EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES AND INTERNAL AFFAIRS

WORKING DOCUMENT

on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on a European Union action plan to combat drugs (1995 - 1999) (COM(94)0234 final)

Rapporteur: Sir Jack STEWART-CLARK

8 February 1995

INTRODUCTION

The drugs problem continues to worsen inexorably from

year to year. International drugs cartels are becoming more

aggressive and more expansionist in attacking new markets with

new drugs with ever changing distribution patterns and with

increasing skill in concealment and in handling the money from

their sales. Even more worrying, they are using their increasing

resources to interfere in the democratic and economic processes

of countries by political influence and by taking over key

sectors of business and financial services.

The annual street sales value of illicit drugs is now estimated

to have reached over 500,000 million US dollars a year. This is a

sum larger than the national budgets of many countries.

Increasingly we see drug cartels collaborating with terrorist

groups, using drugs to purchase their weapons. The political,

social and economic stability of nation states is, therefore,

being affected by the drugs trade. The main victim of drugs is

and will continue to be those young people who are ensnared into

taking drugs and becoming addicted to them. However, whilst crime

at street level may continue to be more immediately apparent as a

threat to our daily safety, it is the steady enlargement of the

power of big time criminal organisations which feed for growth on

drugs trafficking that is the main threat of our time.

The international drug trade is highly organised. Traffickers are

able to employ the finest brains, whether these be legal,

financial, logistical or those of chemists. They employ the most

modern equipment and technology to produce, transport and

distribute their drugs and to assist in laundering the monies

from them. The biggest drug traffickers are now able to run and

finance their entire operation without coming into contact with

the drugs themselves and in many cases living, thanks to

satellite communication, on yachts or in lands where the law

effectively cannot touch them. They remain unharmed because they

can rarely be linked to specific drugs smuggling operations or

where they are, no proof can be established as to their guilt.

Due to their limitless wealth the drug barons can buy protection

from criminal prosecution or, in the event that such protection

is not forthcoming, use violence to eliminate incriminating

witnesses.

The flood of heroin from Asia, cocaine from

South America, cannabis from North Africa and synthetic drugs

from European bases is unstoppable. Bigger and more frequent

seizures by customs may indicate greater success in tracing drug

shipments. More often than not these seizures are an indication

of an increased flow of drugs. The real success or otherwise of a

country's drugs seizures canonly be truly measured when

the elements of street prlce and purity are added to the

equation. If prices are low and purity high, greater seizures

will only confirm a greater availability of drugs.

On the side of law and order we observe that police forces and

customs are cooperating in the war against drugs far more

effectively than was the case ten or even five years ago. But

they are still inadequately equipped and lack sufficient

manpower. At a time when we are congratulating ourselves on

being able to dispense with customs officers as our borders come

down, we are throwing away a trained resource which will

increasingly be seen to be necessary in the pursuit of big time

drugs criminals. Unless too we can match the traffickers, in

provision of the best available technical, electronic and

chemical analysis equipment, we will be fighting with one arm

tied behind our backs.

All member and applicant countries of the European Union must be

fully committed to international co-operation against drugs

trafficking and the growing menace of international crime. A

steady move must take place to multi-lateral cooperation

throughout the European Union in matters such as extradition,

penalties, powers of pursuit, sharing of information etc.

Timetables must be set, but in the meantime, bilateral agreements

with every country on these important matters should be put in

place. This will require a high degree of political will which is

not yet sufficiently evident. We must surely expect that our

action must be anticipatory and not always reactive to the

exigencies imposed by criminal organisations.



EUROPEAN COMMISSION REPORT

The Commission's report to the Council and the European

Parliament on a European Union Action Plan to combat drugs in the

period 1995-1999 is a factual, low key but rather uninspiring

document. It does, of course, have positive elements. Amongst

these it emphasises that effective action to combat drugs

requires a comprehensive and integrated approach but it does not

sufficiently identify those matters which require the greatest

degree of priority or plead convincingly for the better use or

for an increased allocation of funds. The Commission remains

bland in the face of wasted funds being allocated for the

purposes of crop substitution, it makes no clear distinction

between the ring leaders amongst the drug traffickers, the

wholesalers, the retailers and the small time pushers. It does

not argue for at least an equal allocation of funds for

prevention and rehabilitation. It fails, even by inference, to

point to a lack of cohesion in drug matters within its own

departments and between the Council and the Commission which have

different competencies made under the Treaty of European Union.

