes".

5 Para. 5 of the comments referred to in foot-note 3 (p. 447).

61971 Records, vol. 11, para. 25 of the summary records of the sixth plenary meeting of the 1971 Conference (p. 21).

7 Para. 51 of the summary records referred to in the preceeding foot-note (p. 22); see also article 38, para. 3 of the amended Single Convention.

Paragraphs 2 and 3

"2.   The Parties shall as far as possible promote the training of personnel in the treatment, after-care, rehabilitation and social reintegration of abusers of drugs.

"3. The Parties shall take all practicable measures to assist persons whose work so requires to gain an understanding of the problems of abuse of drugs and of its prevention, and shall also promote such understanding among the general public if there is a risk that abuse of drugs wifl become widespread".

Commentary

1.   Paragraph 2 applies only to persons engaged in any phase of treatment (in the broad sense) of abusers of narcotic drugs; it does not cover persons engaged only in preventive measures, including the application of the administrative controls and penal sanctions for which the Single Convention provides. It is however suggested that the promotion of proper training of personnel engaged on the domestic level in the implementation of the provisions of that treaty is an implied obligation of Parties carrying out the Convention in good faith.

2.   The "persons" to which the first part of paragraph 3 applies include all persons covered by paragraph 2, and in addition persons engaged in any , aspect of prevention of the abuse of narcotic drugs or of the implementation of the Single Convention. Judges, police officers, prison wardens, doctors and followers of religious callings who in their professional work deal with abusers of narcotic drugs may be such persons. They fall in that category although their work may only partially be concerned with drug addicts. The authors of paragraph 3 held that persons engaged in any phase of treatment of abusers of narcotic drugs should not only have the required professional skills, but also an understanding of the multidisciplinary and often complex problems involved. They considered it desirable that all other persons whose work brings them in contact with addicts should also have that broad understanding.

3.   Paragraph 3 also requires Parties to promote such a broad understanding among the general public "if there is a risk that abuse of drugs will become widespread". It is suggested that such a promotion is also required if drug addiction has already become a widespread phenomenon. The limitation of that requirement to situations in which there is a risk of widespread abuse of narcotic drugs or in which such widespread abuse already exists is motivated by the assumption of some Government officials that the promotion of knowledge about narcotic drugs in countries where their abuse is rare may actually lead to the spread of their abuse by arousing the morbid curiousity of psychologically weak persons, inducing them to abuse the drugs. 1

4.   Understanding of the complex problems of drug addiction on the part of the general public may be helpful in the formulation and adoption of adequate social policies for dealing with that question.

5.   The   Parties   are   under   paragraph 2   not   required to engage in governmental training programmes, but only to "promote" the training for which that paragraph provides. The methods of that training will differ in different countries in accordance with the differences in the nature of their problems of drug abuse and in view of their different educational systems. The term "promote" means "help forward", "encourage" or "support".

6.   The requirement of promotion of training pursuant to paragraph 2 is qualified by the phrase "as far as possible". A determination of what is possible in a country depends on the means which that country can reasonably be expected to use for the purposes of paragraph 2, and also to some extent on the degree of seriousness of its drug abuse problem. A Government would not be required to divert sparse skilled personnel or financial means to training programmes pursuant to paragraph 2 from tasks which it considers to deserve higher priority in the light of its particular national conditions. That applies specially to developing countries. It is suggested that "possible" in paragraph 2 has about the same meaning as "practicable" in paragraph 1.

7. Paragraph 3 requires Parties to take all practicable measures to "assist" persons whose work so requires to gain an understanding. of the problems of drug abuse and of its prevention, and also to "promote" such an understanding among the general public where required by that provision. It is suggested that the words "assist" and "promote" in paragraph 3 have the same meaning and are used in the same sense as "promote" in paragraph 2. 2 The employment of these two different words appears to be due only to reasons of style. The Governments are not bound to engage themselves in training or publicity programmes which might be required under paragraph 3; they may limit themselves to "promoting" such programmes undertaken by private persons or non-governmental organizations.

8.   Paragraph 3 limits the obligation of Parties to assist persons whose work so requires to gain an understanding of the problems of drug abuse and its prevention, to taking all practicable measures for that purpose; it does not expressly so limit their obligation to promote such understanding among the general public. It follows however from the nature and drafting history of paragraph 3 that Parties are in both of these cases required to take only such measures as can reasonably be expected of them in the light of the resources available to them for that purpose, and of the seriousness of their drug abuse problem.3

1 1971 Records, vol. II, para. 51 of the summary records of the sixth plenary meeting (p. 22).

2 See para. 5 of the present comments.

3 1971 Records, vol. 11, summary records of the sixth plenary meeting, paras. 20, 34, 39 and 47 (pp. 21-22).