Groningen buying MDMA pills

__________________________

📍 Verified store!

📍 Guarantees! Quality! Reviews!

__________________________

▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼

▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲

Groningen buying MDMA pills

Official websites use. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Email: jan. Concerns surrounding increasing MDMA-related criminality coupled with the possibly inappropriate scheduling of MDMA initiated a debate to revise the current Dutch ecstasy policy. An interdisciplinary group of 18 experts on health, social harms and drug criminality and law enforcement reformulated the science-based Dutch MDMA policy using multi-decision multi-criterion decision analysis MD-MCDA. The experts collectively formulated policy instruments and rated their effects on 25 outcome criteria, including health, criminality, law enforcement and financial issues, thematically grouped in six clusters. The experts scored the effect of 22 policy instruments, each with between two and seven different mutually exclusive options, on 25 outcome criteria. The optimal policy model was defined by the set of 22 policy instrument options which gave the highest overall score on the 25 outcome criteria. Implementation of the optimal policy model, including regulated MDMA sales, decreases health harms, MDMA-related organised crime and environmental damage, as well as increases state revenues and quality of MDMA products and user information. This model was slightly modified to increase its political feasibility. Sensitivity analyses showed that the outcomes of the current MD-MCDA are robust and independent of variability in weight values. The present results provide a feasible and realistic set of policy instrument options to revise the legislation towards a rational MDMA policy that is likely to reduce both adverse public health risks and MDMA-related criminal burden. Ecstasy 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine MDMA is a widely used drug, mainly by urban, higher educated, young adults at dance events and house parties Nabben, Typically, ecstasy is used only a few times a year Nabben et al. The basis for this decision was unclear, and still is. Such benefits, as well as the adverse effects and health risks of MDMA, have been recently reviewed Van Amsterdam et al. One may therefore question whether the current scheduling of MDMA is justified. Faced with increasing public awareness of a possibly inappropriate scheduling of MDMA and the growing concerns about MDMA-related crime, many Dutch policymakers and influencers are currently considering a revision of the national MDMA policy. To provide a rational basis for this challenging task, a multidisciplinary group of 18 experts was invited to participate in decision meetings to develop a science-based and politically feasible MDMA policy Hall and Lynskey, In MD-MCDA, weighting factors are assigned to the outcome criteria which allow subsequent summation of effects on a set of unrelated outcomes e. The MCDA approach was previously successfully applied to rank four policy models for alcohol and cannabis Rogeberg et al. The present results may guide the development of feasible and realistic instruments to revise the legislation of a rational MDMA policy that considers both adverse public health risks and MDMA-related criminal burden. A consensus procedure using MD-MCDA was applied with different iterations, considering previously obtained information to reach the next rating; that is, with each iteration, this information is passed on to the next iteration. The different steps in this process are outlined below see also Figure 1. The six steps of the multi-decision multi-criterion decision analysis. Summation of 22 weighted selected policy options gives the overall score final score of a constructed model. The steering group J. The prerequisite for selection was that every expert had a specific expertise and was independent or acted independently, that is, they were not bound by or accountable to political parties or ministries involved in either drug policy or drug enforcement. The expertise represented in the expert panel included the following domains: pharmacology, toxicology, pharmacy, philosophy, ethics, anthropology, drug enforcement, epidemiology, neurobiology, medicine, philosophy of law, criminology, law, national and international drug policy, drug prevention and behavioral sciences. Every drug policy consists of a set of policy instruments with an impact on predefined outcomes. In step 2a, the experts selected 25 outcome criteria e. Table 1 , upper panel. In step 2b, the expert group formulated 22 policy instruments, each having between two and seven options, thus resulting in 95 policy instrument options cf. Table 1. A policy model is defined as a set of distinct choices for each of the 22 policy instruments, and the purpose of the MD-MCDA process is to identify the policy model that achieves the highest overall weighted score on the policy outcomes: the optimal model. To compare this optimal model to other commonly referenced policy proposals, we also defined four drug policy models by identifying how these would be defined in terms of our 22 instruments. These comparison models were a the coffee-shop model, b the adapted coffee-shop model, c the free market