Ideas into movement
Boost TNI's work
50 years. Hundreds of social struggles. Countless ideas turned into movement.
Support us as we celebrate our 50th anniversary in 2024.
Threshold quantities (TQs) for drug law and policy are being experimented with across many jurisdictions. States seem attracted to their apparent simplicity and use them to determine, for example, whether: a possession or supply offence is made out (e.g. Greece); a matter should be diverted away from the criminal justice system (e.g. Portugal); or a case should fall within a certain sentencing range (e.g. UK).
Looking at examples from the EU and beyond, however, it is becoming clear that there are no ‘magic numbers’ in drug policy and that this tool brings its own complications and pit-falls. This briefing will therefore seek to provide an overview of the current discussion around TQs and will explore the mechanism of TQs including their benefits and drawbacks as a policy and legal tool.
Key Points
CONCLUSION
In an ideal world, appropriate charging decisions and sentencing would be decided by an incorruptible and indiscriminate agent of the state on a case by case basis taking into account all the relevant circumstances and based on an objective, evidence-based index of harm. Ours is not, however, an ideal world, but an arbitrary and often discriminatory or corrupt one and always one of stretched resources where any short hand that can save the time of the police officer on the street or the judge at court is welcome to policy-makers.
In this regard TQs do not import any magic but are an imperfect tool, importing their own risk of wrongful conviction and disproportionate response or simply being impractical in the field. In addition, there are clear gaps in the research and rational that underpins TQs not least because the lack of an objective evidence-based harm index (were such an index even possible bearing in mind the importance of local factors).
The value and utility of TQs will depend on the robustness, integrity and resources of a State’s institutions. Where there is an appetite for this policy tool, the international case-studies provide some tips for best practice:
In short, flexibility, practicality and scrutiny should accompany any TQ scheme and policy makers should not lose sight of what is really significant – intention, culpability, and harm.
This paper is indebted to the interventions made at the TNI-EMCDDA Expert Seminar on Threshold Quantities in Lisbon on 20 January 2011, and the exhaustive data collection and comparative analysis undertaken by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), from which much of the data and country examples are taken.
See also: How to determine personal use in drug legislation: The “threshold controversy” in the light of the Italian experience, by Grazia Zuffa, Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 15, August 2011
May 2011
Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 14