THE DRUGS DEBATE

Employing Suspicion To Lead The Fight

LATE on a Friday night and the nightclub is crowded, the dance floor
filled with hundreds of young people.

At the bar, clubbers shout their drink orders above the music as the
DJ turns up the decibels. Through the smoky gloom, friends can be
glimpsed standing around chatting and enjoying themselves.

All around, people can be seen having the same, harmless
fun.

Suddenly, a man appears out of the shadows and approaches a group of
young people. He announces that he is an undercover policeman, has
been watching them all evening and they are all under arrest on
suspicion of taking drugs.

None of them is searched. There is not the slightest evidence that
they are in possession of any drugs. Nor has the officer actually seen
them taking drugs.

In fact, there is not one shred of proof of any illegal
activity.

This would be inconceivable in the UK or in any other European
country. Yet in Sweden it is not only legal, but encouraged by the
government and its zero-tolerance drugs policy.

It is quite common for the police to trawl nightclubs and bars
undercover, picking up people purely on the suspicion that they have
consumed drugs and enforcing compulsory urine and blood tests.

If the result is positive, the offender, even if it is a first-time
offence, will be packed off straight to court.

Sweden has one of the harshest drugs policies in the
world.

While most other European nations are becoming increasingly liberal,
Sweden is hardening its policy on all drugs. There is no distinction
between soft and hard drugs. Cannabis, for instance, is seen as a
gateway and is considered a link to serious psycho-pathologic
disorders, such as schizophrenia, in the young.

Sweden says its aim is to create a drug-free society and is adamant
the hardline policy is working. Yet heavy drug abuse among young
people has risen in the past year. Out in the streets, cannabis and
ecstasy are in demand.

Where once its restrictive policy was once held up as an example for
the rest of Europe, questions are now being asked.

How effective is the Swedish model? Is it a flawed policy, or is it,
as the Swedish government suggests, a victim of influences from other
countries?

A look back at Sweden's history in relation to drugs may provide the
answers.

Thirty-five years ago, Sweden had a much more liberal attitude to
drugs. In the 1960s, amphetamines were decriminalised, enabling
doctors to prescribe drugs to addicts.

The results were disastrous. Drug use exploded, reaching epidemic
proportions, and the black market flourished.

"The level of drug use went from a couple of hundred addicts to
2,000-3,000 within a couple of years," says Ake Setreus, a director of
Stockholm-based European Cities Against Drugs.

"In 1966, the experiment was stopped and we moved towards a more
restrictive policy. We included all drugs under a single drugs law."

What followed was a shift towards total abstinence, criminalisation of
all drugs and a major tightening of policy.

By the 1980s, police activity on the streets was stepped up, backed by
wide "stop and search" powers. A three-point plan was launched: to
limit new abusers, provide treatment for addicts and limit the supply
of drugs. It was a resounding success and drug use declined.

Today, Sweden has about 20,000 drug abusers.

Its approach to catching users is certainly severe, but,
paradoxically, the way it deals with abusers once they are caught
could not be more different. There is no just locking them up in
prison and throwing away the key.

Instead, they are encouraged to go into rehabilitation and be assigned
social workers. Persistent offenders can be sent for compulsory treatment.

"We believe it should be difficult to get drugs, but easy to get
treatment," says Tomas Hallberg, of European Cities Against Drugs.

"We made our mistakes in the 1960s and now have a very good
policy."

"Although we have zero tolerance, we are not repressive. People are
not thrown into prison for smoking cannabis, only if they have
committed other crimes along with it."

Mr Hallberg dismisses any thought of Sweden moving towards
liberalisation. The belief seems to be that following the Dutch
example of decriminalising cannabis would be dangerous, leading to
spiralling addictions and related health problems.

"It would be political suicide for any party to suggest a relaxation
of drug laws," says Mr Hallberg. "They have the support of 90 per cent
of the population."

Recent figures revealed that a mere 9 per cent of Swedes had tried
drugs, compared with 34 per cent in the UK.

Sweden believes this points to success - and its attitude to alcohol
and tobacco is equally intolerant.

Alcohol is only sold in state shops and only recently have these been
allowed to open on Saturdays. Drink is not sold to anyone under 20 in
the shops or under 18 in restaurants.

Yet, Sweden is having to face up to the realisation that more and more
of its young people are dabbling in drugs. Underground support for
legalisation is swelling and web sites are springing up.

"If you look at cinemas and what kids do and think, and the pop stars,
they all use drugs and smoke and drink," says Paula Lilgeberg, from
the Maria Ungdom youth rehabilitation clinic. "Society's changed and
Swedish children have a lot of money, so they get into drugs."

Sweden's response is to sharpen up its existing policy. Over summer,
officials have been meeting representatives from the authorities,
police, customs, schools, parents and voluntary agencies.

In autumn, a national action plan will be launched, pulling together
all those resources.

Sweden's ministry of health and social affairs denies that rising drug
abuse shows its policy is failing. It suggests a number of factors are
to blame: outside influences and the economic crisis of the Nineties
which led to unemployment and marginalisation.

"We believe in the restrictive policy," says Ann Jonsson, of the
ministry. "We are working to oppose all trends of the liberalisation
movement in Europe. It is a dangerous way forward which creates the
wrong attitudes to drugs. We are very much against it and hope to move
forward on this together in Europe within the EU."