and d the repressive model. Models a and b reflect two drug models described in the current Dutch legislation: the coffee-shop model and the adapted coffee-shop model with legal production and delivery of cannabis to the coffee shop Commission Knottnerus, ; Dutch Government, c. Similarly, the free market and the repressive model models c and d with their typical characteristics were constructed by assembling the applicable policy options. After the scoring of all policy options and the weight factors see below , the optimal policy model was automatically generated by combining the 22 highest rated options per policy instrument. In a similar way, the worst policy model was assembled by combining the 22 lowest rated options. In some cases, two to three instrument options with the same score were applicable. The X-shop model was constructed by selecting the applicable set of instrument options which legally impose regulated distribution and sales of ecstasy. The overall score of the five policy models was compared with that of the optimal and worst policy model. Based on their own expertise, the selected experts rated the effect of the policy instrument options on the outcome criteria. In addition, experts shared their expert information with the other members of the panel, and they were provided with an extensive state-of-the-art document, covering the published and grey literature about the 25 outcomes related to ecstasy Van Amsterdam et al. Each of the 22 policy instruments has several possible options resulting in 95 policy instrument options, each of which may have a different impact on each of the 25 policy outcomes. Prior to scoring the 95 policy instrument options, consensus anchor values were set by the experts for each of the 25 outcomes, which represent the estimated maximal negative and maximal positive impact effect that a specific policy instrument can have on the outcome. As a rule, the anchors were set at zero for the current legal situation i. However, for 12 of the 25 outcomes, the status quo more closely approximated the worst or best possible situation. In such cases, the anchors were adjusted to reflect this cf. Table 2 ; e. Scoring was conducted over three days in two parallel groups of experts. To attain a good balance between the ratings, every set of the 22 policy instrument options was scored groupwise i. After the exchange of arguments and new information, consensus about the ratings was usually attained. If not, the average of the individual scores was set as the final score. Following each rating session, group members were asked to rate their confidence in the set of scores just given on a scale from 0 to Finally, experts were given the opportunity in plenary sessions to challenge and adjust the obtained scores at the end of the day. According to MC-MCDA, every outcome criterion within the outcome cluster and the six outcome clusters must be weighed against each other to account for their relative impact on the overall final score of the policy models per se, as well as to adjust for clusters with relatively many outcomes i. First, every expert selected the most important outcome in each cluster and set its weight on Finally, the same procedure was applied for the six weight values W1 of clusters A—F. Table 3. The weighting factor of the cluster with the highest mean value was set at , and the residual five cluster weights W1s were rescaled accordingly related to The mean W2 values were multiplied by the rescaled W1 of the corresponding cluster. The final scores per policy option were obtained by multiplying the option score by the corresponding overall weight factor cf. Consumption of MDMA is not prohibited. The following issues related to MDMA have not been described in Dutch legislation: packaging requirements, age limit for users, price, quality requirements and management and licenses for sale. The mean values of the overall weighting factors are depicted in Table 3. Based on these final scores per policy option, the overall scores of the different policy models were obtained by summation of the appropriate 25 final scores see below for results. Obviously, the worst model and the optimal model reflect the bounds that all possible models will always fall between i. The higher the overall score, the better the model. Tables 4 and 5. Table 5. Figure 2 shows the benefits of the optimal model per outcome compared to the current situation. In particular, the main benefits of the optimal model are gains in health and social benefits, better prevention of MDMA-related organized crime, as well as increased state revenues. These benefits are accomplished by selecting policy instrument options from those described in Table 4 see Supplemental Table S2 for the 22 selected options , including legal requirements for selling ecstasy, monitoring and quality requirements for ecstasy. In the worst possible model, certain policy instrument options had a strong negative impact on the overall score, whereas other options had little or no effect or even a small positive effect on the overall score heat maps are available in the Open Science Framework repository for this project. The 22 policy instrument options that collectively lead to the optimal model i. The final overall score of six policy models, the optimal model and the worst possible model compared to the