31.738
Bearbeitungen
Drug Law Reforms: Strategies and Obstacles: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
Drug Law Reforms: Strategies and Obstacles (Quelltext anzeigen)
Version vom 29. April 2018, 20:06 Uhr
, 20:06, 29. Apr. 2018→Drug Control: A Mega-Trilemma
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
| Zeile 6: | Zeile 6: | ||
It is no secret that the international drug control system with all its worldwide conventions and national anti-drug laws is far from perfect. Moreover, it seems not only incapable of effectively reaching its goals, but to add damage in both the material world and in the legal system to its mere inefficiency. If people speak of Teubner's Trilemma when they refer to a law that either remains ineffective or becomes destructive to society or the legal system itself, then the surprising triad characterising the consequences of insufficient structural coupling in the drug field - adding social and dogmatic destructiveness to mere ineffectiveness - would justify to speak in this case not only of a Teubner Trilemma, but of a Mega-Trilemma. | It is no secret that the international drug control system with all its worldwide conventions and national anti-drug laws is far from perfect. Moreover, it seems not only incapable of effectively reaching its goals, but to add damage in both the material world and in the legal system to its mere inefficiency. If people speak of Teubner's Trilemma when they refer to a law that either remains ineffective or becomes destructive to society or the legal system itself, then the surprising triad characterising the consequences of insufficient structural coupling in the drug field - adding social and dogmatic destructiveness to mere ineffectiveness - would justify to speak in this case not only of a Teubner Trilemma, but of a Mega-Trilemma. | ||
It is not the aim of this contribution to give an in-depth evaluation of the unsatisfoactory effects of the global strategy of drug control - a system of a web of national anti-drug legislation on the basis of the three international conventions of 1961, 1971, and 1988, respectively. Suffice it to say that drug control efforts - as strong and costly as they may be - have neither been able to reduce the availability of drugs worldwide, nor did they lead to reduced drug quality or higher drug prices on the most relevant consumer markets (Werb et al. 2013). In other words, there are enormous efforts to combat drugs on the side of the law, and there is the drug market on the other side. And between them there is indifference. The law is being acted upon, and the market continues with its own dynamics. Lowered or increased efforts on the side of the law do not disturb the dynamics of the market. Both subsystems work - in effect - with utmost indifference to the other. Unbelievable, but true. | |||
As far as the | |||
== The First Choice: Continuation, Escalation or Regulation?== | == The First Choice: Continuation, Escalation or Regulation?== | ||