Articles



I: The Dutch drug policy: a special strategy in the war on drugs, by Mike Ridderhof
(The Collage, winter 2000)

Before 1976 the Dutch drug-policy was officially similar to the policy adopted by our neighbouring countries. In that year the law on drugs was changed and a distinction was made between soft-drugs and hard-drugs and between drug-users and drug-suppliers. Soft-drugs are the less harmful drugs like marihuana and hashish, hard-drugs are the more dangerous ones, including, among others, Heroin, Cocaine, LSD, XTC, amphetamines and hash-oil. This law, and the policy resulting from it, is aimed at three things: The protection of the individual’s health, his or her immediate surroundings and the society in general.

Generally speaking the Dutch policy considering hard-drugs is easier to understand than the policy on soft-drugs. On transporting, producing and selling of hard drugs are severe sentences like jail-sentences up to 16 years and huge fines. For users of hard-drugs the policy has become milder. Though a police-report is made and the drugs are taken from a person, he or she won't be punished for possession of up to 0.5 grams of hard-drugs. As a result of this, more or less, "gedogen " of small amounts of hard-drugs it was possible to start helping these drug-users more actively.

In the first place small centres for hard-drug users could be opened, most of the times funded by municipal funds. These centres, most of them in the larger cities in the Netherlands, have several advantages: As junkies could be found in the entire city before, now they are most of the time in the neighbourhood of this centre. This way the inconvenience for most of the city-dwellers is reduced. However, as these centres are still in the cities, for a part of the city-dwellers (i.e. those living near the centres) the disturbance has increased by this. These centres can also play an important role in needle-exchange programs. As the name says, in such a program a drug-user can change a used needle for a sterile one. This way the number HIV-infected addicts has been reduced.

A second activity resulting from this is the provision of free Methadone to seriously addicted people. The provision of Methadone was a program started in the main cities of the Netherlands two years ago. The first goal was to reduce the amount of Methadone provided per person time by time, thus helping them to do away with drugs. This didn't work. Now it is being done to stabilise the health-circumstances of the addicts, by examining them on a regular basis when they are coming for their Methadone. This way the spread of AIDS, tuberculosis and hepatitis B and C can be reduced. The first results are positive.

So, by these changes in the law and the practice resulting from it as mentioned above, social helpers can more easily get in contact with the drug users . These increased contacts encourage addicts to do away with drugs if they want to (e.g. in one of the 12 rehabilitation-centres in the country), but also the role social workers can play, helping the addicts with their health or even just treating them as humans can be considered valuable. Anyway, there's no doubt that the living conditions of users of hard-drugs have in general been improved by these measures.

Where the difference in the policy towards suppliers and users of hard-drugs is quite clear, this difference is less clear considering soft-drugs. The Dutch policy on soft-drugs is based on two ideas: In the first place the soft- and hard-drug scene had to be split. By splitting these scenes, the possibility that users of soft-drugs would get in contact with hard-drugs was reduced. Secondly, the firm belief that if these scenes are split and the people are allowed to experiment with the less damaging drugs, less people will feel the need to experiment with hard-drugs. It was decided that people would be "gedoogd" to possess 5 grams of Marihuana and grow five hemp-plants for private use. But how to get these products?

The import of marihuana is still prohibited. There’s a strict control at the main harbours and the airports and regularly the main roads to the neighbouring countries are controlled too. If you get caught importing or exporting soft-drugs, you might face a jail-sentence up to 4 years and a fine up to 100.000 Dutch guilders.

Growing hemp is prohibited too, unless it is done for medical experiments or for the production of rope, quality paper or clothing . In both cases one needs the permission of the government. In case you want to grow hemp for the production of marihuana, you risk a two-year jail-sentence. Nevertheless, the goods needed to start with a plant are easily obtainable. As an illegal product most of this kind of production is done indoors, so one needs equipment comparable to that used in greenhouses, which can be bought in an ordinary shop. If you would go to a shop 20 times to buy 5 plants “for private use”, you will have quite a harvest after a while. In case you are caught and the police finds out you evaded taxes, you will be sentenced for that too . On the other hand, according to an article in a regional Dutch newspaper last year, if you decide to tell the tax-office, they won’t tell the police. Unfortunately the website of the tax-office couldn't confirm this.

When there’s a harvest, it has to be sold. This used to be done at people's homes, often the same people who could provide hard-drugs. As one of the government's targets was the division of these two scenes they "invented" an other option: the "coffee-shop". These coffee-shops are recognisable for their particular smell filling half the street, the hemp-leafs painted on the front-windows and the weird looking people inside and in the immediate surroundings. Entering these shops and ordering coffee is doomed to fail it is said. You can get some cake there, space-cake.