current situation set as zero. Effects of the optimal policy, consisting of the best-scoring policy instrument options, on the 25 outcomes. In order to position the optimal model, the characteristics of the optimal model and two legal drug models in The Netherlands the coffee-shop model and the adapted coffee-shop model were compared in terms of policy instrument options and overall scores. The characteristics of the three policy models with their applicable instrument options are depicted in Supplemental Table S1. Table 5 depicts the overall score of the optimal model and the two legal policy models, and shows that the optimal model scores better than the adapted coffee-shop model and the coffee-shop model. The characteristics of the optimal model and the X-shop model are described in Table 6. To accommodate both political feasibility and social acceptance of regulated ecstasy sales, the optimal model was slightly adjusted at six minor points to construct a new, a nearly optimal and a politically more feasible model: the X-shop model. Figure 3 summarizes the differences in outcomes between the X-shop model, the optimal model and the other four policy models at cluster level. It shows that the optimal model is superior at all cluster levels, except in some cases for international status. Furthermore, despite the six minor changes introduced, the scores at cluster level of the optimal model and X-shop model are virtually the same which is agreement with minor difference in overall score cf. Effect of six policy models on the six cluster outcomes. Highest possible scores refers to the optimal model. Two types of sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the findings to changes in the scores and the weights that were employed. To explore the first, all the scores with a confidence rating lower than a given threshold were replaced by the highest possible score for each policy option, zero or the lowest possible score for each policy option. Next, we repeated this procedure stepwise with steps of 0. This procedure revealed two clusters: a high scoring better outcome cluster containing the optimal model, the X-shop model, the coffee-shop model and the adapted coffee-shop model, and a low scoring worse outcome cluster containing the free market model and the repression model. The models sometimes changed rank order within their cluster when many estimates were replaced by the highest and lowest possible estimates, but the models in the high cluster never scored equal to or lower than models in the low cluster and vice versa. Inspection of the individual weighting factors shows that the experts ranked all six models in virtually the same way cf. Supplemental Figures S1 and S2. The current MD-MCDA based on experts ratings of 95 policy options on 25 policy outcomes has led to the development and description of an optimal model with the overall best outcome as basis for a new and science-based MDMA policy in The Netherlands. The optimal model proposes regulated MDMA sales and predicts decrements in health harms, MDMA-related organized crime and environmental damage, as well as increments in state revenues, quality of MDMA products and user information. The optional model was then slightly modified into the X-shop model — a model that is considered to be politically more feasible and will presumably lead to health and social benefits, although with a minor increase in the prevalence of use. Presumably, user health is most improved by legal obligations to formulate legal requirements for selling ecstasy, to monitor and to control the quality of ecstasy pills cf. Table 4. Another important element of the optimal model is the firm decrease in the level of MDMA-related organised crime cf. Figure 2. The latter is crucial to obtain societal and political support from the so-called law-and-order political parties that value reductions in crime highly, in particular crime intertwined with Dutch ecstasy production and consumption. Furthermore, the proposed X-shop model provides — based on the ratings given in the assessment — better protection of vulnerable users, although the incrimination of users will slightly increase due to stricter regulation under the optimal regime. According to the proposed X-shop model, the prevalence of ecstasy use will slightly increase because of the higher availability and the implicit governmental legitimation of ecstasy use. On the other hand, better pill quality rules and improved health education will in our view counterbalance the slight increase in ecstasy use and lead to a safer use of ecstasy with an overall reduction in adverse health effects. Figure 3. Despite a slight increase in prevalence of use, an increase in the level of ecstasy dependence is not expected mainly because of the low dependence potential of ecstasy Alderliefste and Damen, ; EMCDDA, ; Van Laar et al. A specific advantage of regulated ecstasy sales in the X-shop model is the modest generation of state revenues consisting of VAT, income tax, fees of license holders and excise duties. More relevant, however, are the financial benefits resulting from a reduction in costs of health care, environmental pollution and crime, including lower expenses for drug enforcement see below. The optimal model includes the inter se option for treaty modification, as provided by Article 41 