It completely fails to acknowledge that our drug policies to date

have failed to tackle the increasing power of the drugs

traffickers and to curb the ever growing influence of black money

in our society. In short there is no sense of urgency. It is,

therefore, important that this Parliament and its Civil Liberties

Committee help to identify where the main problems lie and put

forward additional and coherent recommendations for improving the

situation.

The European Commission's report deals with three areas: - Action

in Demand Reduction. - Action to combat illegal drugs trafficking

- Action in the International Sphere.

In this working document and in the resolution we put forward we

will deal with the second two areas above and NOT the first. This

is because the Commission has made a separate action programme in

the field of public health, which has been reported on separately

by this Parliament. It is also because your rapporteur wrote a

full report in the last five year session of the Parliament for

the Youth and Education Committee on the whole subject of

Education and Drugs of Abuse. Our recommendations have not

changed since then. Finally this report is limited, regretfully,

by Parliament's rules limiting the length of reports.

We wish to make it absolutely clear fro the outset that,

although this report concentrates primarily on the legal and

policing aspect of drugs of abuse, it is on the prevention and

rehabilitation sides of the fight against drugs thatmost progress

can be made. We wish to see at least 50% of all funding for drugs

from both EV and National budgets going towards health,

education and rehabilitation and we will continue to press for

this relentlessly through the life of the Parliament. If the

demand for drugs cannot be reduced amongst our young people, a

large market will continue to exist which will be satisfied by

the drugs traffickers.We also wish to stress our view that

harm reduction policies must be pursued with vigour and

intelligence. Young people who are addicted to drugs need help.

Help may come in the form of re-habilitation. It may also come in

the form of controlled maintenance. It would be wrong to

prescribe a common approach to drugs maintenance since the

attitudes of society and the needs of drugs takers vary according

to circumstances. There is no case for anything but open debate

on the subject of treatment and rehabilitation in whatever form

including that of both methadone and heroin. However, it will be

for the Drugs Monitoring Unit in Lisbon to carefully collate all

evidence of success and failure in this regard so as to help

establish what methods work and why and in what circumstances.



MAIN BODIES DEALING WITH CROSS-BORDER TRAFFICKING

INTERPOL AND EUROPOL

About 60% of all inquiries coming to Interpol relate to drugs and

about 80% of the one million or so messages transmitted by this

organisation involve Europe. Interpol is necessary because it

operates in an international capacity and has members from across

the world. Europol, on the other hand, is destined to operate as

an EU body hopefully to obtain information about drugs and drug

trafficking and with the ability to analyse it and to initiate,

if not carry out, investigations resultant upon this analysis.

Both bodies, in this context, have separate and complimentary

roles. Europol can only operate effectively and indeed be worth

its creation if it is given legitimacy through the signing and

ratification of a Convention. It is most unfortunate that

national governments have so far held up the signing of this

Convention on the count of information disclosure or competence.

If information exchange is to be the only use to which Europol is

to be put then it would have been better to locate customs and

police officers in a separate part or an adjacent building to

Interpol in Lyon. The French Presidency has stated that it will

ensure that a Convention for Europol is signed by July 1995. We

ask our French colleagues to do their utmost to ensure that this

Convention does not produce a toothless paper tiger. Europol must

have at its disposal, at the very least, a comprehensive data

base and in time should be able to work in co-ordinating

investigation with national police and customs forces.

TREVI

A most positive outcome of this group has been the development of

the system of Drugs Liaison Officers (DLO's) from national

customs and police who have been posted in producer or transit

countries. However, the network of liaison officers needs to be

both rationalised and increased. There is sometimes undue

rivalry. In a city like Bangkok DLO's are falling over themselves

whereas in other areas DLO's are sorely needed. We, therefore,

recommend greater cooperation, less duplication but also

extension in a co-ordinated manner. A further positive step

initiated through Trevi has been the agreement to establish drugs

intelligence units so as to link in to Europol. All countries in

the EU do now have these intelligence units working but there is

a world of difference between them. All countries of the EU must

bring their intelligence units up to the highest standard, such

as that operating successfully in the U.K. In addition all

applicant countries must be asked to set up intelligence units

and be given assistance and training to accomplish this.

THE WORLD CUSTOMS ORGANISATION (formerly the Customs Co-operation

Council)

The WCO has been recently re-structured. It now works with six

regions each of which has a headquarters which is responsible for

orqanising specific

intelligence gathering within its area. WCO headquarters

continues to be in Brussels with European headquarters based in

Warsaw. For too long international customs and police operated in

parallel but separate tracks. Drugs co-operation was insufficient

and objectives dissimilar. Customs went for the drugs, the police

for the criminal. The situation has been transformed over the

past five years. The WCO and Interpol are on the point of

establishing an official memorandum of understanding. 90th bodies

now operate a monthly electronic reporting system about drug

movements and seizures. This links in to the UN. There do,

however, remain problems of differing software and computer

systems for communications. These must be tackled if further

progress is to be made. Further improved customs and police

co-operation can result in increased seizures of drugs and better

knowledge of drugs criminal organisations and their methods of

operation. This can be done by profiling and analysing techniques

without the necessity for disclosing names, where this is not

possible. Germany now operates 24 joint customs/police

operational groups investigating drugs smuggling. Joint money

laundering and precursor units also operate out of Wiesbaden.

Even so across the EU there is still so much more to be done in

locating drugs traffickers, their modes of transport and

concealment and methods of transferring funds. We need to improve

our knowledge about those who are travelling on false passports.

It should, therefore, be the aim to establish joint

customs/immigration/police teams at all major points of entry

into the EU. On the borders with Eastern Europe these should be

added to by joint East/West teams. These should be mobile and

should be well trained and equipped with the most up-to-date

equipment including making use of satellites so that information

can be transferred immediately from the remotest border points to

a central data Point for analysis.



LEGAL SYSTEMS AND PENALTIES

Drug traffickers today are making rings around us because of

our unwillingness and inability to adapt our legal systems to

deal with them. Most, if not all, countries in the European Union

have effective laws for bringing drug traffickers, dealers and

pushers to book. However, methods and requirements on police and

customs and the legal profession itself in targeting, tracking,

arresting and bringing drugs criminals to court vary greatly.

This makes effective co-operation difficult. Again and again one

learns of cases where the scent on a criminal case having been

allowed to go dry or a big time criminal has escaped the net

because of differing laws and practices. Disagreement or

inability to act over controlled deliveries (monitoring the

journey of a shipment known to contain drugs across borders),

tracking devices attached to vehicles, pursuit across borders,

inability to make a quick arrest, different laws in regard to

search, are just a few examples where co-operation and success

break down because of the law. We can quite understand the

sensitivities involved as regards the protection of national

sovereignty. Nonetheless the Treaty on European Union

specifically requires greater co-operation between member states

in the Union matters regarding terrorism and drugs trafficking

and this must surely include a mutual approach to adapting our

laws to deal with drug trafficking.

There has to date been no systematic evaluation of the penalties

which are being imposed in different countries and in differing

circumstances for the trafficking, dealing, pushing and

possession of drugs. Today the degree of severity of penalties

between for example the United Kingdom and the Netherlands for

varying drug offences is enormous. But there are also great

differences of approach to sentencing in a single country like

Germany. States like Bavaria have a much tougher approach

compared to those like Nordrhein-Westfalen. We need	to make a

complete analysis but in so doing be aware that even those caught

with large amounts of drugs are seldom the ring leaders, who

distance themselves from the drug trafficking they organise.

The question of penalties for drug using and possession for

personal use continues to be one of continuing debate and

differences of opinion. We welcome the increasing awareness in

courts across the European Union that imprisonment for using or

small possession of drugs can be counter-productive. More often

than not prisons are hot-beds for drugs, where not only are all

sorts of drugs available but where needle sharing takes place

with the attendant certainty of spreading AIDS. A study in the

U.K. shows that 43% of male prisoners had used drugs prior to

their arrest and that 23% of women had been dependant on drugs

prior to entering prison. In addition addicts who are not

criminals themselves come into contact with the culture of

criminality in prison and are influenced by it. There is also the

danger of young men and women who are not drug addicts and are

given gaol sentences for relatively minor offences such as shop

lifting. Very often they are introduced to drugs whilst in prison

and become addicts. It is known too that within prison the

availability of drugs and consequent drug debt lead to violence

and extortion amongst inmates. We also doubt the benefit of

allowing a person off a gaol sentence provided he or she agrees

to have rehabilitation. It has been found by experience that drug

addicts can only be helped to 'kick their habit' provided they

themselves have the will to do so. If they do not, the

rehabilitation process is almost always useless. There is also

the ridiculous situation, which often arises, where addicts who

have not come before the courts and who do want of their own free

will to obtain rehabilitation, are unable to do so because the

facilities are not available. So in effect an addict may have to

create an offence before he is offered rehabilitation.

We recommend the following steps should be taken:

1. There should at an early stage be a full-scale review of drugs

in prison across the EU and the effects that these have on

inmates. Recommendations should take into account that law

enforcement measures must go hand in hand with drug treatment and

drug education initiatives.

2. There should be a complete review of different sentencing

practices and the effects of various penalties on drug users. The

aim should be to establish which practices yield best results and

should be recommended for wider use. 3. There must be a uniform

policy for sentencing the major criminals in the drugs trade.

This must include effective extradition.



MONEY LAUNDERING

There is increasing contamination taking place in the

financial and business world due to the greater flows of black

money. The G7 Financial Action Task Force has estimated that the

annual sales of cocaine, heroin and cannabis alone amount to 
20

billion in the USA and Europe and that $85 billion could be

available for money laundering. Funds are finding their way into

many and varied legal entities. There are approximately 1000 new

banks in Russia and of these probably two thirds are financed or

heavily influenced by criminals. Finance houses, construction

companies, hotels, casinos and office blocks across the whole of

Europe are increasingly being financed by black laundered money.

Dollars and European currencies gained from the drugs trade are

being traded for rubles and other eastern currencies at

extortionate rates and then being used for buying up large tracts

of the economies of Russia, the Ukraine and other central and

central European countries.

We recommend that all EU governments should agree a joint level

of commitment in dealing with money launderers and must abide by

the United Nations Convention in respect of money laundering. It

will be necessary to effect a complete change in the professional

culture of banking and financial institutions. The foremost

brains must be employed to devise and operate a European wide

system for detecting and keeping up with the myriad of techniques

used for laundering and transferring of black money and

presenting solutions for dealing with them. There is an urgent

need for greater transparency in the recording of financial

sources, which will allow authorities to obtain a clearer picture

of the state of financing of an enterprise and will be a

disincentive for legal entities to engage in the black market.

The amount of training of those dealing with money transactions

must be significantly increased. A code needs to be worked out

and agreed. Computer programmes must be devised to track payments

and the destinations of money so that patterns can be established

and suspicious circumstances brought to the attention of those

that can take action. New investigative and intelligence

structures must be devised and agreed not only across Europe but

with the United States and with the many tax free countries

operating around the world. There needs to be a thorough review

of banking secrecy laws and the ethics employed based on today's

requirements. If we do not act on this matter as a matter of

urgency we will find that the financial institutions themselves

will become so contaminated that such action as is contemplated

will be impossible.



EASTERN AND CENTRAL EUROPE

There are no effective controls at the borders of the

former Communist countries, no knowledge of drugs amongst either

police or customs and a naivety about drugs purveyors and

shippers partly because those who trade in them from the west are

still seen as being part of the new free non-oppressive culture

and partly because in one way or another the trade brings

financial advantages to them. However, the situation is just

beginning to show signs of improvement particularly at the

borders of Scandinavia, Germany and Austria where assistance is

being given with direct information, training and equipment.

There are few if any legal processes for dealing with drugs. New

laws are being worked on but there is a great need for assistance

in setting up the necessary legal processes such as the training

of judges and prosecutors. It will take a good two to three years

to move customs and police to come round to actively

investigating and five years to gain experience. During that time

the drugs traffickers will have established a vice-like grip

across all former Communist countries and the trade will have

escalated beyond all imaginable proportions. Further, there are

almost insurmountable problems in both human and material

communications between one former Communist country and another

in investigating crime. In human terms this is because these

countries under the Communist system have spent their time

building up information which could be used against the other. So

neither the will nor the laws permit the giving or sharing of

information. In material terms the amount of equipment and the

antiquity of land telephone communications is abysmal. There are

also almost unbelievable blockages due to language problems. For

instance communications about drugs and drug seizures can be

transmitted to Warsaw in Russian but there are almost no

facilities for translation. Equally communications in English

from Warsaw will not be understood in Russia.

In order to improve this situation the following should take

place:

1. There needs to be a considerable increase in funds. We suggest

that monies

    being allocated to crop substitution should be re-allocated

to strengthening

    the police and customs operations and, of course, full use of

funds available

    from PHARE and TACIS should be utilised.

2. Priority must be given to enhancing communications and

intelligence gathering.

3. There needs to be an improvement in the link between control

activities at

    external border posts of the European Union and the gathering

of relevant

     intelligence in Eastern and Central Europe.

4. The objective of customs police and customs operations must go

well beyond

    pure drug interdiction and must be to identify, track down

and bring to justice

   the leaders of the criminal organisations involved in the

drugs traffic in

   Central and Eastern Europe rather than arresting couriers and

seizing shipment

    and means of transport.