MEMORANDUM 49
Submitted by Richard Parry
1. I am a criminal defence lawyer, so my
wish to see the legalisation of illegal drugs is adverse to my
interests. Perhaps up to half my work is connected to the prohibition
on certain drugs—which suggests to me that an equivalent
of time must be spent on such cases by the police, the courts
and the Probation Service. The enormous waste of time and taxpayers
money is quite staggering and increases year on year. The so-called
"war on drugs" if it continues will become a bottomless
pit into which taxpayers money is thrown without any tangible
result. Except the locking away of thousands of prisoners, the
erosion of civil liberties, an increasing crime rate, and huge
profits continuing to be made by criminal gangs and terrorist
groups.
2. Assuming that the Government's drug policy
is to decrease illegal drug use and its ill effects it is a massive
failure. Young people in the UK love their drugs and are notorious
in Europe for their drug use, especially cannabis and ecstasy
(incidentally the safest of all). The harshest laws in Europe
have had no deterrent effect whatsoever. The British are after
all a freedom-loving race and do not like hypocrisy or being lied
to, and that applies especially to young people who know from
experience that cannabis and ecstasy are virtually harmless. They
are also triggers for having great fun, just like alcohol, but
do not lead to aggression or health problems. They are also not
addictive and do not create knock on crimes such as theft, burglary
and robbery associated with heroin and crack addicts. In my view
they should be decriminalised or legalised immediately.
3. In my view the "war on drugs"
is a civil war waged on our own sons and daughters. Let me tell
you about some current cases to give you a flavour of where Government
policy on drugs leads to at street level.
4. Case X: on a quiet afternoon in Islington
a 19 year old youth is sitting in a barber's shop waiting for
a haircut. Two uniformed officers walk slowly by and look through
the window. The youth puts his hand in his pocket. The police
enter and ask to search him. In a panic he runs out and is chased
onto the estate where he lives, as the police call frantically
for back up. Police vans screech onto the estate with sirens blaring.
A crowd gathers and a woman is knocked over by a policeman and
injured. The boy is caught and dragged over a fence, handcuffed
and taken to the police station. A solicitor is called, he is
interviewed, then released after several hours, bailed to return
pending analysis of what was found in his pocket—two tiny
pieces of cannabis. On charge he says he uses cannabis to help
with his asthma. He appears at the Magistrates Court and is bailed
pending committal to the Crown Court. He indicates a not guilty
plea on legal advice. The defence costs so far are only in the
hundreds of pounds, by the end of the case they may be in the
thousands. And then there are the Prosecution costs, the costs
of the forensic science service, the police, the court staff,
the judge, the jurors. Ultimately thousands of pounds of taxpayers
money will be spent to defend a boy who was doing nothing more
than sitting in the barbers waiting to have his hair cut, but
who ran because Government policy in the form of two over-eager
policemen marked him out as a criminal. He has no convictions
or cautions for drugs. The injured woman had to seek hospital
treatment. And the local youth despise the police even more. I
hope that by the time your inquiry is over that I shall be able
to report a successful outcome to this case. But at what price?
5. Case Y: A young man who has attended
a major English public school, just gaining 2 As and a B at A
level, intending to go to University after a gap year. After the
exams he went out celebrating and bought ten ecstasy tablets for
£50—it's obviously cheaper to buy in bulk and many
young people take two or three a night. He returned with a girlfriend
and arrived home at 8am. He later got up and went out, coming
across two scruffy men in their 20s sitting on the ground only
yards from his door drinking from cans of lager. Still under the
effects of ecstasy he asks if they'd like some. At first they
refuse but then they call him back and buy four for £20.
He makes no profit. They ask for his name and phone number and
he readily supplies it. One offers him a drink from his can and
he accepts. They are in fact undercover policemen waiting to trap
a local crack dealer, but they got lucky. Over the next few weeks
they continually try to buy drugs from the youth but he fobs them
off because in reality he is not a dealer. So eventually they
arrest him and charge him with supplying Class A drugs. The local
lay magistrates decline jurisdiction because any supply of drugs
is serious. The maximum penalty is life imprisonment. The boy's
mother, a university lecture, is distraught. She explains the
trauma the boy suffered as a child, his clinical depression diagnosed
at the age of fourteen and his referral to psychiatric and counselling
services. The prescription drugs he was given had very bad side
effects and he started using ecstasy. He has attempted suicide
in the past. The chance of him avoiding a custodial sentence is
slim according to current sentencing guidelines.
I could tell you many other stories but I hope
these convey the flavour of some of the drugs cases I deal with
every day. Please have the courage to be bold and recommend the
ending of prohibition!
September 2001
|
