DECRIMINALISATION OF DRUGS: THE DEBATE CONTINUES WITH DIVERGENT SCENARIOS.

REFORMS. The voting on the Droleg initiative that will take place end of
November will be decisive for current reforms. With the publication of
several competing proposals on the topic, discussions won't be easy.

After a long period of calm, the approach of the vote on the Droleg
initiative at the end of November has reopened the political debate on
prohibited drugs. The "Sonntags-Zeitung" (a Zurich newspaper) fired the
first salvo Sunday in exposing a report of the Parliamentary working group,
"Politique de la Drogue" (Politics of Illegal Drugs), on proposed
modifications to the federal law on narcotics (LFS). In this report, the
four governmental parties consider the possibility of testing the
decriminalization of drug use solely in certain cities, similarly to the
model of experimental prescription of heroin.

But that is not all. The Sonntags-Zeitung also reveals in the process
findings of the Federal Office of Public Health (OFSP), the agency
responsible for a project of modification of the LFS. These findings also
recommend a decriminalization of drug consumption, not surprisingly. The
question has been current in Berne at least since 1989 and
decriminalization has been recommended once again in February 1996 by the
commission of experts presided over by the former district attorney of
Basel, Jörg Schild. But the topic remains delicate and, until Sunday, the
administration had not made its convictions known on the question of
whether to begin to discuss the subject before the voting on Droleg. One
thing is sure: a discussion in parallel with the initiative -- that
recommends not only the decriminalization of the consumption but that of
the commerce in all prohibited drugs -- of the plans of the OFSP and the
reflections of parliamentarians, has little chance to clarify a debate that
seems very contentious and difficult.

The Example of Holland

Let us try to summarize the present positions. The OFSP, whose work is
almost finished, tried to smooth some of the rough edges of the
propositions of the Schild report: a firm base in the law of the tripartite
politics {transl?}, a more important role of the Confederation in policies
concerning prevention, therapy and reduction of risks notably. Concerning
the legality of consumption, two variants were considered. The first would
lead to a decriminalization of the consumption and the possession of small
quantities of all narcotics.

The second takes a suggestion of the criminologist Martin Killias,
published recently in magazine "Dependences". Referring to the pragmatic
politics of Holland concerning cannabis, the Lausanne professor proposes to
give to the federal Council the power, after consultation with the cantons,
to control the policies on prohibited drugs concerning availability of
various drugs as a function of local conditions and the dangers for the
public order. In this setting a prompt test of decriminalization could take
place.

The parliamentary group "Politique de la Drogue," consisting of
representatives of all four governmental parties, explores yet another
avenue. "We made an inventory of the questions requiring consideration,"
explains its president, Felix Gutzwiller. "Thus we ask the federal
administration to evaluate the legal and practical possibility to proceed
without delay in a test of decriminalization of drug consumption. We also
ask for a report on cannabis, a report that is in fact already under
development. Concerning the prescription of heroin, the governmental
parties are encouraged not to oppose the urgent federal decree that permits
heroin's prescription until 2004 ".

Far From Unanimity

Between the most daring propositions concocted within the OFSP and those
considered by parliamentarians, one sees that there is an wide margin. In
addition, it is also necessary to consider opinions of other federal
offices concerned, of the professional groups, and of the cantons... The
procedings of consultation on the Schild report shows that the idea of
decriminalization is far from being unanimous. In this context, the voting
on Droleg risks, in a way, to arbitrate the debate. Partisans of this
initiative had considered withdrawing it after the crushing defeat of the
group Jeunesse Sans Drogue (Youth Without Drugs). If they finally persist
with the initiative, it is in the hope to put pressure on the federal
Council that is, in their view, not progressing resolutely enough in the
loosening of repression. Today, their weapon could turn against them:
Droleg will be rejected, it is obvious. But the result of the voting won't
be less significant for it. A honorable score would strengthen reformists'
determination but a massive defeat could set them back for a long time.

Checked-by: Richard Lake