ACADEMIC CALLS FOR MOVES TO LEGALISE CANNABIS

CONFLICTING views on the decriminalisation and legalisation of cannabis and
other drugs were voiced yesterday at the [National Crime] forum.

Tim Murphy of the Department of Law at UCC advocated decriminalising drugs
and told the forum he would prefer his young son to take cannabis than
alcohol.

His argument was that the criminalisation of drugs over the past 70 to 80
years had not worked. The policy of trying to move to a drug free society
was an unrealistic aim, as the trend was going in the opposite direction
throughout Ireland, Europe and the world.

In society supply and demand had increased.

Mr Murphy pointed out that all drugs could be used or abused and the policy
should be one of harm reduction rather than criminalisation.

He asked what purpose it served to criminalise people with drug problems.
They were stigmatised and driven into a criminal realm. The reality was
that people were taking drugs but they were adulterated and came from
underground sources.

"Society should move away from this demonisation of drugs," he said.
Instead, society should take over from the criminal gangs and, in a humane
way, decriminalise drugs.

It was through a treatment system rather than through the judicial or
prison system that society should react. It should move away from the
punitive approach because "addiction is a clinical condition and
criminalising addiction is not the way".

He denied he was defending the trendy liberal thinking from the ivory tower
of a university. The reality is that drugs are available everywhere.

Dr French insisted that cannabis caused loss of memory and loss of
concentration. For 14 to 16 year olds cannabis was not "the bread and
butter" of drug abuse in the community.

Mr Murphy's problem, he said, was that he did not accept the reality of
addiction. Those addicted were getting younger and younger and anything
which would legalise or decriminalise drugs was most irresponsible.

It would lead to much greater problems than those which affected society in
legalising alcohol, tranquilisers and tobacco.

Ms Anne Quigley of the Citywide Drug Group said the legalisation of drugs
were something which was hugely insensitive to bring up with families
devastated by drug addiction.

"Legalisation can be seen as a distraction or a search for another easy
answer to a complex problem," she said.

One speaker who said she was "the mother of a cannabis addict" said the
drug had destroyed their home. She said he was expelled from school because
he could not concentrate and had no interest in a job. She said 95pc of
young people in her area had progressed into other drugs from cannabis.

The issue of special courts to deal with drugs cases was given a mixed
reception by community workers.

Ms Quigley said there was no point in dealing with drug addicts through the
courts without dealing with their habit.

If they had committed a crime in order to feed a drug habit then there
should be a treatment option rather than prison.

She agreed with Fergus McCabe of Icon that more research was needed. He
said the big difference with special drug courts in the USA was that they
had extra resources and facilities linked to treatment which the ordinary
courts did not.