Difficulties arise at problem definition, since there is lack of agreement on what the terms 'drug,' 'trafficker,' and 'user' denote. What drug laws exist arbitrarily divide harmful substances between the legal and illegal market, and broad discretion characterizes enforcement and judicial practice. The role of criminal justice in drug control must be viewed as a last resort, to be employed only when all other remedies of social and mental hygiene have failed. Belgian law now regulates drug use only in the realm of sports, but the devastating human proclivity for addictive toxicants raises the issue of governmental intervention to forestall the self-destruction of its citizens. Canada exemplifies the dilemma of a country where the law equally forbids soft and hard drugs, thus criminalizing an ever increasing population of youthful soft-drug users. Finer differentiation between criminal drug abuse and social or experimental contact with soft drugs is needed. Repressive sanctions of the latter should be replaced with educational and treatment responses. The most refined and extensive treatment services are to be found in the United States. For example, California has methadone dispensaries, detoxification clinics, and counseling centers. Belgian efforts in this area remain undeveloped and lacking in resources. A total of 25 footnotes are provided.