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The inter se modification is a procedure specifically designed to find a balance between treaty regime stability and the need for change in the absence of consensus, whereby a group of two or more like-minded states could reach agreements among themselves that permit the production, trade and consumption of scheduled substances for non-medical and non-scientific purposes, while minimising the impact on other states and on the goals of the drug conventions Boister and Jelsma, Following international consultations and negotiations through the inter se option, neighboring countries may implement comparable legislation. Legal producers in The Netherlands can then supply high quality MDMA products to consumers in those countries and vice versa. The more countries adapting such legislation, the more effectively MDMA-related organised crime is sidelined. One of the proposed elements of the optimal model is more efficient confiscation of goods and finances obtained by the illegal production of and trade in MDMA, including better coordination with foreign partners. An even more important element of this regime is prioritisation of fighting crime intertwined with the production of and trade in MDMA. However, it is beyond the scope of this investigation to outline initiatives in the frame of more efficient and smarter investigation methods in drug enforcement. Moreover, a number of innovative targets have already been mentioned by the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Justice and Security in their letter to the Dutch parliament describing initial contours of the broad-based offensive against organized, subversive crime Dutch Government a , b , d. The main strength of the current study is that the expert panel consisted of experts from a broad range of expertise domains. Their specific expertise was extended by supplying them with an extensive state-of-the-art literature review about ecstasy, covering all outcome criteria Van Amsterdam et al. Moreover, rating of the policy options was performed in an efficient manner using a structured decision-making model with a broad range of policy instruments and outcomes as the building blocks for a revised national ecstasy policy model. Compared to some other consensus models, the current approach is fully transparent. The judgements and weights currently used by the expert panel can be varied, so that the effects of theses variations on the outcome best model can be easily tested a publicly available website fully disclosing the data facilitates such testing. Moreover, the sensitivity analyses performed indicated the high robustness of the outcomes. For instance, the outcomes of the current MD-MCDA exercise were robust against extreme changes in judgements and weights. However, the impact of this potential bias has been mitigated by a deliberately including experts from law enforcement agencies and experts with a relatively conservative attitude towards the liberalisation of drug laws, and b regularly challenging the experts during the rating sessions to give science-based arguments for their rating. Furthermore, the selection of policy instruments and outcomes was not idiosyncratic but rather based on previous studies on similar issues Nutt et al. Finally, sensitivity analyses showed that the outcomes of the current MD-MCDA are robust and independent of both the uncertainty of the ratings and any extreme position s taken by individual experts. Therefore, we believe that the proposed models represent the currently most adequate evidence-based estimation of benefits and risks of different national ecstasy policies, including The Netherlands and other countries. Given the robustness of these models, it is likely that this will also be true for the MDMA policy in other countries. Supplemental material, sj-pdfjop These results have been obtained thanks to the experts who have carried out their work with great dedication, expertise and enthusiasm. Without them, this result would not have been achieved. Supplemental material: Supplemental material for this article is available online. This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article. As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. J Psychopharmacol. Find articles by Jan van Amsterdam. Find articles by Gjalt-Jorn Ygram Peters. Find articles by Ed Pennings. Find articles by Tom Blickman. Find articles by Kaj Hollemans. Find articles by Joost J Jacobus Breeksema. Find articles by Johannes G Ramaekers. Find articles by Cees Maris. Find articles by Floor van Bakkum. Find articles by Ton Nabben. Find articles by Willem Scholten. Find articles by Tjibbe Reitsma. Find articles by Judith Noijen. Find articles by Raoul Koning. Find articles by Wim van den Brink. Issue date May. Open in a new tab. Policy instruments Policy instrument options Nr. Outcome Maximal negative effect Maximal positive effect 2 Magnitude of use frequency and dose — 50 3 Use by vulnerable groups —50 8 Shift to other more harmful drugs — 25 11 Criminalisation of users — 50 12 Small crime — 50 15 International trafficking of MDMA —10 17 State revenue through VAT 0 18 State revenues through other taxes 0 19 Health-related costs — 50 23 Damage due to international economic boycotts — 0 24 Damage due to international legal counter measures — 0 25 Environmental