U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Toward an "Americanization" of Dutch Drug Policy?

NCJ Number
128683
Journal
Justice Quarterly Volume: 7 Issue: 2 Dated: (June 1990) Pages: 391-420
Author(s)
I H Marshall; O Anjewierden; H Van Atteveld
Date Published
1990
Length
30 pages
Annotation
The purpose of this paper is to describe the main features of the Dutch approach to the control of mind-altering drugs, the changes in Dutch drug policies since the early 1980's, and the national and international factors involved in the apparent redirection of Dutch drug policy.
Abstract
Dutch drug policy always has been based on a pragmatic concern with "harm reduction" and tolerance. Although the basic liberal philosophical foundations of Dutch drug policies have not changed over the years, a shift toward a tougher drug policy has been seen since the early 1980's; there have been more incarceration of drug addicts and expansion of prison capacity. The Schengen Agreement is discussed as one particular international pressure to change Dutch laws on drugs. The agreement demands harmonization of Dutch drug legislation with the surrounding countries of France, West Germany, Belgium, and Luxembourg by 1990. The agreement requires a forceful fight against illegal drug trafficking and the efficient coordination of such efforts. Various other national and international factors in the toughening of the Dutch drug laws are also discussed. However, the authors do not see an Americanization of the Dutch drug policy as yet because of the same pragmatic basis of their overall drug policy. This is shown by the Dutch drug policy's current selective orientation towards gaining access to the profits of drug trafficking, minimizing public order problems resulting from drug use, and attempting to conform to international demands for more repressive measures. 2 tables, 20 footnotes, and 54 references