According to the law these shops are not allowed, but are being "gedoogd". But to be "gedoogd" as a coffee-shop there are rules again. (As you see, studying law in this country is very interesting). The mayor of the city should agree to the opening of this coffee-shop in the first place. Being a coffee-shop owner the most important rules you should adhere to are as follows:
- No quantities larger than five grams per person may be sold at one time
- No hard-drugs may be sold
- Advertisements for drugs are not allowed
- No annoyance may be caused in the neighbourhood
- No drugs may be sold to under-aged people (younger than 18) and they are not
allowed to enter the “coffee-shop”
- No alcohol may be sold
- Coffee-shops can have a maximum supply of 500 grams If any of these rules are broken the major of the city has the power to close the shop again.

There is one difficulty here. Producing marihuana is, except for the purposes mentioned above, prohibited. Selling it in coffee-shops is being “gedoogd”, but transporting it is illegal too. How does it get to the coffee-shop? Officially no-one knows and as the writers of “The Undutchables” remarked quite clear: “…no traffic jams caused by wholesalers delivering their goods in 30g (the quantity that used to be “gedoogd”, MR) increments are ever reported.”

Although the implementation of the policy on soft-drugs looks quite strange, it does seem to work. The number of people that have experiences with soft-drugs is relatively high. On the other hand, the number of hard-drug addicts is quite low in this country.

So both in the soft-drug as well as in the hard-drug scene this policy seems to have positive results: The number of hard-drug users is relatively low and their health-circumstances pretty good. In the coffee-shops people who want to can obtain their soft-drugs out of the illegal sphere and it seems that the policy-makers were right and the number of people interesting in experimenting with hard-drugs has not been increased, probably even reduced, by the "gedogen*" of soft-drugs.

The Dutch drug-policy gave the Netherlands one issue in the international field in which they followed their own course. Following this course the government had to deal with internal critics, but in particular with critics from other countries, which had a negative opinion most of the times. In the late 1990's more and more countries, having difficulties with the problems caused by drug-addicts within their own borders, became interested in the Dutch model. In this century we'll see whether the Dutch policy will remain a strange strategy, or whether it will become the leading strategy in the global war on drugs.

Mike Ridderhof is a student of policy and management in international organisations / international relations at the State University of Groningen, the Netherlands.

*As nothing which has to do with drugs is legal in the Netherlands it is important to explain one word from the Dutch language, crucial in the Dutch drug-policy: “gedogen”. According to the dictionary “gedogen” would mean something like “brook, tolerate, allow or suffer ” Translating it with “allow”, for example, would lead to a major misconception of the entire policy. The right translation would be something like: “Something is prohibited, but if you break the law on this point, you won’t be punished.”


II: Welcome to fortress Europe? A criticism of the European Union’s visa policy, by Mike Ridderhof (The Collage, summer 2002)

For all those people who recognise something out of their own lives in this article

 Claudia had just finished her chat with Ivan. She had met him last summer at a summer camp in Slovakia. It really was love on first sight and together they had a great time. Unfortunately after two weeks the summer camp came to an end and they both had to go back to their own countries. Nevertheless they decided to listen to their feelings and give their relationship a chance. It would become hard, but Ivan was about to finish his study of the German language and culture at the university of Skopje, Macedonia. Afterwards he would come to France, where Claudia was living, to spend some time together. In the meantime they kept in touch by sending lots of emails and chatting at least three times a week. The internet had really turned the world into a global village.

December 2000 Ivan had graduated and wanted to leave for his girl in France. He had saved enough money for the flight and also the expenses in Nancy wouldn’t be a problem. He just needed to get that visa. Friends of his from Western Europe had told him it wasn’t a problem for them to get one – if they needed one at all. They just went to the embassy, gave their passports, waited for a few hours, got the stamp, paid and left. He had heard weirder stories from people in his own country and it also took a while to receive his visa for Slovakia. But well, France was a western European country and with these Schengen agreements everything should be well organised.

That evening he sat on his balcony, drinking a cup of coffee. He was sad, very sad. It had taken him hours to get into the embassy. There he had shown his passport to the man at the counter, the man had looked at it and had sent him away. He didn’t have a steady job; the only way to go to France would be by invitation of a person or organisation in that country. He was mad, so many people travelling, why not him, after all he saved enough money not to be a burden to anyone. He wasn’t a second-class civilian, was he? He phoned Claudia, she was surprised. She hadn’t heard of any difficulties at embassies before, but well, she said, “don’t worry, tomorrow I’ll post my invitation to you and I’ll send a copy to our embassy.”

Two weeks later the postman brought his long expected letter from France. Actually he had hoped to be in France already… Again he queued in front of the embassy, again it took him hours and again he was sent away. They also needed proof that Claudia had enough income, at least 1000 euro a month. “Sure she does not,” he told the man, “she’s a student, what do you expect?” It wasn’t wise to lose his temper, but he started to lose hope and queuing all the time didn’t make it easier either. “Why didn’t you say this last time?” But the man only responded that the person inviting him didn’t have to be the same person as the one giving the guarantee. This time the man gave him some additional information. “Why didn’t I have this at the beginning”, Ivan asked himself. He read it through …

It was no use. In the worst case, the person who gave a guarantee would have to pay more than 75.000 euro. Of course that wouldn’t be the case, he went there for Claudia, not to become a thief. He got his MA, what did they think? Anyhow, if he would be in Claudia’s position he wouldn’t know who to ask to give a guarantee for such an amount of money, for a person he or she doesn’t know.

He decided to read more about the subject. In this European Union people could travel from country to country even without showing their passports. The politicians really believed in this freedom of movement of people, didn’t this count for people from abroad? He understood many people wanted to come to the EU to work, the wages were much higher than in most other countries in the world and he also understood that the influx of too many foreigners was seen as a risk for the stability of the social security programmes in these states, maybe even for the states as such. But how did this correspond with the belief of multi-ethnic states? After all it was the European Union who wanted the former Yugoslavians to believe this was the only way to live together.

He didn’t even want a job in France; he just wanted to see his girl, to find out how it would be if they’d spend more time together. She was 24; old enough to vote, allowed to drive a car, studying at the university, but according to the politicians not grown-up enough to invite a friend. And still the government was wondering why the youth had so little interest in politics? Why would she be the one travelling all the time? She still had to finish her studies. Was he waiting for her only to find out they weren’t that much in love as he thought? Was he keeping her waiting all the time; waiting for something that maybe didn’t exist?

Claudia didn’t manage to find someone to give a guarantee for Ivan. During her holidays she travelled to Macedonia twice. But it was hard. Ivan couldn’t visit her and while being in Macedonia she felt some kind of jealousy among the other people, was it real? It wasn’t fair she could travel the world so easily, but she could never take her friend. Ivan got a job; he had to go on with his life. It wasn’t a very good job, but at least he had one and could earn his living. They drifted apart.

Claudia had just finished her chat with Ivan. They decided to break up. Claudia had no future in Macedonia and there was no way Ivan could come to France. The world had become a global village… With city gates and high walls between the different quarters.

The author wishes to express his gratitude to Mr Orhan Demirovski and Mr Dave Holt for their support

Mike Ridderhof is final-year student of International Relations at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands.

Afterthought: Indeed many citizens of the European Union don’t know how hard it is for foreigners to obtain visa. Actually nobody cares; contrary to the interest they show in the way their governments are dealing with asylum-seekers. Yet it is strange. In the Charter of the European Union there are the famous four freedoms, including freedom of movement. For EU-citizens, that is.

Over the years an EU-visa policy has developed. Designed after the examples of the Benelux Customs Union and the Nordic Passport Union, and developed parallel with the Schengen agreements, EU-visa policy started with the treaty of ‘Maastricht’. In the following years it was extended and after ‘Amsterdam’ the Schengen agreements became part of EU-law. Politicians claimed there were many advantages. People now get visas for the entire Schengen-area and practically all EU-member states use the same criteria to let foreigners in. True, but the new visa-policy was not a compromise, but rather a combination of all the former visa-policies of the EU-member states, and as such it became very restrictive.

Where, for example, people who fulfilled the conditions had in the old situation the right to receive a visa and enter the Benelux, nowadays this right has disappeared. There are more and vaguer conditions, one doesn’t know exactly how to fulfil them and even if one does, it doesn’t give a right to receive a visa. Moreover, even with a visa one can be sent back at the border, when one doesn’t fulfil the additional requirements to enter the country.

The visa-policy of the EU-member states becoming more restrictive is absolutely contradictory to the Helsinki Agreement of 1975, which all the present EU and Schengen-member states signed. Considering visa-policy one of the most important ideas of this text, as expressed in the chapter on Human Contacts, was that the policy towards citizens of the Eastern European countries would never become harsher than in 1975 and every country had to try to make the policies more liberal. That people like Claudia and Ivan would have been much appreciated in 1975 the text shows by stating, “The participating states intend to further the development of contacts and exchanges among young people.” Unfortunately, 25 years later, 10 years after the end of the cold war and the disappearance of the ‘Red Enemy’ there’s no way a normal student from the Schengen area can invite a foreigner in a legal way without the help of other people.  

*This article has been quoted in the "Newsletter del centro di documentazione e ricerca per la cittadinanza attiva Anno 2, n. 2, gennaio 2004"
*If the link above doesn't work, please click here for a copy of the newsletter mentioned. 
Created by Mike L.H. Ridderhof and Ridderhof.net. Copyright © 1995-2006. The help of many people is gratefully acknowledged. Though we try to ensure all information is correct, Ridderhof.net cannot be held responsible for any inaccurate data appearing on the site, nor for any consequences of the use of these data by the visitors.

© 1995-2006 Ridderhof.net. All rights reserved. webmaster(at)ridderhof.net