IR28227
Jakarta Centre for Public Policy 1
Wage war on drugs, not on drug users
ID: IR28227
To: The Government of Indonesia
From: Jakarta Centre for Public Policy
Scenario: Scenario A
Date: February 26, 2014
Word count: 1726
1. Introduction
A new report from the World Bank has caused a stir in the media and the government by suggesting that globally, the costs of drug-related incarceration outweigh the social costs of drug use. Indonesian prisons have seen the worst of the war on drugs, becoming hotbeds of HIV AIDS through unsafe drug use in recent years. Given the large number of Indonesians in prison (many on death row) for drug use and trafficking, it is helpful to relook at Indonesia’s drug policy.
This brief will outline the current drug policy in Indonesia, highlight its effects on various stakeholders, and make recommendations for a nuanced, evidence-based policy on drugs, including measures such as legalisation, decriminalisation, rehabilitation, health and education. It will also examine the ramifications of these recommendations and address any concerns.
2. Current Strategies and Effects
What are the current drug laws in Indonesia?
Law 35 of 2009 regulates most drug related activities in Indonesia. The objectives of the law are (a) ensuring the availability of narcotics for the purpose of health and scientific advancement, (b) protecting the people from drug abuse and (c) providing medical and social rehabilitation for drug addicts. While admirable in its intentions, the law falls short on achieving these objectives due to its focus on prohibition and punishment.
Other highlights of the law are:
Narcotic substances are divided into three categories. Category 1 contains drugs that are considered the most dangerous (eg. ...
... middle of paper ...
...s collected through cannabis sales can partly finance this fund. As an example for the potential of tax collection through cannabis sales, Colorado’s tax on cannabis is expected to yield USD 98 million in 2014-15. (Wyatt, 2014)
4. Conclusion
The success of drug policy cannot be measured in terms of drugs seized and users imprisoned. A drug policy is successful when it prevents the ill-effects of drugs on society and the individual.
If Indonesia adopts a tolerant approach towards drug use, guns for rehabilitation instead of incarceration, and spends more on education than on prisons, the drug problem will be solved far quicker and less violently than is being attempted now.
Indonesian drug laws, while strict, have seen major shifts in focus before; they must continue to be evidence-based and innovative to suit the needs of present and future generations of Indonesia.
In Australia the Government uses three methods to tackle drugs; Demand reduction, supply reduction and harm minimization. Needle and syringe programs are under harm minimization category. Supply reduction is focused on drug dealers and drug makers and is brought about by law enforcement. In the Demand reduction method it is tried to decrease the number of people taking drugs through anti-drug advertisements and campaigns, legislation, rehabilitation centers. On the other hand harm minimization recognizes the fact that drugs can never be eradicated fro...
Brecher, Edward M. (1972) Licit and Illicit Drugs; The Consumers Union Report on narcotics, stimulants, depressants, inhalants, Hallucinogens, and marijuana- including caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol. New York, 291-390
America's War on Drugs: Policy and Problems. In this paper I will evaluate America's War on Drugs. More specifically, I will outline our nation's general drug history and look critically at how Congress has influenced our current ineffective drug policy. Through this analysis, I hope to show that drug prohibition policies in the United States, for the most part, have failed.
We cannot afford to keep using the same approach in hopes of diminishing our drug problem in the United States. In a study posted on RAND.org, the author Jonathan P. Caulkins compares many methods we can use to help with drug crime. The first graph compares federal mandatory minimum sentences, conventional enforcement at all levels of government, and treatment of heavy users. Conventional enforcement prevented around thirty kilo grams of cocaine from being used, while federal mandatory minimums prevented around forty kilograms from being used. Treatment of heavy users blew both of the other methods out of the water.
The drugs issue is a major problem in Australia. A simple solution cannot be found to solve this great problem because there are so many decisions, thoughts and sacrifices that need to be made. All sides of the issue must be considered when making such a large decision. To find a solution, several tests, meetings, interviews and research need to be made, to name a few. Extreme care is needed when challenging such major issues, all aspects of the problem need to be considered.
Is Prohibition (defined as a government decree against the exchange of a good or service) actually successful in reducing recreational drug consumption and drug-related violence? This is the question that will be analyzed in this paper. Drug enforcement officials frequently cite drug-related violence as a reason that drugs must be eliminated from our society. A contrary belief is that the system of drug prohibition actually causes most of the violence. Similar to alcohol prohibition in the 1920s and the rise of organized crime, drug prohibition inspires a dangerous underground market that manifests itself with violent crime throughout the U.S. and, in fact, the world. The illegal nature of drugs has significantly increased the price and the
Anti-drug legislation has had an extensive and fascinating record in the United States. The initial drug that showed prevalent use in the nation was Opium, which came primarily from China. Opium was utilized as a recommendation drug by doctors, but the growing cases of addiction led to laws alongside this drug. The greater part of the opium addicts were girls due to the doctors tend to recommend the drug for many women’s particular problems. In 1875, a law was approved in California barring individuals from smoking opium. While the law pertained generally to Chinese immigrants it was the first place in anti-drug provision is the Unites States. At the Federal stage, the prohibition of importation of opium by Chinese nationals happened in 1887 and in 1905 opium smoking was constrained in the Philippines (Harrison). While these regulations were the initial steps, they did not have any absolute provisions to decrease drug supply and use in the country. The laws beleaguered the lessening of delivery of drugs in the country and do not deal with the problem of treatment of a true illness.
The Netherlands is one of the most highly developed countries in the world. It is an international, well-integrated country with policies that are among the world’s most liberal. In fact, The Netherlands has perhaps the most liberal view on drug use than any other country and has even gone to the extreme of extraordinarily relaxing its laws regarding ‘soft’ drugs.
The war on drugs began with good intentions, but it is becoming clear that this battle is a failure. Not only do drug laws violate American’s freedoms, but they further complicate the lives of drug users. These laws have inadvertently been responsible for the deaths of thousands through bad drug deals and dirty drugs, which leads one to ask the question, “Is this a war on drugs or a war on drug users?” Body bags and HIV are becoming the most widely known side effects of drug prohibition. Contrary to what many may think, drug use will never be eliminated. Only through legalization and strict state-controlled regulations will the violent and deadly consequences of drug laws be controlled. By making these substances available, the drugs themselves will be safer and cheaper, government spending and prison population will decrease, and most importantly, Americans will be freer.
A “drug-free society” has never existed, and probably will never exist, regardless of the many drug laws in place. Over the past 100 years, the government has made numerous efforts to control access to certain drugs that are too dangerous or too likely to produce dependence. Many refer to the development of drug laws as a “war on drugs,” because of the vast growth of expenditures and wide range of drugs now controlled. The concept of a “war on drugs” reflects the perspective that some drugs are evil and war must be conducted against the substances
With an estimated twenty-five million active marijuana smokers in America that consume nearly thirty-one million pounds of marijuana each year, we are missing out on extreme revenue that this country cannot afford to go without for much longer (Krulick). Specialized government funded programs such as Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) cost around $7 billion and are in danger of being defunded to save money (Whitehouse). Marijuana tax revenues exceed $6 billion and would help less fortunate women in need of assistance when they are raising a child. On the state level, Alabama has a projected profit of $8.9 million in tax revenues alone from marijuana sales (Miron). States could increase pay or set up better retirement for police, firefighters, teachers, or any other underpaid public service.
Let’s begin with US revenue gain that would occur from legalizing marijuana. Marijuana Offers Extreme US revenue boost in several different ways. Shouldn’t we want to collect revenue due to taxation other then criminalization? Marijuana is too expensive for our justice system and should inst...
The drug control policy of the United States has always been a subject of debate. From Prohibition in the early 1930’s to the current debate over the legalization of marijuana, drugs have always been near the top of the government’s agenda. Drug use affects every part of our society. It strains our economy, our healthcare, our criminal justice systems, and it endangers the futures of young people. In order to support a public health approach to drug control, the Obama administration has committed over $10 billion to drug education programs and support for expanding access to drug treatment for addicts (Office). The United States should commit more government resources to protect against illegal use of drugs by youths and provide help for recovering addicts.
Colorado is the latest state to approve the sale of marijuana for recreational use. This topic has been tossed around by the officials for years now. Legislators in Colorado have “considered excise and sales taxes on marijuana of up to 30 percent combined” (Frosch, 2013). With the rapidly growing market and marijuana industry, rules and regulations had to be put into place. Even this tax charge needs to be implemented and enforced.
Drug abuse has been a hot topic for our society due to how stimulants interfere with health, prosperity, and the lives of others in all nations. All drugs have the potential to be misapplied, whether obtained by prescription, over the counter, or illegally. Drug abuse is a despicable disease that affects many helpless people. Majority of those who are beset with this disease go untreated due to health insurance companies who neglect and discriminate this issue. As an outcome of missed opportunities of treatments, abusers become homeless, very ill, or even worst, death.