Author: Erigi Wabemo, LLB program in Business Law at Rivers State University, 2015-2021, e-mail: [email protected]
Editor: Tofig Shahniyarov, MPA at ADA University, 2020-2022, Doctor of Philosophy – Ph.D. at Middlesex University, e-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
This article draws upon an extensive review of the British criminal justice system, its punitive drug policy, criminalising the possession of drugs, exploring drug-related crime rates in the United Kingdom and a critical re-evaluation of the basis of British drugs policy to proffer a conclusion on whether legalising drugs will help reduce crime in the United Kingdom. The article problematises the rationale for criminalising certain substances and questions the distinctions created between legal and illegal drugs; in so doing, the article argues that the definition of the ‘drugs problem’ is the real problem. It shows that the debate on illegal drugs is filled less with factual truths and more with misinformation, which creates public fear and provides a questionable basis for public policy as compared to the drug policies of Portugal, where drugs have been progressively legalised; adopting an approach focused on public health rather than public-order priorities. The article questions current thinking regarding the drug/crime relationship and concludes by exploring some implications for policy and practice.
Introduction
The United Kingdom’s criminal justice systems are under constant scrutiny,[1] the calls for improvement and change are never far away. Questions arise over how to uphold standards and implement change in line with the expectations of government and citizens. This article outlines the high rate of crimes in the United Kingdom (UK), highlighting drug-related crimes and lastly attempts to determine if the legalisation of drugs would help reduce the crime rate in the UK.
The British constitution is a blend of statute law, precedent and tradition dating back to the time of King Henry I (1100).[2] The Magna Carta (1215),[3] the Bill of Rights (1688)[4] and the Act of Settlement (1700)[5] represent the three major statutes that define British legal and political history. England and Wales have an unwritten or, more appropriately, uncodified constitution.[6]
While there are several ways to categorise crimes in the UK, their seriousness is usually used to classify them.[7] Additionally, offences may be categorised in accordance with the method used to bring a case to trial, in accordance with the availability of the prison sentence, or in accordance with the Home Office’s Standard List of more serious offences.[8]
The Home Office reports9 that recorded crime in England and Wales has reached a 20-year high while the percentage of offences resulting in court action has reached a new low. In 2021–2022, just 5.6% of crimes reported to the police resulted in a suspect being charged or summoned, down from 7.1% the year before and from 16% in 2014–2015.10
Within this framework, drugs can be categorised. It is critical to preserve flexibility in order to keep drug classification in accordance with current social and scientific opinion. The Misuse of Drugs Act11 was enacted to regulate drug usage and trafficking. As a result, it is generally illegal to import or export, create, supply, possess, prepare, or cultivate any restricted substance.
The classification of drugs by seriousness of offence presents particular difficulties. The Misuse of Drugs Act of 1971,12 created for the purpose of narcotic control, listed certain drugs as Class A, B, or C, depending on the magnitude of harm deemed to be attached to their trafficking and use. In 1994, there were 17,569 reported offences of trafficking in controlled drugs.[9]
In the UK, drugs that are deemed addictive or dangerous are referred to as “controlled substances” and are subject to legal restrictions.[10] Before 1964, the punishment for unrestrained use and supply of drugs was distinct from the medical treatment of drug addicts.[11] Drug usage remained low as a result of this approach; there was comparatively little recreational use and a small number of drug dependents who received prescriptions for medications from their doctors as part of their treatment.[12] Drug usage was decriminalised starting in 1964, with the framework – which was still in place in 2014—largely being set by the Misuse of Drugs Act.[13]
About 210,000 drug offences were reported to the police in England and Wales in 2020–21. This is a 19% increase from 2019–20. The highest rate of drug offences was 9.2 per 1,000 people in Merseyside in 2020–21, up from 8.3 in 2019–20. With 1.4 offences per 1,000 people, Staffordshire had the lowest rate and was 0.4 lower than the year before.[14]
In the UK, drug-related deaths are at the highest level on record, accounting for more than a third of the drug-related deaths in the EU.[15] Without the burden of ideology framing its aims in terms of a moral impetus, any other field of public policy similarly marred by failure would be swiftly overhauled. To the readership of this journal the problems with criminal justice-focused drug policy, underscored by the rhetoric of the war on drugs may seem so plainly evident that they do not warrant stating. Nonetheless, it persists unabated in the UK and to degrees across the world.
Whether the war on drugs is spurred on by one, or by a combination of these factors, to create a more just society it is necessary to engage with the public to highlight the problems with drug policy, particularly given the lack of transparency in much of contemporary political decision-making. Only through a shift in the understanding of the electorate will those in positions of power be given the mandate to rationalise drug policy or be held accountable if they do not.[16]
Arguments Against Punitive Drug Law Policies in the United Kingdom
According to John Walliss,[17] using, possessing, manufacturing, selling, dealing, or sharing drugs (commonly known as “supplying”) can result in a fine or prison time. The sort of narcotic or substance, how much you possess and if you are also manufacturing or dealing with it all affect the penalty. Depending on the nature or “class” of the drug, the maximum punishments for possession, supply (selling, trading, or sharing), and manufacturing vary. The following lists these categories:[18]
- Class A substances include heroin, LSD, magic mushrooms, methadone, methamphetamine, ecstasy (MDMA), crack cocaine, and cocaine (crystal meth)
Class A narcotics are punishable by up to seven years in prison, an infinite fine, or both for possession, and up to life in prison, an unlimited fine, or both for supply and production;[19]
- Class B substances include synthetic cannabinoids, synthetic cathinones, codeine, ketamine, methylphenidate (Ritalin), barbiturates, cannabis, codeine, and marijuana (for example mephedrone, methoxetamine)
Class B drug possession is punishable by a maximum of five years in jail, an infinite fine, or both; supply and manufacturing is punishable by a maximum of fourteen years in prison, an unlimited fine, or both;[20]
- Class C substances include Anabolic steroids, benzodiazepines (diazepam), gamma hydroxybutyrate, gamma-butyrolactone, piperazines (BZP), and khat.
Class C drugs are punishable by up to two years in prison, an unlimited fine, or both (except anabolic steroids, which are legal to have for personal use). For supply and production, the maximum sentence is fourteen years in prison and an unlimited fine;[21]
- Temporary Class drugs include some methylphenidate substances, such as ethylphenidate, 3,4-dichloromethylphenidate (3,4-DCMP), methylnaphthidate (HDMP-28), isopropylphenidate (IPP or IPPD), 4-methylmethylphenidate, ethylnaphthidate, and propylphenidate, and their straightforward derivatives.
There is no specific penalty for possessing these drugs, but authorities can seize any suspected temporary-class narcotics. For supply and production, a suspect faces a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison, an infinite fine, or both.[22]
The normative ethical theorists, a branch of moral philosophy or ethics, concerned with criteria of what is morally right and wrong, argue that the formulation of rules has a direct implication on human actions and ways of life. According to some normative ethical theorists, the motivation behind punitive drug laws appears to come from the notion that consuming substances that are prohibited is wrong ethically and should be punished as a result.[23] The definition of “drug” in the illegal sense that informs drug policy discourse and the paradigm of the war on drugs includes a wide range of substances with various effects that are used by various groups in various contexts and share as many similarities with one another as they do with many legal substances.[24]
While some contend that increased drug use can result in dependency and that this state can cause a variety of new issues.[25] Working and keeping a career may become increasingly challenging as drug abuse and dependence rise. Financial difficulties may result from not being able to pay bills like mortgages, rent, rates, and other household expenses. Even social security benefits may not be sufficient to cover drug use costs. It may be necessary to borrow money, and if payments are not made, this causes additional issues.
As drug abuse rises, some people may resort to criminal activity, such as breaking into homes, to identify objects that may be taken and sold to others to generate cash for more drugs. To get money to obtain drugs, some people may turn to more serious crimes like robbery, theft, or extortion. Some people turn to trade to increase their income, but if they are discovered by the police, the court may impose harsher punishments.[26]
Opponents of these views argue that the only defining characteristic shared by those drugs that are illegal, distinguishing them from those that are not, such as alcohol, tobacco or coffee, is precise that they are illegal.[27] This generates a circular argument: illegal drugs are immoral because they are illegal, and they are illegal because they are immoral. It is this circularity that unfortunately means that the position is as logically unassailable for those who hold it as it is nonsensical for those who do not. Proponents of the view that drug use is immoral may claim that its immorality stems from its potential to cause harm to a consumer. However, it is not obviously correct to say that the potential for an act to cause harm necessarily makes it immoral.
Even though making the decision to go skiing or start a campfire, for example, could end in harm or burns, these actions would not automatically be considered moral simply because of their potential for harm. On the other hand, it is unethical to set someone on fire before forcing them to ski down a steep mountain without any instruction. If the agency of the subject who is at risk of injury as a result of an act determines the morality of that act, then using drugs is not an immoral way for someone to expose themselves to the danger of harm.
It can also be argued that adults have a moral right to treat their bodies any way they see fit, including using narcotics recreationally.[28] Even if it were agreed that it was wrong for subjects to put themselves in danger and that this should determine the legal status of various drugs, current policy does not reflect this because the relative degrees of harm that various drugs are responsible for are not reflected in their respective legal classifications.[29] If this viewpoint were to be adopted, there would be significant repercussions regarding the legal status of unhealthy meals, extreme sports, and driving in addition to the legal status of alcohol and tobacco.
