MANDATORY DRUG TESTING WON'T HALT POLICE CORRUPTION

Ottawa Citizen

When six veteran drug squad officers in Toronto were charged with
corruption this winter, police commissioned retired justice George Ferguson
to suggest ways to ensure the rot never sets in again. It was a hopeless task.

Granted, Ferguson provided a long list of administrative reforms. But he
also made a controversial suggestion: Mandatory drug testing for officers,
which he argued was used in New York's police department and was "effective
and fair to all."

Initially, we were appalled. U.S. studies have found urine testing
ineffective. Canada, unlike the U.S., has generally rejected urine testing
as an invasion of privacy. Recent events in New York have confirmed our
doubts and they suggest until authorities ask the basics about police
corruption, the problem will continue.

Late last year, two veteran NYPD detectives were caught robbing a drug
courier of $170,000 US. The culprits talked, and now some 10 officers --
both current and former members of a special narcotics task force -- are
being investigated for robbing drug dealers of cash and drugs and
recruiting dealers to sell the stolen drugs.

The revelations follow a scandal in the 1990s when 30 officers were
convicted of similar drug-related corruption. New York responded with a
commission which conducted a penetrating investigation and found: "Wherever
there is an active drug trade, there is some level of (police) corruption."

The panel recommended many of the very reforms now being considered in
Toronto. Clearly, they didn't work. More ominous is the fact the same story
has played out in big cities everywhere. A 1997 Australian royal commission
concluded there was terrible corruption among drug squad officers in New
South Wales, noting that the findings were identical to those of New York's
commission.

Obviously, Canada, too, is not immune. Over the years, the list of
corrupted officers has grown. Most have been drug-enforcement specialists.
The charges in Toronto are another example of an old, clear pattern.

The explanation of the pattern is equally clear. Some people want to buy
illicit drugs and others want to sell. There is no victim to complain and
everyone wants to keep things quiet. Investigating these crimes is
difficult and officers find that no matter how many dealers they bust, it
makes no difference to the trade. Cynicism sets in. They also discover that
in this shadowy world where no one complains to the authorities, the
opportunities to make money are unlimited.

The absolute prohibition of drugs -- just like the former prohibition of
alcohol -- is inherently corrupting. No administrative reform will change
that. Not even a move as intrusive as making officers urinate in a cup.

Drugs are a scourge, but it seems the harder we crack down on this illicit
trade, driving it into the shadows, the more problems we create --
including a few crooked cops.