Skip to content
Support Us

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Shutterstock/Impact Photography

Opinion The government's new drug policy will do nothing to end the stigmatisation of drug users

The government’s new drug possession policy is not likely to achieve its goals, writes Marcus Keane.

LAST FRIDAY, THE government launched its policy on Ireland’s approach to the possession of small amounts of drugs for personal use, following the report of the working group set up to examine the issue. In essence, the new policy adopts a staged approach to dealing with possession.

The first time a person is caught, they will be diverted for a (mandatory) health assessment with HSE. The second time, the gardaí will have the option to apply an adult caution under the adult cautioning scheme. The third time, the person will have used all their chances and will face criminal prosecution.

For those who have been following the policy as it developed to this stage, they will know that this is a policy born of compromise – an attempt to reconcile health and criminal justice in the context of personal drug use. However, there should have been no compromise, personal drug use is a health issue, pure and simple.

As a result, the policy is not likely to achieve its goals – adopting a health led approach, connecting people who use drugs with health services and breaking down the stigma associated with drug use.

In this piece, we look at the main reasons as to why this is the case. 

Who is likely to get caught more than once?

First, think about who is likely to be caught three times for possession, and who will thus be criminalised under the new policy. For most people, it’s easy to avoid getting caught at all.

Although drug use is widespread – over 1 in 4 Irish people report using illicit drugs at some point in the lives – and although An Garda Siochána detects many thousands of episodes of possession every year, the vast amount of drug possession in the state goes undetected. 

Laws against simple possession are largely disrespected by the Irish public, partly because they are unenforceable to any level where they might have a deterrent effect. The risk of getting caught is, quite simply, minuscule.

Against this backdrop, who is likely to get caught more than once? The sad answer is those that are visible – people who are homeless, people whose drug use is causing them such difficulties that they often use drugs in the public domain, people whose living conditions mean that it is difficult for them to get out of sight and away from garda detection. In short, those who are already marginalised; those who are already struggling with their drug use.

If you listen to the rhetoric, these are those who the policy is intended to help – we talk of this policy giving ‘chances’ and ‘opportunities’ to people. It’s 2019. Healthcare is not something Irish citizens should have a ‘chance’ at. It’s something that we should be entitled to, and if drug use is a health issue the first time, it is a health issue the hundredth time.

A system that diverts people to health services – correctly identifying the issue as one for health services to deal with – only to divert that person back to the criminal justice system if they don’t comply with the health diversion or need to be diverted more than once – is clearly inappropriate. 

I can think of no other health issue where policymakers would think it appropriate to rely on the criminal justice system for enforcement. Thus, although it’s not the proposed policy’s intent to further marginalise people struggling with drug use, I am deeply concerned that this will be its unintended consequence, and that this will be a policy that ends up perpetuating isolation and disadvantage as opposed to reducing harm and supporting recovery. 

9661 Health-led approach_90576922 Minister for Health Simon Harris, Minister of State with responsibility for Drugs Strategy Catherine Byrne and Minister for Justice Charlie Flanagan, launching the government’s new approach to the personal use of drugs does not go far enough. Leah Farrell / RollingNews.ie Leah Farrell / RollingNews.ie / RollingNews.ie

This leads to the second point. The policy as set out is unnecessarily complicated and bureaucratic, and it is hard to see how it can be delivered in a way that will provide value to the taxpayer.

Those caught for the first time attend a health screening, which is mandatory. This is unnecessary. The evidence shows that the vast amount of drug use in a society is by people who do not struggle with their drug use, and who do not require treatment.

Most people will not need to be offered further intensive interventions, so why insist that they get assessed? Of course, people should be offered an assessment, but they should not be forced to undergo one on pain of prosecution.

This approach of forced assessment is particularly hard to defend in the context of current policy – as it stands, Ireland has a system in which people who are found in possession are processed through the courts.

If the state genuinely has a legitimate interest in assessing the health needs of everyone found in possession of drugs for personal use, then why are we not already doing this? The cohort is not a hidden or hard to reach population – it is, by definition, that group of people that the state has already detected and is currently processing through the criminal justice system.

If assessing the health needs of everyone found in possession of drugs for personal use was a genuine concern, why haven’t we been doing it since we started to criminalise possession over 40 years ago? Further, the mandatory nature of the assessment creates, by necessity, a feedback loop between the health services and the gardaí – more bureaucracy, and more cost.

Getting caught a second time will lead to a discretionary adult caution – which, if it falls to be implemented in the same way as the current adult caution system is a far cry from the mental image of the system I’m sure most people have – a compassionate guard simply giving a person a caution, another chance and sending them on their way.

Rather, adult cautioning is a complex system, requiring the involvement of not only the garda but also the local superintendent. There are referral forms, meetings with the accused, time spent which has an opportunity cost. There are also facets of the adult cautioning system which make it less flexible than it seems – you can generally only be considered for it if you have no previous convictions, for example.

Further, you have to accept responsibility for your behaviour, essentially admitting the wrong, and if you come before a court again, the fact that you availed of the adult caution scheme before can be brought up at sentencing. 

Finally, if someone gets caught a third time, the criminal prosecution – courts, police time, lawyers, the well documented negative lifelong consequences – all in the name of punishing something which the government rightly notes is a health issue.

00018759_18759 (1) Health Minister Simon Harris said the “war on drugs has not worked” and that a "health led approach" is the way forward in tackling problem drug use. Joe Dunne / Photocall Ireland! Joe Dunne / Photocall Ireland! / Photocall Ireland!

