Annual Report 2001

ADD	attention deficit disorder
AIDS	acquired immunodeficiency syndrome
ANMAT	National Administration for Medicaments, Food and Medical Technology (Argentina)
CICAD	Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission
CIS	Commonwealth of Independent States
CONACUID	Comisión Nacional contra el Uso Ilícito de las Drogas (Venezuela)
DAWN	Drug Abuse Warning Network (United States of America)
ECOWAS	Economic Community of West African States
Europol	European Police Office
GAFISUD	Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering in South America
GBL	gamma-butyrolactone
GCC	Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf
GHB	gamma-hydroxybutyrate
HIV	human immunodeficiency virus
Interpol	International Criminal Police Organization
LSD	lysergic acid diethylamide
MDA	methylenedioxyamphetamine
MDMA	methylenedioxymethamphetamine
MERCOSUR	Common Market of the Southern Cone
OAS	Organization of American States
OAU	Organization of African Unity
PMA	paramethoxyamphetamine
PROMIS	Police Realtime Online Management Information System (Australia)
SAARC	South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
SEDRONAR	Secretariat for Planning the Prevention of Drug Abuse and the Fight against Drug Trafficking (Argentina)
SIDUC	Inter-American System of Uniform Drug-Use Data
THC	tetrahydrocannabinol
UNDCP	United Nations International Drug Control Programme
WHO	World Health Organization

The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Countries and areas are referred to by the names that were in official use at the time the relevant data were collected.

Foreword

Just as the introduction of electricity and the telephone changed lives in the twentieth century, the Internet is revolutionizing the way people live today. As with many innovations, however, the advantages go hand in hand with new problems; for the Internet, there is a real danger that its benefits might be seriously undermined by criminals for illicit gain. It is the responsibility of the International Narcotics Control Board to alert Governments and the public to any developments relating to drug abuse and trafficking. In chapter I of its report for 2001, the Board examines the challenges that new technologies, such as the Internet, pose to drug law enforcement in an era of increasing globalization.

Cyber crime—crime committed in an electronic environment—is easy to commit. It requires few resources and can be committed in one country by a person sitting safely in another. It is difficult to fight both the criminals and their crimes in this “virtual” environment, where national boundaries are irrelevant and personal risk to the criminals and the likelihood of detection are greatly reduced. Enhanced vigilance at the local level and international cooperation in the investigation and prosecution of cyber crime are essential to preventing the Internet from turning into a worldwide web of drug trafficking and crime.

In chapter II of its report for 2001, the Board reviews the operation of the international drug control system, including legislative developments in certain European countries concerning the prosecution of cannabis-related offences. The Board’s opinion is that such measures will not contribute to achieving the target of significantly reducing the demand for illicit drugs by 2008, to which Governments committed themselves in the Political Declaration adopted in 1998 by the General Assembly at its twentieth special session, devoted to countering the world drug problem together. The Board has not received credible information indicating that relaxing drug laws reduces drug abuse. To the contrary, the progressive liberalizaton of drug laws in some countries over the last 20 years has been associated with a progressive increase in drug abuse.

Chapter III presents an analysis of the world situation with regard to illicit drugs. It reports on a continued reduction in cultivation of some illicit drug crops, and also on the increasing manufacture and trading of illicit synthetic drugs. It is evident from this chapter that there is nearly universal support for the three main international drug control treaties and that more than 170 States are accepting and fulfilling the obligations that being parties to those treaties entails. The parties to those treaties could not be more diverse; they include both developed and developing countries from all parts of the world, the common thread being that they have all been affected by the world drug problem in some way—illicit drug manufacture or trafficking, rampant drug abuse or exploitation of their territory for money-laundering.

The International Narcotics Control Board, whose mandate and mission originate in the international drug control treaties, wishes to emphasize that the reason for adopting those treaties was to contain the abuse of drugs. The Board notes that all those treaties emphasize the principle that the use of drugs should be restricted to medical and scientific purposes. It follows that, in this context, the term “use” or “consumption” should only be applied when it refers to the use or consumption of drugs for medical or scientific purposes. When neither of those conditions applies, in line with the international drug control treaties, the drug may be considered abused. Drug abusers are therefore, by definition, neither consumers nor users, and drugs and other mind-altering substances are not consumer goods. It is important that any attempt to minimize, trivialize or even ignore the seriousness of drug abuse by calling it drug use or drug consumption should be strongly resisted. It is also important that any careless use of terms should not lead to any contradicting or undermining of what is expressed in the treaties.

The international drug control treaties support the advancement of science and the reduction of human suffering. They explicitly stress that drugs should be available for medical purposes to relieve pain and that scientific enquiry into the use of drugs for the relief of suffering is essential. At the same time, the treaties seek to protect individuals, families and societies so that they do not become the casualties of drug dependence and addiction. For those individuals who do become such casualties, the treaties offer a humane response, with provision for treatment, rehabilitation and social reintegration. They do not, however, sanction the recreational use of drugs. It is important that the humane treatment and rehabilitation of those who abuse drugs and are dependent upon them are not confused with and do not lead to the “normalization” of drug abuse (i.e. drug abuse being accepted or considered normal). The social and recreational use of drugs constitutes their misuse and should not be “normalized”, as some now advocate. Doing so might offer short-term gains in terms of saving resources but it would have profound consequences for young people today and for future generations.

The progressive acceptance of drug abuse over the past three decades, such that illegal drug use is now perceived as inevitable, will be hard to reverse. Increasingly, it is argued that drug use is a personal issue, an individual’s civil right. While rights are important and must be protected, they are also inextricably linked to responsibilities, in this case societal responsibilities. Pursuit of pleasure and freedom of choice are rightly valued highly in a free society, but in relation to drugs they can also be dangerous, not just for individuals but also for society as a whole and especially for the vulnerable segments of society. The “normalization” of drug abuse is a high-risk approach to a complex problem, the prevention of which should be firmly based in scientific research.