A more compelling argument would be to suggest that buying illegal drugs is morally wrong because it provides funding to criminal organisations thereby facilitating other criminal activities that cause harm to third parties.[30] However, this argument once again leads to circularity as the relationship is contingent on contemporary policy: possessing a drug is illegal because buying it is morally wrong; buying it is morally wrong because it provides funding for organised criminal gangs; it provides funding for organised criminal gangs because they control the market for that drug; and they control the market for that drug because it is illegal to possess it.[31]
The use of force when enforcing punitive drug laws has the potential to cause physical and psychological harm; contact with the criminal justice system is linked to a number of health and social inequalities that may be made worse by the prosecution; and if the use of force results in the deprivation of liberty, this is inherently harmful to the person who is unable to do what they want to do.[32] For this approach to be morally justified, it would need to prevent more harm than it causes. Proponents might claim that it results in a net reduction in harm to those being punished as it deters them from using drugs in the future.[33]
However, there is no convincing evidence that this is the case and even incarceration is not a reliable deterrent as more than one in four prisoners surveyed in the UK reported drug use in prison.[34] Regardless, data from the UK suggest that most people who take illicit drugs do not do so regularly and as the risk is cumulative, consumption and harm tend to be correlated.[35]
First, there is no conclusive link between drug policy liberality and the incidence of drug usage, either globally at the time or posthumously in nations with new drug laws.[36] Although it is conceivable that harsh regulations might reduce drug use in some contexts, this is not a prerequisite for success because, in Portugal, drug usage has continued to decline after possession for personal use was decriminalised.[37] Portugal decriminalised the public and private use, acquisition and possession of all drugs in 2001; adopting an approach focused on public health rather than public-order priorities. This led to a differentiation between the user and the dealer, the former was seen as an ill person in need of care, and the second as a delinquent. Whereas, in the UK, public and private use, acquisition and possession of all drugs are criminalised.
Second, the implementation of punitive drug laws might promote actions that raise the risk of harm among a larger group of drug users.[38] People who use drugs out of fear of getting caught may do it in more shady and dangerous ways, such as taking more before leaving the house or utilising pills they obtained hastily without first checking them. They might also be less likely to use harm reduction or treatment services, which would have lessened the hazards they were exposed to.
Third, even if there was solid proof that punishing drug users prevented further usage and did not have unintended consequences, it would still be an ethically dubious strategy as demonstrated by a scene from Voltaire’s Candide.[39] Following his observation of an admiral being ceremoniously shot in the head, the titular character declares his refusal to set foot on English soil. The characters are informed that “in this country, we find it pays to shoot an admiral from time to time to encourage the others” when they inquire as to why the admiral was put to death.[40]
Finally, even if the punitive drug laws effectively prevented drug use, had no unintended negative effects and were otherwise morally justified, they are not applied fairly because people from some ethnic minority communities receive disproportionately harsh punishments for drug possession compared to how much they actually use the drugs.[41] In a world that is intensely aware of the shadow of racial inequity, this is particularly the case in the USA but is also the situation in the UK.[42] Even if a criminal justice approach to drugs had advantages, it would still be unethical for those advantages to be predicated on the harm being primarily borne by certain people as determined by the colour of their skin.
Political and scholarly support for nations decriminalising drug possession for personal use is rising, following Portugal’s example.[43] This includes suggestions from the Lancet Commission on Drug Policy and Health,[44] the Royal Society of Public Health,[45] the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police,[46] the United Nations Chief Executives Board for Coordination[47] and 2019 UK House of Commons Select Committee on Drug Policy.[48]
Instead of focusing on how to reduce the harm that drugs do, drug policy debates should instead centre on how to minimise the unrestricted possibility for drug market actors to benefit from the selling of medicines. Both the legal and criminal drug markets employ marketing strategies that exhibit neoliberal tendencies, putting consumer health and welfare before financial gain.[49]
How are Punitive Drug Laws Ineffective?
Harsh drug laws have not only failed to decrease drug availability and use, but they have also brought forth a host of brand-new issues.[50]
Drug-related violence: The number of homicides involving known drug dealers increased significantly between 2013–15 and 2016–18, however, the number of homicides involving drug users remained higher. According to Dame Carol’s research, incidents involving drug users, dealers, or crimes with a drug-related purpose account for about half of the increase in homicides between 2013/14 and 2017/18. She is cautious to point out, however, that a variety of other reasons unconnected to drugs are also contributing to the rise in serious violence.[51]
Health crises: In England and Wales, 4,859 drug-related deaths were reported in 2021, translating to an annual mortality rate of 84.4 per million persons, up 6.2% from the rate reported in 2020. (79.5 deaths per minute).[52] The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported a 20% increase in 2013 in the number of drug-related deaths in England, with a larger increase in heroin-related deaths.[53] A wide range of stakeholders in the domains of drug and alcohol treatment, policy, and research are concerned about this since is reversing a trend of reducing drug-related deaths during recent years. Drug laws that are “tough on drugs” restrict access to life-saving programmes like opioid substitution therapy and needle exchange, which keeps drug users who need support away from help and treatment. Treatments are available, and new infections can be prevented.[54]
Mass imprisonment: Around the world, one in five inmates are arrested for drug-related offences, most of them just for simple personal possession. Despite consuming drugs at a lower rate than white people in the UK, black individuals are nine times more likely to be stopped and searched for drugs than white people. Despite having similar rates of marijuana use, Black individuals in the US are 3.6 times more likely than White persons to be arrested for the drug.[55]
Capital punishment and executions: 3,000 or more people are currently facing execution for drug-related crimes globally. Between 2008 and 2018, more than 4,000 people were put to death for drug charges.[56]
What Would Happen if the War on Drugs was to End?
Crime and addiction did not rise in nations that adopted alternative drug policies, such as decriminalising all drugs or regulating cannabis for adult use, and there were also significant advantages.[57]
In Portugal, for example, all drug use and possession became legal in 2001. Since then, drug consumption has stayed below the EU average. Along with a sharp decline in HIV transmission linked to drug use, there were significant increases in the number of people getting treatment and other services. The number of people imprisoned in Portugal for drug charges decreased by 44% between 1999 and 2008.[58]
Punitive drug policies can encourage greater violence and instability rather than making people safer. More than 250,000 individuals lost their lives to drug-related violence in the six years that followed the Mexican government’s 2006 proclamation of an all-out, militarised war on drugs.[59]
Conclusion
None of these measures; the harm reduction movement, decriminalisation of the possession of drugs or the regulation of the drug market, are a solution, and even together they would not eliminate drug-related harm. However, neither will an ideological war on drugs, which is, directly and indirectly, responsible for incalculable harm to the significant proportion of the population who use drugs and to the wider society. Some level of drug use and drug-related harm is as inevitable in the future as it has been present for millennia.[60] Hopefully, one day this will be accepted by policymakers, and the vast resources spent waging the war on drugs will be redirected to reducing harm, rather than propagating it.
Although it is seemingly unlikely that the UK will spearhead a global rationalisation of drug policy, it is not beyond the realms of possibility following the sensible conclusions of the 2019 House of Commons Select Committee on Drug Policy.[61] Their initial report concluded that “UK drugs policy is failing” and among other things highlighted the potential benefits of decriminalising the possession of drugs, changing legislation to allow the opening of drug consumption rooms and increasing the provision of harm reduction interventions that are not widely available in the UK such as drug checking services and heroin-assisted therapy.[62]
Arguably, when all these are in place, crime will dramatically decline as the mere possession of narcotics as well as their distribution will no longer be considered a crime. Since the issue will not be widely understood until then, people will look for lesser damaging ways to use pharmaceuticals, will receive the finest safety advice, and will seek the proper therapies. The police will therefore be more concerned with stopping the detrimental criminal acts linked to drug use than with interfering with individual freedoms.
List of References
“About CACP – CACP” (About CACP – CACP) <https://www.cacp.ca/about-cacp.html> accessed November 22, 2022
“About United Nations” (CEB) <https://unsceb.org/about#:~:text=The%20UN%20System%20Chief%20Executives,and%20meets%20twice%20a%20year.> accessed November 22, 2022
Act of Settlement 1700 12 and 13 Will 3 c 2
Aplin R, “Police Discretion, Pragmatism and Crime ‘Deconstruction’: Police Doorstep Crime Investigations in England and Wales” (2021) 32 Policing and Society 451 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2021.1906668
Baumohl J and others, “Substance Abuse and Welfare Policy at the New Century” (2003) 30 Contemporary Drug Problems 501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00914509030301-218
Bill of Rights (Act) 1689 (England) 1688 c.2 (1 Will and Mar Sess 2)
Chandler RK, Fletcher BW and Volkow ND, “Treating Drug Abuse and Addiction in the Criminal Justice System” (2009) 301 JAMA 183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2008.976
“Criminal Justice Systems in the UK | Centre for Crime and Justice Studies” (Criminal justice systems in the UK | Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, August 10, 2022) <https:// www.crimeandjustice.org.uk%2Fpublications%2Fcriminal-justice-systems-uk&usg=AOvVaw1mF_NAfGBnxeoCD3Y64-44> accessed November 19, 2022
Dalgarno P, O’Rawe S and Hammersley R, “Illegal Drugs in the UK: Is It Time for Considered Legalisation to Improve Public Health?” (2021) 7 Drug Science, Policy and Law 205032452110053 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20503245211005351
“Deaths Related to Drug Poisoning in England and Wales – Office for National Statistics” (Deaths related to drug poisoning in England and Wales – Office for National Statistics) <https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsrelatedtodrugpoisoninginenglandandwales/2020> accessed November 20, 2022
Dodd V, “Recorded Crime in England and Wales at 20-Year High as Charge Rate Hits New Low” (the Guardian, July 21, 2022) <https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/21/recorded-in-england-and-wales-at-20-year-high-as-charge-rate-hits-new-low> accessed November 19, 2022
Driver K, “Lancet Commission on Public Health and International Drug Policy” (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health) <https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/center-for-public-health-and-human-rights/research/key-populations-program/current-projects/lancet-commission-on-public-health-and-international-drug-policy.html> accessed November 21, 2022
“Drug Addiction (Substance Use Disorder) – Symptoms and Causes” (Mayo Clinic, October 4, 2022) <https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/drug-addiction/symptoms-causes/syc-20365112> accessed November 20, 2022
“Drug Crime Statistics for England and Wales” (Magistrates Association) <https://www.magistrates-association.org.uk/News-and-comments/drug-crime-statistics-for-england-and-wales> accessed November 20, 2022
“Drug Decriminalisation in Portugal: Setting the Record Straight. | Transform” (Transform) <https://transformdrugs.org/blog/drug-decriminalisation-in-portugal-setting-the-record-straight> accessed November 25, 2022
“Drug Offences | The Crown Prosecution Service” (Drug Offences | The Crown Prosecution Service, November 18, 2022) <https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/drug-offences> accessed November 19, 2022
“Drugs Penalties” (GOV.UK) <https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing> accessed November 19, 2022
Emily J and others, “Legal Regulation as a Human Right and Public Health Approach to Currently Prohibited Substances” (2021) 91 International Journal of Drug Policy 103153 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103153
Greenberg M, “The Value of Harm Reduction for Injection Drug Use: A Clinical and Public Health Ethics Analysis” (2019) 65 Disease-a-Month 118 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.disamonth.2018.12.003
Hayes KatherineM, “System of Justice: An Introduction to the Criminal Justice System in England and Wales” (1986) 14 Journal of Criminal Justice 98 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0047-2352(86)90033-4
“Health Product and Policy Standards” (Access to Medicines and Health Products, September 8, 2021) <https://www.who.int/our-work/access-to-medicines-and-health-products/controlled-substances> accessed November 29, 2022
“Health” (Health, August 20, 2015) <https://www.health-ni.gov.uk/articles/misuse-drugs-legislations> accessed November 20, 2022
Holland A, “An Ethical Analysis of UK Drug Policy as an Example of a Criminal Justice Approach to Drugs: A Commentary on the Short Film Putting UK Drug Policy into Focus” (2020) 17 Harm Reduction Journal http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12954-020-00434-8
Koram K, “British Drugs Policy Is Punitive and Contradictory. And Now It’ll Go Backwards | Kojo Karam” (the Guardian, July 21, 2022) <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/21/british-drugs-policy-failed-war-on-drugs-boris-johnson> accessed November 26, 2022
Kuthy D, “Redlining and Greenlining: Olivia Robinson Investigates Root Causes of Racial Inequity” (2016) 70 Art Education 50 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2017.1247573
Langton S, Dixon A and Farrell G, “Six Months in: Pandemic Crime Trends in England and Wales” (2021) 10 Crime Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40163-021-00142-z
Lievens D and others, “Economic Consequences of Legal and Illegal Drugs: The Case of Social Costs in Belgium” (2017) 44 International Journal of Drug Policy 50 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.03.005
M Greenberg, “The Value of Harm Reduction for Injection Drug Use: A Clinical and Public Health Ethics Analysis” (2019) 65 Disease-a-Month 118 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.disamonth.2018.12.003>.
Morgan CJ and others, “Harms Associated with Psychoactive Substances: Findings of the UK National Drug Survey” (2009) 24 Journal of Psychopharmacology 147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0269881109106915
Olubunmi M Bolade and Adedotun AS, “Impact of Self-Efficacy and Social Support on Intention to Quit Drug Use among People with Drug Abuse Cases” [2020] Advances in Research 67 http://dx.doi.org/10.9734/air/2020/v21i130182
Ostrom B and Hanson R, “Exploring the Theory and Practice of Sentencing Reform” (2016) 35 Criminal Justice Ethics 80 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0731129x.2016.1148970
“Part 1: Hospital Admissions Related to Drug Misuse – NHS Digital” (NHS Digital) <https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/statistics-on-drug-misuse/2020/part-1-hospital-admissions-related-to-drug-misuse> accessed November 20, 2022
Picinali F, “Do Theories of Punishment Necessarily Deliver a Binary System of Verdicts? An Exploratory Essay” (2017) 12 Criminal Law and Philosophy 555 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11572-017-9440-y
Pickard H, “Responsibility without Blame for Addiction” (2017) 10 Neuroethics 169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12152-016-9295-2
RÊGO X and others, “20 Years of Portuguese Drug Policy – Developments, Challenges and the Quest for Human Rights” (2021) 16 Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00394-7
Papadimos TJ, “Voltaire’s Candide, Medical Students, and Mentoring” (2007) 2 Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 13 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1747-5341-2-13
“Report: Fewer Nations Using the Death Penalty for Drug Offenses, But Executions and Secrecy Are Up in Those That Do” (Death Penalty Information Center, March 23, 2022) <https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/report-fewer-nations-using-the-death-penalty-for-drug-offenses-but-executions-and-secrecy-are-up-in-those-that-do> accessed November 24, 2022
“Rethinking Incarceration: UNODC Hosts Consultation on Treatment of Drug Use Disorders and Associated Mental Health Disorders in Prison Settings” (United Nations : Office on Drugs and Crime) <www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/2022/January/rethinking-incarceration_-unodc-hosts-consultation-on-treatment-of-drug-use-disorders-and-associated-mental-health-disorders-in-prison-settings.html> accessed November 21, 2022
RSPH, “About RSPH | Royal Society for Public Health UK” (RSPH | About RSPH | Royal Society for Public Health UK) <https://www.rsph.org.uk/about-us.html?gclid=Cj0KCQiAm5ycBhCXARIsAPldzoULsAKwa1fyuTugCQ4NC9dTDsq6fcDTRmfXa01172WnImIN8verVfcaAqpXEALw_wcB> accessed November 21, 2022
Seffrin P and Teeple J, “Making Drug Use Dangerous for Black Men: Race, Drugs, Violence, and Criminal Justice” [2022] Race and Justice 215336872211274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21533687221127446
Sheinman H, “The First Virtue of the Law Courts and the First Virtue of The Law” (2007) 13 Legal Theory 101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1352325207070061
“The History of the Magna Carta, 1215” (Historic UK) <https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/The-Origins-of-the-Magna-Carta/> accessed November 19, 2022
The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 c.38
“UK House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee Report on Drug Policy” (IDPC) <https://idpc.net/publications/2019/10/report-by-the-commons-select-committee-on-drug-policy> accessed November 22, 2022
“Uncodified British Constitution” (Uncodified British Constitution) <https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/public-law/with-reference-to-the-uncodified-law-essays.php> accessed November 19, 2022
“UNODC World Drug Report 2022 Highlights Trends on Cannabis Post-Legalization, Environmental Impacts of Illicit Drugs, and Drug Use among Women and Youth” (United Nations : Office on Drugs and Crime) <//www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/2022/June/unodc-world-drug-report-2022-highlights-trends-on-cannabis-post-legalization–environmental-impacts-of-illicit-drugs–and-drug-use-among-women-and-youth.html> accessed November 24, 2022
Walliss J, “Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics? Nineteenth Century Crime Statistics for England and Wales as a Historical Source” (2012) 10 History Compass 574 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-0542.2012.00867.x
“Why We Need Drug Reform” (Why We Need Drug Policy Reform – Open Society Foundations) <https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/why-we-need-drug-policy-reform> accessed November 20, 2022
“Why We Need Drug Reform” (Why We Need Drug Policy Reform – Open Society Foundations) <https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/why-we-need-drug-policy-reform> accessed November 23, 2022
Winstock AR and others, “Methoxetamine: An Early Report on the Motivations for Use, Effect Profile and Prevalence of Use in a UK Clubbing Sample” (2015) 35 Drug and Alcohol Review 212 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dar.12259
[1] “Criminal Justice Systems in the UK” (Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, August 10, 2022) <https:// www.crimeandjustice.org.uk%2Fpublications%2Fcriminal-justice-systems-uk&usg=AOvVaw1mF_NAfGBnxeoCD3Y64-44> accessed November 19, 2022.
[2] Hanoch Sheinman, “The First Virtue of the Law Courts and the First Virtue of The Law” (2007) 13 Legal Theory 101 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1352325207070061>
[3] “The History of the Magna Carta, 1215” (Historic UK) <https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/The-Origins-of-the-Magna-Carta/> accessed November 19, 2022.
[4] Bill of Rights (Act) 1689 (England)
[5] Act of Settlement 1700
[6] “Uncodified British Constitution” (Uncodified British Constitution) <https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/public-law/with-reference-to-the-uncodified-law-essays.php> accessed November 19, 2022.
[7] Katherine M Hayes, “System of Justice: An Introduction to the Criminal Justice System in England and Wales” (1986) 14 Journal of Criminal Justice 98 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0047-2352(86)90033-4>
[8] (n7)
9 Vikram Dodd, “Recorded Crime in England and Wales at 20-Year High as Charge Rate Hits New Low” (the Guardian, July 21, 2022) <https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/21/recorded-in-england-and-wales-at-20-year-high-as-charge-rate-hits-new-low> accessed November 19, 2022.
10 Rachael Aplin, “Police Discretion, Pragmatism and Crime ‘Deconstruction’: Police Doorstep Crime Investigations in England and Wales” (2021) 32 Policing and Society 451 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2021.1906668>
11 The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
12 “Drug Offences” (The Crown Prosecution Service, November 18, 2022) <https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/drug-offences> accessed November 19, 2022.
[9] (n11)
[10] Brian Ostrom and Roger Hanson, “Exploring the Theory and Practice of Sentencing Reform” (2016) 35 Criminal Justice Ethics 80 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0731129x.2016.1148970>
[11] Phil Dalgarno, Steve O’Rawe and Richard Hammersley, “Illegal Drugs in the UK: Is It Time for Considered Legalisation to Improve Public Health?” (2021) 7 Drug Science, Policy and Law 205032452110053 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20503245211005351>
[12] Jim Baumohl and others, “Substance Abuse and Welfare Policy at the New Century” (2003) 30 Contemporary Drug Problems 501 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00914509030301-218>
[13] Ibid
[14] “Health” (Health, August 20, 2015) <https://www.health-ni.gov.uk/articles/misuse-drugs-legislations> accessed November 20, 2022.
[15] “Deaths Related to Drug Poisoning in England and Wales – Office for National Statistics” (Deaths related to drug poisoning in England and Wales – Office for National Statistics) <https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsrelatedtodrugpoisoninginenglandandwales/2020> accessed November 20, 2022.
[16] (n28)
[17] John Walliss, “Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics? Nineteenth Century Crime Statistics for England and Wales as a Historical Source” (2012) 10 History Compass 574 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-0542.2012.00867.x>.
[18] “Drugs Penalties” (Gov.uk) <https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing> accessed November 19, 2022.
[19] as set out in Parts I, II or III of Schedule 2 to the Act. s.4-9
[20] “Crack” cocaine is a Class A controlled drug, being a “preparation or other product containing a substance” which is a controlled drug (Schedule 2, part 1 paragraph 5 of the Act). It is cocaine for the purposes of the Act, see R v Russell (1992) 94 Cr. App. R 351.
[21] Home Office Circular 015/2012 provides that forensic analysis of substances believed to be cannabis is not required in cases likely to be dealt with in a magistrates’ court if a law enforcement officer, is experienced in the recognition of the physical appearance, texture and smell of cannabis, identifies it as such and the identification of the drugs is not in dispute. Having regard to Rule 3 of the Criminal Procedure Rules, where an offender has not confirmed the identification of the drugs in an interview, admission of this fact by the defence should be sought at an early stage in the proceedings. The Court of Appeal ruled that the prohibition of possession of cannabis did not infringe a defendant’s rights under Articles 8 and 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (R v Taylor, TLR 15 (2001).
[22] Visual identification by a police or law enforcement officer is only applicable to khat warnings and Penalty Notice for Disorder (PND) cases to corroborate an acceptance by the suspect that s/he is in possession of khat. Where no such visual identification can be made or where the suspect denies the suspected offence(s), the case is going to proceed to court, and it is anticipated that the defendant will plead not guilty, a forensic service provider must be asked to identify the drug as khat.
[23] “Why We Need Drug Reform” (Why We Need Drug Policy Reform – Open Society Foundations) <https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/why-we-need-drug-policy-reform> accessed November 20, 2022.
[24] Federico Picinali, “Do Theories of Punishment Necessarily Deliver a Binary System of Verdicts? An Exploratory Essay” (2017) 12 Criminal Law and Philosophy 555 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11572-017-9440-y>
[25] Adam Holland, “An Ethical Analysis of UK Drug Policy as an Example of a Criminal Justice Approach to Drugs: A Commentary on the Short Film Putting UK Drug Policy into Focus” (2020) 17 Harm Reduction Journal <http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12954-020-00434-8>
[26] “Drug Addiction (Substance Use Disorder) – Symptoms and Causes” (Mayo Clinic, October 4, 2022) <https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/drug-addiction/symptoms-causes/syc-20365112> accessed November 20, 2022.
[27] Delfine Lievens and others, “Economic Consequences of Legal and Illegal Drugs: The Case of Social Costs in Belgium” (2017) 44 International Journal of Drug Policy 50 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.03.005>
[28] (n32)
[29] Hanna Pickard, “Responsibility without Blame for Addiction” (2017) 10 Neuroethics 169 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12152-016-9295-2>
[30] Celia JA Morgan and others, “Harms Associated with Psychoactive Substances: Findings of the UK National Drug Survey” (2009) 24 Journal of Psychopharmacology 147 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0269881109106915>
[31] Mokuolu Olubunmi Bolade and Ajiboye Samuel Adedotun, “Impact of Self-Efficacy and Social Support on Intention to Quit Drug Use among People with Drug Abuse Cases” [2020] Advances in Research 67 <http://dx.doi.org/10.9734/air/2020/v21i130182>
[32] (n32)
[33] Redonna K Chandler, Bennett W Fletcher and Nora D Volkow, “Treating Drug Abuse and Addiction in the Criminal Justice System” (2009) 301 JAMA 183 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2008.976>
[34] (n32)
[35] “Rethinking Incarceration: UNODC Hosts Consultation on Treatment of Drug Use Disorders and Associated Mental Health Disorders in Prison Settings” (United Nations : Office on Drugs and Crime) <www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/2022/January/rethinking-incarceration_-unodc-hosts-consultation-on-treatment-of-drug-use-disorders-and-associated-mental-health-disorders-in-prison-settings.html> accessed November 21, 2022.
[36] Adam R Winstock and others, “Methoxetamine: An Early Report on the Motivations for Use, Effect Profile and Prevalence of Use in a UK Clubbing Sample” (2015) 35 Drug and Alcohol Review 212 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dar.12259>
[37] (n32)
[38] Ximene RÊGO and others, “20 Years of Portuguese Drug Policy – Developments, Challenges and the Quest for Human Rights” (2021) 16 Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy <http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13011-021-00394-7>
[39] (n39)
[40] Thomas J Papadimos, “Voltaire’s Candide, Medical Students, and Mentoring” (2007) 2 Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 13 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1747-5341-2-13>
[41] (n47)
[42] (n32)
[43] Diane Kuthy, “Redlining and Greenlining: Olivia Robinson Investigates Root Causes of Racial Inequity” (2016) 70 Art Education 50 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2017.1247573>
[44] (n45)
[45] Kelly Driver, “Lancet Commission on Public Health and International Drug Policy” (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health) <https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/center-for-public-health-and-human-rights/research/key-populations-program/current-projects/lancet-commission-on-public-health-and-international-drug-policy.html> accessed November 21, 2022.
[46] RSPH, “About Royal Society for Public Health UK” (RSPH) <https://www.rsph.org.uk/about-us.html?gclid=Cj0KCQiAm5ycBhCXARIsAPldzoULsAKwa1fyuTugCQ4NC9dTDsq6fcDTRmfXa01172WnImIN8verVfcaAqpXEALw_wcB> accessed November 21, 2022.
[47] “About CACP” (About CACP) <https://www.cacp.ca/about-cacp.html> accessed November 22, 2022.
[48] “About United Nations” (CEB) <https://unsceb.org/about#:~:text=The%20UN%20System%20Chief%20Executives,and%20meets%20twice%20a%20year.> accessed November 22, 2022.
[49] “UK House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee Report on Drug Policy” (IDPC) <https://idpc.net/publications/2019/10/report-by-the-commons-select-committee-on-drug-policy> accessed November 22, 2022.
[50] Jenkins Emily and others, “Legal Regulation as a Human Right and Public Health Approach to Currently Prohibited Substances” (2021) 91 International Journal of Drug Policy 103153 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103153>
[51] “Why We Need Drug Reform” (Open Society Foundations) <https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/why-we-need-drug-policy-reform> accessed November 23, 2022.
[52] Patrick Seffrin and Joseph Teeple, “Making Drug Use Dangerous for Black Men: Race, Drugs, Violence, and Criminal Justice” [2022] Race and Justice 215336872211274 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21533687221127446>
[53] “Deaths Related to Drug Poisoning in England and Wales – Office for National Statistics” (Deaths related to drug poisoning in England and Wales – Office for National Statistics) <https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsrelatedtodrugpoisoninginenglandandwales/2021registrations#:~:text=1.-,Main%20points,(79.5%20deaths%20per%20million).> accessed November 23, 2022.
[54] (n60)
[55] M Greenberg, “The Value of Harm Reduction for Injection Drug Use: A Clinical and Public Health Ethics Analysis” (2019) 65 Disease-a-Month 118 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.disamonth.2018.12.003>
[56] (n62)
[57] “Report: Fewer Nations Using the Death Penalty for Drug Offenses, But Executions and Secrecy Are Up in Those That Do” (Death Penalty Information Center, March 23, 2022) <https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/report-fewer-nations-using-the-death-penalty-for-drug-offenses-but-executions-and-secrecy-are-up-in-those-that-do> accessed November 24, 2022.
[58] “UNODC World Drug Report 2022 Highlights Trends on Cannabis Post-Legalization, Environmental Impacts of Illicit Drugs, and Drug Use among Women and Youth” (United Nations : Office on Drugs and Crime) <//www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/2022/June/unodc-world-drug-report-2022-highlights-trends-on-cannabis-post-legalization–environmental-impacts-of-illicit-drugs–and-drug-use-among-women-and-youth.html> accessed November 24, 2022.
[59] “Drug Decriminalisation in Portugal: Setting the Record Straight. | Transform” (Transform) <https://transformdrugs.org/blog/drug-decriminalisation-in-portugal-setting-the-record-straight> accessed November 25, 2022.
[60] ibid
[61] Kojo Koram, “British Drugs Policy Is Punitive and Contradictory. And Now It’ll Go Backwards | Kojo Karam” (the Guardian, July 21, 2022) <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/21/british-drugs-policy-failed-war-on-drugs-boris-johnson> accessed November 26, 2022.
[62] (n32)
This article is written within the Academic Essay Project (AEP) organised by LAWELS. AEP aims to increase the number of quality academic writings on legal topics, encourage young lawyers to participate in academic writing, and lay the foundation of an online database on legal science. The team of legal editors and legal writers share their knowledge through high-end essays that we are publishing on our website and social media accounts for the world to read and learn from.
The articles on the LAWELS platform are not, nor are they intended to be, legal advice. You should consult a lawyer for individual advice or assessment regarding your own situation. The article only reflects the views of the author.