It’s important to be clear – all of this will cost money, and it is not likely to be effective in reducing levels of drug use or drug-related harm in Irish society. Focusing on punishing individual level consumers in drug markets is not supported by evidence as an effective policy approach; that we should be continuing with it in 2019 is disquieting, to say the least.

There are things we could be doing that do have an evidence base – universal prevention programmes, making access to treatment easier for people who need it, helping people in recovery build their recovery capital as they face into a new future.

But this policy will not help us achieve them. It draws a bright line between those who do not use drugs at all, or avail of the single chance on offer – these are the ‘normal’ people – and those who do not or cannot avail of said chance. It appears that we have a word for these people too – criminals.

And this leads to the third and most important point as to why this policy is not fit for purpose. It is stigmatising. It makes it clear that people who use drugs are worthy of help and support, but only if they manage to keep themselves hidden and away from detection.

If they don’t manage to do this, society will extend a branch – but just the one – before lowering the mask and reverting to type, which is to bemoan the lack of grace with which people receive help and to hand them over to the police so the criminal justice system can label them for us.

This approach – in circumstances where addiction is viewed as a chronic, relapsing, health condition and in which it is well documented even those trying hard in treatment programmes can struggle to stay away from drugs – is very sad and very wrong. 

So, where do we go from here?

Well, it’s important that we look at the report of the working group and talk about what they found – all three strands of their public consultation revealed a public that is overwhelmingly in favour of removing criminal sanctions for simple possession, for example.

We also need to look in more detail at some of the underlying assumptions on which the policy was based – that decriminalising simple possession while maintaining garda powers to stop, search and confiscate drugs was not considered to be legally viable in the Irish context, for instance.

We need to understand why government felt it necessary to ignore some policy options which should have been easy to go with, why they failed to remove imprisonment as a possible consequence for simple possession, for instance – something which the working group recommended and which the international community is entirely united behind.

Finally, we need to recognise that there is a long way to go before this policy will be implemented and that there will be many opportunities to advocate for a better system along the way – one that will genuinely reduce harm and support recovery, rather than one that is merely likely to punish those who need help the most.

Marcus Keane is a lawyer and head of policy at the Ana Liffey Drug Project. 

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
40 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Joe Johnson
    Favourite Joe Johnson
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 12:33 AM

    Let us hope the families finally get justice for what happened that terrible bloody Sunday.

    285
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute pat murphy
    Favourite pat murphy
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 12:47 AM

    Murdered by a foreign army on Irish soil…

    284
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute SFNutters
    Favourite SFNutters
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 8:50 AM

    @pat murphy: horse guards

    4
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Brian Jones
    Favourite Brian Jones
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 12:41 AM

    If it was the case that the soldiers were given advance orders to shoot should they feel it was warranted then that order should be traced up the chain of command. I don’t believe it was a spur of the moment decision

    122
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jane
    Favourite Jane
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 7:24 AM

    @Brian Jones: I don’t think they needed to feel it was warranted. I was listening to an interview by one of the relatives the other day and he said that one of the soldiers that gave evidence to Saville said that he looked down the barrel of his gun but could see no justification for shooting so he didn’t pull the trigger. Others didn’t seem to care whether it was justified or not.

    69
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Barry Somers
    Favourite Barry Somers
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 5:38 AM

    Will be amazed if these people receive justice, UK 2ont like to admit that it’s own army murdered people

    139
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Colette Kearns
    Favourite Colette Kearns
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 7:22 AM

    @Barry Somers: agree , but every army murders people!

    22
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jim Buckley Barrett
    Favourite Jim Buckley Barrett
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 8:20 AM

    @Barry Somers: unlikely they will see justice, British soldiers, British courts, British jury…..

    39
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Maurice Frazer
    Favourite Maurice Frazer
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 9:06 AM

    Had the pleasure of meeting with these wonderful people from Derry recently when they came to Dublin to support our fight for Justice for the Stardust 48.
    We wish them all the best in their quest for Justice. As I have said before…. TRUTH+JUSTICE=PEACE

    30
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Donal Carey
    Favourite Donal Carey
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 9:22 AM

    Give these families justice and peace enough is enough

    18
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Charles Williams
    Favourite Charles Williams
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 10:15 AM

    Like all historic trouble related murders in N.Ireland, it’s time to let go of the past and move on to the future. All trouble related crimes on all sides committed before the signing of the Good Friday Agreement should be subject to a general amnesty. Nobody murdered on any side of the troubles is coming back. Death is a one way street, a shared future is a two way street. Let go of the past and move on to a better, brighter shared future.

    9
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Sean O'Rourke
    Favourite Sean O'Rourke
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 11:06 AM

    @Charles Williams: Easier said than done Charles.

    3
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Denis McClean
    Favourite Denis McClean
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 12:31 PM

    @Charles Williams What you say would make perfect sense but some scars will only begin to heal when everyone associated with them is dead and even then …

    2
    See 1 more reply ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute T Beckett is back
    Favourite T Beckett is back
    Report
    Mar 14th 2019, 3:16 PM

    @Charles Williams:

    The British army were never charged, imprisoned, admitted or apologised for their murders, so they’re not covered by the GFA – which also they were against.

    And yet there are still people who were British blood stained poppies.

    1
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

Leave a comment

 
cancel reply
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds