FIGHTING DRUGS, SENSIBLY

Judge Kaye proposes an enlightened program, but it is no substitute
for drug law reform

For the second time this year, New York state's judiciary has taken
the lead on issues that the Legislature lacked the political courage
to address. That should provide a sobering context to the glowing
praise that Governor Pataki heaped upon state lawmakers last week for
what he termed a productive session.

In some respects, that is true. But not when it came to facing
squarely some overdue, controversial issues. Consider: Only last
February, the lawmakers had an opportunity to serve the public
interest by repealing the state's antiquated ban on still and
television cameras in the courtrooms. There was an urgency for action,
as four New York City police officers were about to go on
trial in Albany on charges of gunning down a West African immigrant,
Amadou Diallo, in a hail of 41 bullets. But lawmakers didn't act.
Instead, it took the courage of the presiding judge in the trial,
state Supreme Court Justice Joseph Teresi, to allow cameras into his
courtroom, thereby establishing a precedent that remains to this day.

Now comes the state's chief judge, Judith Kaye, with a far-reaching
and humane plan for dealing with the state's escalating caseload of
drug crimes. It's an issue that state lawmakers could have helped
resolve by repealing the state's antiquated and ineffective
Rockefeller drug laws. But they did not act.

Judge Kaye, by contrast has acted on the findings of a commission of
district attorneys, judges, lawyers and drug treatment experts by
requiring that New York state offer nearly all nonviolent criminals
with drug addictions an opportunity for treatment as an alternative to
incarceration. The program will be the first of its kind in the nation.

Judge Kaye's plan is expected to spare 10,000 nonviolent offenders
time in jail as they choose to undergo drug treatment instead. That
would reduce New York's inmate population by 10 percent and save the
state $500 million in prison and social care costs every year.
Court-ordered drug treatment is said to have an average 70 percent
success rate, defined by the number of those who, after completing a
treatment program, are not arrested again.

What Judge Kaye's plan won't do -- indeed, cannot do -- is end the
need for drug law reform. Only state lawmakers can do that, and so far
they have irresponsibly refused to do so. The Rockefeller drug laws,
intended as a deterrent to drug crime, have done little to stop the
explosive increase in drug offenses throughout the state, especially
in New York City. Nor have the laws achieved their primary objective
of putting drug kingpins away for long periods of time. To the
contrary, the drug lords have largely avoided lengthy sentences
because they can afford top legal talent to plead their case. It's the
low-level offenders who bear the brunt of these excessive statutes.

While it is true that once Judge Kaye's program is in place, those
facing drug sentences can sidestep the Rockefeller laws by pleading
guilty and agreeing to undergo treatment, that does not mean the end
of drug law injustice. If a defendant wishes to go to trial rather
than plead guilty, then he or she will face the prospect of being
convicted under the Rockefeller statutes. Some defense attorneys are
already expressing concerns that for precisely these reasons, many
suspects will plead guilty rather than exercise their right to prove
their innocence.

This is no way to serve justice. Judge Kaye has done her part by
placing the state on the path to humane reform. Now it is time state
lawmakers and Governor Pataki do theirs, by enacting real drug law
reform.