Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The failed war on drugs

By Sukrit Sabhlok - posted Thursday, 18 September 2008


Ten years ago, the United Nations (UN) promised to deliver a “drug-free” world by the year 2008. Pino Arlacchi, the Drug Czar at the UN, exclaimed that although “[t]here are naysayers who believe a global fight against illegal drugs is unwinnable ... they are wrong”. For what seemed like the umpteenth time, the UN assured us that if we simply sent them more money, their team of “experts” would take care of the problem.

A decade later, how has UN fared? Any dispassionate observer would surely agree that they have failed dismally. After all, drugs are more widely available than before.

Take a long-term view and the result is the same. On almost every indicator, outcomes have gotten worse since the so-called war on drugs began.

Advertisement

Most tragically, drug overdose deaths have increased. In 1964, there were six drug overdose deaths in Australia. Yet by 1999, this number had grown to 958 deaths (Modernising Australia's Drug Policy by Alex Wodak and Timothy Moore).

The number of injecting users has also increased. A study in 1999 concluded that the number of injecting drug users in Australia had been doubling every ten years since the 1960s, reaching 100,000 regular injectors and an additional 175,000 occasional injectors by 1997.

Although the drug warriors are vague as to what constitutes “victory”, it seems to me that if their goal is to save lives, this is not being achieved by the present strategy.

Unfortunately, lack of success has not stopped the expansion of drug interdiction programs. Like the child who murders his parents and then pleads for pity because he is an orphan, governments have a long history of asking for regulatory powers despite creating much of the mess we see today in the area of drug policy.

The financial costs are mounting. Despite $13 billion of taxpayer money being spent by Australian governments between 1976 and 2000, the Federal Police website reports that “[t]he illicit drug trade has become an international, multi billion dollar enterprise, estimated to be bigger than the oil trade and second only to the arms trade”.

We continue to spend $100 million a year, yet surveys consistently show that drugs are easily available. Of those aged 14 and older, 33.5 per cent have tried marijuana, 8.9 per cent have tried ecstasy, 6.3 per cent have tried amphetamines, 5.9 per cent have tried cocaine and 1.6 per cent have tried heroin. In spite of efforts by police, 38.1 per cent of the community has tried an illicit drug at some point in their life. That equates to nearly 8 million people.

Advertisement

These figures, from the latest National Drug Strategy Household Survey, are just the tip of the iceberg because many do not admit their use due to fear of the law.

This is a war we are losing. Current statistics suggest that police only intercept a small percentage of the illegal drugs entering Australia. Even in the rare instances when law enforcement does succeed in significantly reducing the supply of a particular drug, users simply turn to other drugs instead. This was the case with the heroin drought of 2001: although heroin was less widely available, cocaine use rose to compensate.

We need a more rational drug policy - one that provides better value for money, and does not marginalise users so they are afraid to seek the treatment they need. We should show more compassion towards non-violent drug users, instead of filling our prisons.

Let us not succumb to the false stereotype that portrays drug users as deviant individuals. On the contrary, many are respected members of the community. To cite but a few examples: American President George W. Bush, former president Bill Clinton, former vice-president Al Gore, presidential nominee Barack Obama, the Supreme Court nominee Douglas Ginsburg, the Pulitzer Prize winning astronomer Carl Sagan and the Nobel laureate chemist Kary Mullis, have all tried at least one illicit drug.

As Jacob Sullum demonstrates in his book titled Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use, the reality is that the majority of illicit drug users are productive citizens, not addicts. Irrational fear appears to be the main reason for the arbitrary line drawn between illegal and legal drugs. Or perhaps most people are unaware that alcohol and tobacco are responsible for more deaths than all the illicit drugs put together?

Things are changing, albeit slowly. At the Prime Minister’s recent 2020 summit, medical doctor Wendell Rosevear argued that the billions of dollars spent on prisons would be better spent on drug intervention and education programs. Don Stewart, former chairman of the National Crime Authority, agrees: “Punitive measures will not work. We can’t go on the way we are.” This is a debate we urgently need to have.

Lives depend upon it.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

22 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Sukrit Sabhlok is a PhD Candidate at Macquarie University Law School.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Sukrit Sabhlok

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 22 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy