March 14, 1998

The Age, Australia
By Paul Heinrichs

editorial@theage.com.au

http://www.theage.com.au/

UNTYING THE DRUG KNOT

Just 100 young pot smokers are at the core of the Victoria Police’s step-by-step attempt to cut the Gordian knot that has made drug law reform almost impossible in this state.

The offenders, mostly men aged 17 to 21, became the "guinea pigs" of a six-month cannabis cautioning system on trial in Melbourne’s northern suburbs, aimed at diverting them away from court appearances and towards health advice centres.

Although people were eligible for the cautions for carrying up to 50 grams of cannabis (a bag that might cost $600) for personal use, more than 80 of those involved had only 5 grams or less, enough for a couple of joints.

The scheme is being evaluated for a report to the chief commissioner, Mr Neil Comrie, within weeks. It has already been lifted for a statewide trial in Western Australia, and is being examined by other forces.

Mr Comrie said this week that he had been encouraged by initial reports of the trial in Broadmeadows and would consider whether to extend it statewide. "We will then start turning our minds to whether or not we ought to include other drugs in that program," he said.

Although the northern suburbs scheme is only a small step in policing, it is a giant leap for the philosophical approach to drug law enforcement.

It amounts to a de facto decriminalisation of cannabis for low-level users who are not trying to deal or committing other offences, a position that was not obtainable less than two years ago. "It’s a step in the right direction, and an important step," says the drugs expert Professor David Penington.

It was only in June 1996 that the proposal by Professor Penington, head of the Premier’s Drug Advisory Council, for decriminalisation of minor cannabis usage was overwhelmingly rejected by the coalition. This was despite the recommendation having come forward after a long inquiry and report, and being made for two significant reasons.

The first was to eliminate the waste of police and court resources involved in prosecuting minor users of cannabis. The second was that in order to reach young people at risk of harm from using more serious drugs like heroin, it was necessary to establish and maintain credibility. The inquiry judged that was impossible while the law still criminalised the use of a substance widely accepted in the community and recognised as much less dangerous than tobacco or alcohol.

"In fact," says Professor Penington, "the Government judged it couldn’t proceed with our recommendations, because there wasn’t sufficient public support. There was too much public concern about it. If in fact we are moving in this direction, the community is getting used to looking at things in a different way."

The Penington approach to heroin was that first-offence heroin users should not be taken to court but get an official warning and referred to counselling. It did not involve changing the criminal status of heroin.

Now working on drug law issues for Australia’s capital city lord mayors, Professor Penington believes there has been a substantial change in police attitudes and the trial was "an attempt to find a way to implement the sort of approach we had recommended. But it was done in their own way, and not using the words we used".

The most crucial aspect of the trial was that it could be instituted under police operating rules, a procedure which did not require fresh legislative authority. It could be instituted by Mr Comrie himself, although the Police Minister would have been informed or consulted. Two senior police are in charge of the trial: Superintendent Peter Macievic (policy branch), and Chief Superintendent Peter Driver, in charge of I District, covering suburbs from Brunswick to Broadmeadows and Essendon.

As well as being in line with the Penington thinking, it was an extension of the police caution system that had worked successfully for many years for a variety of offenders under 17 and for adults caught shop-stealing.

Mr Macievic said the trial required extensive preparation time in testing and design. Criteria also required offenders had no prior drug offences, or any other offence at the time of apprehension. This is why just 100 people were eligible out of the thousands of police contacts over the trial period.

According to Ms Angie Laussel, acting executive director of the Court Network support service, keeping young people out of courts is crucial if at all possible. She says that convictions for minor cannabis use still could have serious consequences in people being blocked from a number of career paths. It also could lead to shame and banishment for people in traditional families.

The trial began on 21 July last year, and is continuing in that area. A key element of the caution is that people are given a form with comprehensive information on cannabis’s effects and dangers, especially for long-term users.