NCJ Number
230921
Date Published
2010
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This chapter documents the successful efforts of the United States to criminalize drug use under United Nations conventions and the laws of many countries dependent on U.S. foreign aid, and it compares the effectiveness of such an approach to that of the countries that have chosen to pursue a harm-reduction model for addressing drug use.
Abstract
This chapter concludes that in some cases states may cause less harm to their citizens by violating international laws than by conforming to them. This is the case regarding national drug policies. By violating U.N. resolutions governing the sale and use of drugs, several European nations have caused less harm to drug users than if they had conformed to the prohibitionist and highly punitive model of drug control promoted by United Nations antidrug resolutions designed in accordance with United States drug policies. Two related harm-reduction programs designed to reduce health risks to drug users have generated the greatest controversy in the context of international conventions, i.e., safer injection rooms for injecting drug users and heroin prescription programs. Despite the effectiveness of these programs in reducing the harms caused by drug use, the United Nations steadfastly follows the U.S. policy of opposing them. Another controversial drug policy issue is the use of marijuana for beneficial medical purposes. Despite the evidence for the effectiveness of medical marijuana, the International Narcotics Control Board has held that permitting medical uses of marijuana sends the wrong message and is a step toward legalization. Given the empirical evidence of the greater effectiveness of the harm-reduction model in reducing the harms of drug use compared to the punitive criminalization model, this chapter recommends a strategy for rethinking and reforming international law regarding the use and sale of potentially harmful drugs.