damage ethical consideration —40 Cluster Outcome criterion cluster item W2 a Overall weight b 1 A Prevalence in the general population 74 3. Only license holders may sell MDMA to users. Possession of a user quantity of MDMA is tolerated and all advertising is allowed. Export of MDMA is legalised and an inter se position for the new model within international drug treaties will be applied for. Predominantly prevention organisations supply of information about health effects and is focused on harm reduction. Adverse effects of MDMA use will be extensively monitored. X-shop model Specifications deviating from the optimal model: a user quantity is legal and larger quantities tolerated, b all advertising is prohibited, c sales of MDMA to users is subjected to pharmaceutical legislation d age limit is 18 years, e export is illegal and f all governmental bodies are responsible for prevention policy. Click here for additional data file. Similar articles. Add to Collections. Create a new collection. Add to an existing collection. Choose a collection Unable to load your collection due to an error Please try again. Add Cancel. Tolerate user quantity, user quantity is legal and large possession tolerated, prohibit all or allow all. Age-related advertising, advertising on the packaging, only business to business, prohibit all or allow all. Trade in ecstasy between companies: regulated, in analogy with commodity legislation, in analogy with pharmaceutical legislation, prohibit or allow. Sales of ecstasy to consumers: regulated, in analogy with commodity legislation, in analogy with pharmaceutical legislation, prohibit or allow. Sanctioning of consumer, seller or none of the two in case of violation of age limit. For sellers of legalised ecstasy: no criminal record and high drug education level or no requirements. Sanctioning QA rules a. Level of monitoring product quality, prevalence and incidents: none, selective, regularly. National, regional, municipality or no governmental body is responsible for drug policy. Production of MDMAb: regulated, in analogy with commodity legislation, in analogy with pharmaceutical legislation, prohibit or allow. The Dutch position is an exceptional position, compliant, adjusted, tolerating, violating, inter se. Prioritisation of fighting crime: low, selective for serious crime, high. Increase efforts to seize profits gained through MDMA production and trading or not. State revenue through VAT c. Selective high priority for serious MDMA-related crime, but low priority for that of consumers. Which government b.

Toleration policy regarding soft drugs and coffee shops

Groningen buying MDMA pills

While recreational use , possession and trade of non-medicinal drugs described by the Opium Law are all technically illegal under Dutch law , official policy since the late 20th century has been to openly tolerate all recreational use while tolerating possession and trade under certain circumstances. This pragmatic approach was motivated by the idea that a drug-free Dutch society is unrealistic and unattainable, and efforts would be better spent trying to minimize harm caused by recreational drug use. Soft drugs include hash , marijuana , sleeping pills and sedatives , while hard drugs include heroin , cocaine , amphetamine , LSD and ecstasy. Policy has been to largely tolerate the sale of soft drugs while strongly suppressing the sale, circulation and use of hard drugs, effectively separating it into two markets. Establishments that have been permitted to sell soft drugs under certain circumstances are called coffee shops. Prosecution for possession, trade and in some rare cases use are typically handled by the municipal government except where large-scale criminal activity is suspected. Notably absent from toleration of drugs is its production, particularly the cultivation of cannabis. This has led to a seemingly paradoxical system where coffee shops are allowed to buy and sell soft drugs but where production is nearly always punished. It was first challenged in court in when a judge found two people guilty of producing cannabis in large quantities but refused to punish them. While the legalization of cannabis remains controversial, the introduction of heroin-assisted treatment in has been lauded for considerably improving the health and social situation of opiate-dependent patients in the Netherlands. Large-scale dealing, production, import and export are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, even if it does not supply end users or coffeeshops with more than the allowed amounts. Exactly how coffeeshops get their supplies is rarely investigated, however. One of the reasons is plant breeding and use of greenhouse technology for illegal growing of cannabis in Netherlands. The drug policy of the Netherlands is marked by its distinguishing between so called soft and hard drugs. An often used argument is that alcohol, which is claimed by some scientists as a hard drug, \[ 15 \] is legal and a soft drug cannot be more dangerous to society if it is controlled. This may refer to the Prohibition in the s, when the U. Prohibition created a golden opportunity for organized crime syndicates to smuggle alcohol, and as a result the syndicates were able to gain considerable power in some major cities. Coffeeshops are also technically illegal but are flourishing nonetheless. However, a policy of non-enforcement has led to a situation where reliance upon non-enforcement has become common, and because of this the courts have ruled against the government when individual cases were prosecuted. This is because the Dutch Ministry of Justice applies a gedoogbeleid tolerance policy with regard to the category of soft drugs: an official set of guidelines telling public prosecutors under which circumstances offenders should not be prosecuted. This is a more official version of a common practice in other European countries wherein law enforcement sets priorities regarding offenses on which it is important enough to spend limited resources. According to current gedoogbeleid the possession of a maximum amount of five grams cannabis for personal use is not prosecuted. Cultivation is treated in a similar way. Cultivation of 5 plants or less is usually not prosecuted when they are renounced by the cultivator. Proponents of gedoogbeleid argue that such a policy practices more consistency in legal protection than without it. Opponents of the Dutch drug policy either call for full legalization, or argue that laws should penalize morally wrong or deviant behavior, whether enforceable or not. In the Dutch courts, however, it has long been determined that the institutionalized non-enforcement of statutes with well defined limits constitutes de facto decriminalization. The statutes are kept on the books mainly due to international pressure and in adherence with international treaties. Importing and exporting of any classified drug is a serious offence. The penalty can run up to 12 to 16 years if it is hard drug trade, maximum 4 years for import or export of large quantities of cannabis. Section 8 of the Road Traffic Act section 1. The Dutch police have the right to do a drug test if they suspect influenced driving. For example, anybody involved in a traffic accident may be tested. Causing an accident that inflicts bodily harm, while under influence of any drug, is seen as a crime that may be punished by up to 3 years in prison 9 years in case of a fatal accident. Suspension of driving license is also normal in such a case maximum 5 years. In there were 20, drug crimes registered by public prosecutors and 4, persons received an unconditional prison sentence \[ 22 \] The rate of imprisonment for drug crimes is about the same as in Sweden , which has a zero tolerance policy for drug crimes. Despite the high priority given by the Dutch government to fighting illegal drug trafficking, the Netherlands continue to be an important transit point for drugs entering Europe. The Netherlands is a major producer \[ 24 \] and leading distributor of cannabis , heroin , cocaine , amphetamines \[ 25 \] \[ 26 \] and other synthetic drugs, and a medium consumer of illicit drugs. Although drug use, as opposed to trafficking , is seen primarily as a public health issue, responsibility for drug policy is shared by both the Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sports, and the Ministry of Justice. The Netherlands has extensive demand reduction programs, reaching about ninety percent of the country's 25, to 28, hard drug users. The number of hard drug addicts has stabilized in the past few years and their average age has risen to 38 years, which is generally seen as a positive trend. Notably, the number of drug-related deaths in the country remains amongst the lowest in Europe. On 27 November , the Dutch Justice Minister Piet Hein Donner announced that his government was considering rules under which coffeeshops would only be allowed to sell soft drugs to Dutch residents in order to satisfy both European neighbors' concerns about the influx of drugs from the Netherlands, as well as those of Netherlands border town residents unhappy with the influx of ' drug tourists ' from elsewhere in Europe. The European Court of Justice ruled in December that Dutch authorities can ban coffeeshops from selling cannabis to foreigners. In the owner of Netherlands's largest cannabis selling coffeeshop was fined 10 million euros for breaking drug laws by keeping more than the tolerated amount of cannabis in the shop. He was also sentenced to a week prison term. In a study of the levels of cannabis , cocaine , MDMA , methamphetamine and other amphetamine in wastewater from 42 major cities in Europe Amsterdam came near the top of the list in every category but methamphetamine. The Netherlands tolerates the sale of soft drugs in 'coffee shops'. A coffee shop is an establishment where cannabis may be sold subject to certain strict conditions, but no alcoholic drinks may be sold or consumed. The Dutch government does not prosecute members of the public for possession or use of small quantities of soft drugs. In the province of North Brabant in the south of the Netherlands, organized crime organizations form the main producer of MDMA , amphetamine and cannabis in Europe. Together with the proximity of the ports of Antwerp and especially Rotterdam where heroin and cocaine enter the European continent, this causes these substances to be readily available for a relative low price. This means that users will not have to rely on more polluted substances with greater health risks. Together with an approach that focuses on easily accessible health care, harm reduction and prevention, this causes the medical condition of the Dutch addicts to be less severe than that of many other countries. The convention prohibits cultivation and trade of naturally occurring drugs such as cannabis; the treaty bans the manufacture and trafficking of synthetic drugs such as barbiturates and amphetamines ; and the convention requires states to criminalize illicit drug possession:. Subject to its constitutional principles and the basic concepts of its legal system, each Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish as a criminal offence under its domestic law, when committed intentionally, the possession, purchase or cultivation of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances for personal consumption contrary to the provisions of the Convention, the Convention as amended or the Convention. The International Narcotics Control Board typically interprets this provision to mean that states must prosecute drug possession offenses. The conventions clearly state that controlled substances are to be restricted to scientific and medical uses. However, Cindy Fazey , former Chief of Demand Reduction for the United Nations Drug Control Programme , believes that the treaties have enough ambiguities and loopholes to allow some room to maneuver. Many countries have now decided not to use the full weight of criminal sanctions against people who are in possession of drugs that are for their personal consumption. The Conventions say that there must be an offence under domestic criminal law, it does not say that the law has to be enforced, or that when it is what sanctions should apply. Despite such grey areas latitude is by no means unlimited. The centrality of the principle of limiting narcotic and psychotropic drugs for medical and scientific purposes leaves no room for the legal possibility of recreational use. Nations may currently be pushing the boundaries of the international system, but the pursuit of any action to formally legalize non-medical and non-scientific drug use would require either treaty revision or a complete or partial withdrawal from the current regime. The Dutch policy of keeping anti-drug laws on the books while limiting enforcement of certain offenses is carefully designed to reduce harm while still complying with the letter of international drug control treaties. This is necessary in order to avoid criticism from the International Narcotics Board, which historically has taken a dim view of any moves to relax official drug policy. In their annual report, the Board has criticised many governments, including Canada, for permitting the medicinal use of cannabis, Australia for providing injecting rooms and the United Kingdom for proposing to downgrade the classification of cannabis, \[ 37 \] which it has since done although this change was reversed by the Home Secretary on 7 May against the advice of its own commissioned report. The liberal drug policy of the authorities in the Netherlands especially led to problems in 'border hot spots' that attracted ' drug tourism ' as well as trafficking and related law enforcement problems in towns like Enschede in the East and Terneuzen , Venlo , Maastricht and Heerlen in the South. In , Gerd Leers , then mayor of the border city of Maastricht, on the Dutch-Belgian border, criticised the current policy as inconsistent, by recording a song with the Dutch punk rock band De Heideroosjes. By allowing possession and retail sales of cannabis, but not cultivation or wholesale, the government creates numerous problems of crime and public safety, he alleges, and therefore he would like to switch to either legalising and regulating production, or to the full repression that his party CDA officially advocates. The latter suggestion has widely been interpreted as rhetorical. He said the practice of allowing so-called coffeeshops to operate had failed. The coalition agreement worked out by the three coalition parties in stated that there would be no change in the policy of tolerance. Prominent CDA member Gerd Leers spoke out against him: cannabis users who now cause no trouble would be viewed as criminals if an outright ban was to be implemented. Van Geel later said that he respected the coalition agreement and would not press for a ban during the current government's tenure. This was nearly half of the coffeeshops that operated within its municipality. This was due to the new policy of city mayor Ivo Opstelten and the town council. Many other towns have done the same in the last 10 years. In , the municipality of Utrecht imposed a Zero Tolerance Policy to all events like the big dance party Trance Energy held in Jaarbeurs. However, such zero-tolerance policy at dance parties are now becoming common in the Netherlands and are even stricter in cities like Arnhem. The two towns Roosendaal and Bergen op Zoom announced in October that they would start closing all coffeeshops , each week visited by up to 25, French and Belgian drug tourists, with closures beginning in February In May the Dutch government announced that tourist are to be banned from Dutch coffeeshops, starting in the southern provinces and at the end of in the rest of the country. In a letter to the parliament, the Dutch health and justice ministers said that, 'In order to tackle the nuisance and criminality associated with coffeeshops and drug trafficking, the open-door policy of coffeeshops will end'. A government committee delivered in June a report about Cannabis to the Dutch government. It includes a proposal that cannabis with more than 15 percent THC should be labeled as hard drugs. In order to qualify for a membership card, applicants would have to be adult Dutch citizens, membership was only to be allowed in one club. In Amsterdam 26 coffeeshops in the De Wallen area were ordered to close their doors between 1 September and 31 August In October , the prohibition of hallucinogenic or ' magic mushrooms ' was announced by the Dutch authorities. On 25 April , the Dutch government, backed by a majority of members of parliament, decided to ban cultivation and use of all magic mushrooms. Amsterdam mayor Job Cohen proposed a three-day cooling period in which clients would be informed three days before actually procuring the mushrooms and if they would still like to go through with it they could pick up their spores from the smart shop. As of 1 December , all psychedelic mushrooms are banned. The relatively recent increase in the cocaine trafficking business has been largely focused on the Caribbean area. Since early , a special law court with prison facilities has been operational at Schiphol airport. In , an average of drug couriers per month were arrested, decreasing to 80 per month by early Contents move to sidebar hide. Article Talk. Read View source View history. Tools Tools. Download as PDF Printable version. In other projects. Wikimedia Commons. This article needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. January Arts Culture. Drug culture Drug liberalization Illegal drug trade Psychedelia. Results of the drug policy. Implications of international law. Developments from — Counterculture Entheogen Smart shop Trip sitter Psychedelic microdosing. Related topics. Law banning 'magic mushrooms'. Daily News. New York. Archived from the original on 12 May Retrieved 12 August Archived from the original on 15 August Retrieved 17 October J Urban Health. PMC PMID Archived from the original on 22 September Retrieved 20 April NBC News. Archived from the original on 14 October Archived from the original on 9 September Archived from the original on 14 May Volkskrant in Dutch. Retrieved 31 January To make the sale, trade and growth of soft drugs not punishable is currently hindered by United Nations treaties. Het Parool in Dutch. Archived from the original on 27 December Two thirds of all Dutch advocate the legalisation of softdrugs. Archived from the original on 2 July Archived PDF from the original on 27 September Archived from the original on 11 December Archived from the original on 7 January Archived from the original on 23 November Retrieved 23 November Archived from the original PDF on 9 January Retrieved 21 August The Guardian. Retrieved 1 May Archived from the original on 26 January BBC News. Archived from the original on 11 August Archived from the original on 31 May Retrieved 30 May Archived from the original on 5 July Archived from the original on 5 January Retrieved 2 January Archived from the original on 23 April Archived from the original on 15 February Retrieved 19 December Archived from the original on 20 July The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 15 November Archived from the original on 1 February Retrieved 15 January Mensinga; et al. Archived PDF from the original on 17 December Retrieved 21 September Australia: ABC News. Archived from the original on 25 July Archived from the original on 22 December Archived from the original on 1 June Retrieved 28 May Archived from the original on 13 February Retrieved 28 June Archived from the original on 10 April Retrieved 20 June Atlantic Wire. Archived from the original on 26 December Retrieved 23 June Archived from the original on 30 December Retrieved 30 December Archived from the original on 25 October Archived from the original on 26 November Retrieved 25 November Archived from the original on 6 February The Independent. Agence France-Presse. Archived from the original on 6 October Archived from the original on 30 April International Herald Tribune. Archived from the original on 8 August Retrieved 2 September National cannabis legalization. Law Drug laws, policies, and regulations. Bangladesh India Laos South Korea. Canada cannabis United States alcohol , cannabis , harm reduction , psilocybin Mexico cannabis. Netherlands articles. Part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Cycling Public transport Rail transport Road transport. Regulation of therapeutic goods. Categories : Drug policy of the Netherlands Law of the Netherlands. Hidden categories: Webarchive template wayback links CS1 Dutch-language sources nl All articles with dead external links Articles with dead external links from June CS1 maint: archived copy as title Webarchive template archiveis links CS1 errors: missing periodical Articles with Dutch-language sources nl Articles with short description Short description is different from Wikidata Wikipedia indefinitely semi-protected pages Use dmy dates from September Wikipedia articles in need of updating from January All Wikipedia articles in need of updating. Related Drug culture Drug liberalization Illegal drug trade Psychedelia. Cannabis portal Medicine portal Agriculture portal. Part of a series on. Outline Category Portal.

Groningen buying MDMA pills