Fernando Henrique Cardoso, a former president of Brazil (1995-2002), is co-chairman of the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy, and convener of the Global Commission on Drug Policy.

Pubdate: Mon, 27 Dec 2010
Source: Sydney Morning Herald (Australia)
Copyright: 2010 The Sydney Morning Herald
Contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Website: http://www.smh.com.au/
Author: Fernando Henrique Cardoso
Note: Fernando Henrique Cardoso, a former president of Brazil (1995-2002), is co-chairman of the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy, and convener of the Global Commission on Drug Policy.

ENDING THE FUTILE WAR ON DRUGS

Prohibition has failed and we must redirect our efforts to the harm
caused by drugs, and to reducing consumption.

The war on drugs is a lost war, and 2011 is the time to move away from
a punitive approach in order to pursue a new set of policies based on
public health, human rights, and commonsense. These were the core
findings of the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy that
I convened, together with former presidents Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico
and Cesar Gaviria of Colombia.

We became involved with this issue for a compelling reason: the violence
and corruption associated with drug trafficking represents a major
threat to democracy in our region. This sense of urgency led us to
evaluate current policies and look for viable alternatives. The evidence
is overwhelming. The prohibitionist approach, based on repression of
production and criminalisation of consumption, has clearly failed.

After 30 years of massive effort, all prohibition has achieved is to
shift areas of cultivation and drug cartels from one country to
another (the so-called balloon effect). Latin America remains the
world's largest exporter of cocaine and marijuana. Thousands of young
people continue to lose their lives in gang wars. Drug lords rule by
fear over entire communities.

We ended our report with a call for a paradigm shift. The illicit drug
trade will continue as long as there is demand for drugs. Instead of
sticking to failed policies that do not reduce the profitability of
the drug trade - and thus its power - we must redirect our efforts to
the harm caused by drugs to people and societies, and to reducing
consumption.

Some kind of drug consumption has existed throughout history in the
most diverse cultures. Today, drug use occurs throughout society. All
kinds of people use drugs for all kinds of reasons: to relieve pain or
experience pleasure, to escape reality or enhance their perception of
it.

But the approach recommended in the commission's statement does not
imply complacency. Drugs are harmful to health. They undermine users'
decision-making capacity. Needle-sharing spreads HIV/AIDS and other
diseases. Addiction can lead to financial ruin and domestic abuse,
especially of children.

Cutting consumption as much as possible must, therefore, be the main
goal. But this requires treating drug users not as criminals to be
incarcerated, but as patients to be cared for. Several countries are
pursuing policies that emphasise prevention and treatment rather than
repression - and refocusing their repressive measures on fighting the
real enemy: organised crime.

The crack in the global consensus around the prohibitionist approach
is widening. A growing number of countries in Europe and Latin America
are moving away from a purely repressive model.

Portugal and Switzerland are compelling examples of the positive
impact of policies centred on prevention, treatment, and harm
reduction. Both countries have decriminalised drug possession for
personal use. Instead of leading to an explosion of drug consumption,
as many feared, the number of people seeking treatment increased and
overall drug use fell.

When the policy approach shifts from criminal repression to public
health, drug users are more open to seeking treatment.
Decriminalisation of consumption also reduces dealers' power to
influence and control consumers' behaviour.

In our report, we recommend evaluating from a public-health standpoint
- - and on the basis of the most advanced medical science - the merits
of decriminalising possession of cannabis for personal use.

Marijuana is by far the most widely used drug. There is a growing body
of evidence suggesting that the harm it causes is at worst similar to
the harm caused by alcohol or tobacco. Moreover, most of the damage
associated with marijuana use - from the indiscriminate incarceration
of consumers to the violence and corruption associated with the drug
trade - is the result of current prohibitionist policies.

Decriminalisation of cannabis would thus be an important step forward
in approaching drug use as a health problem and not as a matter for
the criminal justice system.

To be credible and effective, decriminalisation must be combined with
robust prevention campaigns. The steep and sustained drop in tobacco
consumption in recent decades shows that public information and
prevention campaigns can work when based on messages that are
consistent with the experience of those whom they target. Tobacco was
deglamorised, taxed, and regulated; it has not been banned.

No country has devised a comprehensive solution to the drug problem.
But a solution need not require a stark choice between prohibition and
legalisation. The worst prohibition is the prohibition to think. Now,
at last, the taboo that prevented debate has been broken. Alternative
approaches are being tested and must be carefully reviewed.

At the end of the day, the capacity of people to evaluate risks and
make informed choices will be as important to regulating the use of
drugs as more humane and efficient laws and policies. Yes, drugs erode
people's freedom. But it is time to recognise that repressive policies
towards drug users, rooted as they are in prejudice, fear, and
ideology, may be no less a threat to liberty.