Update from Europe, Part 1: Berlin

by David Hewson

Guten Tag from Berlin, Germany. It's a great city and the weather is gorgeous, so the lure of a patio beer was unavoidable.

I've been in living and working in Germany since September, which has given me the opportunity to see another country's drug policies first-hand (check out the blog post I wrote last fall, about the relative peacefulness of drunken Oktoberfesters).

I've also had the chance to travel and meet a lot of different people in the drug policy reform movement. It brought me to the UK last month (full update coming!), and it's why I'm in Berlin now.

My trip has also shown me the power of putting yourself out there and making connections, and the role that students can play. So apart from just telling you what I've been up to, I also want to tell you how things came together in the first place.

Here's what's been happening:


Meeting with Frank Tempel

Wednesday, May 23

photo credit: Frank-Tempel.de

My trip to Berlin happened because Annie Machon, the director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) Europe, invited me to join her in a meeting with Frank Tempel, drugs spokesperson for "Die Linke" party in Germany, and a former police officer who has become one of the outspoken critics of drug prohibition in German politics. He seemed like a natural ally for Annie and LEAP Europe - like LEAP members, Frank has used his own personal story to show people the harm caused by his actions as a drug law enforcer, and the need for change.

Apart from the fact that I speak German and could help translate, Annie was also excited to have someone from Students for Sensible Drug Policy present, because of the way LEAP and SSDP have worked together in North America. Many LEAP speaking events in the USA and Canada are set up as speaking tours at SSDP chapters, and a complementary relationship has emerged: LEAP speakers provide an element of authority and credibility to the students' drug policy reform message, while the SSDP chapter structure make speaking tours work financially (speaking tours instead of individual engagements brings down costs) and the energy to make the events a success. LEAP is hoping that something similar can happen in Europe.

The meeting went very well: Annie and Frank quickly saw eye-to-eye on the issues and the role that law enforcement officials can play in the drug reform debate. They agreed to stay in contact and take advantage of the different things they're working on, including LEAP co-founder Jack Cole's visit to Berlin in June.

Click here to see what Frank's website had to say about our meeting (in German).

How the meeting happened

Annie (left) and Jason Reed, director of LEAP UK (right), spoke at the SSDP UK conference in London, which I attended (full update coming!).

photo credit: Joseph Tynan

At the conference, I made it my goal to ask at least one good question per speaker, so that people would:

1. know that I exist,
2. remember me, and
3. see that I had something intelligent to say.

I asked Annie a question and then talked to her in person at the end of her session; she found out I was living in Germany and spoke German (ding ding ding!), and asked me to join her on her trip to Berlin.

If I hadn't spoken up, I never would have had this opportunity.

And how did the Frank Tempel meeting happen in the first place?

Annie received an email forwarded through LEAP USA, from a university student in Hamburg named Florian, who was in contact with Frank Tempel and familiar with LEAP. Florian thought it would be good for the two organizations to meet, and emailed his idea to LEAP USA. Annie agreed, contacted Frank, and the meeting was arranged. It was that easy.

Sometimes what you know can seem completely obvious - but to someone else, it's a revelation. All Florian did was throw his idea out there in the world. Again, if you don't speak up, nothing happens.

(Final, interesting note: there's a Canadian connection here - Annie was recruited into LEAP by David Bratzer, a Canadian LEAP member in Victoria, who has spoken at our CSSDP conferences! Here's a video of him discussing LEAP at our 2009 Vancouver Conference.)


Meeting with the German Hemp Association (Deutscher Hanf Verband)

Thursday, May 24

photo credit: Deutscher Hanf Verband

On Thursday, May 24 - i.e. today - I met with two members of the German Hemp Association, Georg Wurth (left) and Max Plenert (right - I'm in the middle). Both have been working in drug activism for over a decade, and accumulated a ton of experience along the way.

We discussed the situation in our different countries (I got a familiar "what the heck is Canada doing?!!!" when I told them about Bill C-10), LEAP in Europe, and the role Germany and Canada can play in what happens next.

Some interesting points to pass on:

1. Because of its own experience with Nazi authoritarianism, Germany has developed excellent freedom-of-speech legislation, and its citizens tend to be much less complacent about free speech issues in the UK or America. This makes it attractive to organizations like LEAP Europe that have a controversial message.

That said, there are still things that get in the way of people speaking out. German police unions can be very hierarchical, and lower-level police officials that speak out against drug prohibition are often harshly rebuked. This, of course, shows the role that LEAP can play in providing a platform for law enforcement officials to "come out" against prohibition.

2. German society is, in some important ways, very decentralized. This creates challenges for drug reform advocates, but also provides some opportunities.

Firstly, Germany's different regions seem to go their own way on drug policy issues, so there are different things happening around the country. If you're the German Hemp Association, this makes it hard to coordinate things nationally, and if you're Annie Machon, it's hard to know who to talk to as you get LEAP Europe started. There's also not one, but TWO national police unions - one that's more progressive and open to a new approach on drugs, and one that's more conservative, and isn't.

But the regional differences also provide opportunities. For example, while very conservative parts of the country like Bavaria seem completely uninterested in drug policy reform, Hamburg has a safe-injection site, and the conservative mayor of Frankfurt has defied her party and promoted more humane drug treatment policies.

Another difference: universities.

North American students' lives are often centred around their universities; in addition to studying, they often live on-campus, play sports, go to parties - and attend events like the ones held by SSDP. They are a natural recruiting opportunity for activist organizations, and even non-students from around the university often get pulled in.

German universities tend to be more academics-only; the students live off-campus, play sports in unassociated clubs, and have fewer on-campus events. For Georg and Max of the German Hemp Association, it means that they've had to hustle for every new member, since they don't have the natural funneling opportunity that universities provide for SSDP in North America. But the way I see it, the people they do get are more likely to stay engaged once they graduate, which is an issue for SSDP.

3. Like many reform activists I've met, Georg and Max are frustrated by the fact that people just don't seem to get the injustice of it all.

Getting people to see that it's unjust to criminalize people for nonviolent drug offences is a German problem too. From their perspective, the only recent example of the public outcry against law enforcement actions was when police used water cannons and pepper spray against people protesting the placement of a new train station in Stuttgart. The reason? The injured were largely middle-class, and that's different - and newsworthy.

Again, this is where LEAP Europe can play a valuable role, by bringing attention to injustices that are often ignored.

How the meeting happened

Quick updates were key.

Two hours after our meeting with Frank was over, I logged onto Twitter and found this:

@davidcssdp @EuropeLEAP who do you meet? how about a meeting with @hanfverband german hemp association or green party antiprohibitionists?

— Maximilian Plenert (@mind_shifter) May 22, 2012

So basically:

1. Frank's website already had a report of our meeting, and
2. Georg and Max tweeted it, then found me on Twitter, and wanted to know if I could meet with them.

I called them, set a time for today, and that was it.

This wasn't the first time things happened via Twitter; the Scottish Naloxone interview I did in April also came together that way (more information in my UK update, coming soon!). So I guess the take-home message is, you get a lot of opportunities through Twitter - if you can manage the constant stream of information without losing your mind!

All in all, a good couple of days: interesting possibilities, new allies, and a renewed respect for speaking up, both online and off. Try it. Exciting things can happen.

Take part in our Naloxone interview - with Scots!

by David Hewson

Interview naloxone professionals from Scotland! UPDATE: the details for this interview have now been finalized!!

Let us know your thoughts! 

Ok CSSDPers, we've got an interesting opportunity here!

As most of you already know, the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs passed a resolution last week to promote naloxone, an antidote for opiate overdoses. This is good news.

Amid the tweeting around this, I connected with two people from Scotland who work with naloxone: Kirsten, a registered nurse working in addictions, and Stephen, the national coordinator and lead trainer for Scotland's Naloxone Programme. I asked if they'd like to be interviewed for a post on our blog...and got a great response!!

@StephenCMalloy @kristenlh23 to keep this #Naloxone ball rolling, would either/both of you be interested in an interview for our blog?
— CSSDP (@CSSDP) March 21, 2012

@CSSDP @kristenlh23 vey kind offer! Sure we both could offer something from national and local perspectives. Thanks! :)
— Stephen Malloy (@StephenCMalloy) March 21, 2012

@StephenCMalloy @injectingadvice @cssdp ditto
— Kirsten H(@kirstenlh23) March 21, 2012

If that wasn't enough, a British harm reduction group called Injecting Advice saw what we were tweeting about, and now they want to reprint the interview on their website! Not bad.

@stephencmalloy @CSSDP @kristenlh23 would we be able to re-print the interview on the naloxone site when we launch? #itallhelps
— Injecting Advice.com (@injectingadvice) March 21, 2012

So the stage is set...and this is where you guys come in.

We want your help with this - and here's why:

1. We need to ask some good questions! For those of you with no background in harm reduction (like myself) - what do you want to know about naloxone? For those of you with more experience - what do you want to ask the pros now that we've got their attention?

2. If Injecting Advice is interested in our interview, then lots of other people must be too. Who else should we be telling about this? Some of our friends from the conference come to mind, like CAANS in Red Deer and Streetworks in Edmonton. Who else can you think of who might want to submit questions, post the interview on their blog, or otherwise get involved?

3. Last, but not certainly not least...just because. That's why you should get involved. Interviewing interesting people, building connections and promoting events for a worthy cause are all activism skills we want you to learn - so seize this opportunity to do so!

So here's what happens next.

In the comments below, tell us:

- what questions should we ask our interviewees? what do you really want to know about harm reduction, naloxone, or what's happening with drug policy in the land of haggis? ;)

- who should we tell about this? where and how can we promote this cool opportunity?

- how do you want to be involved? do you want to take part in the interview directly (you're welcome to!!)? should we try to livestream the event? do you want to live-tweet your thoughts/reactions for our followers while the interview is happening?

Let us know what you think, and we can all go on from there. Looking forward to hearing from all of you!

#ForoDrogas in Mexico City Looks North - Zara Snapp

Note: this is a guest post by Zara Snapp, international liaison for SSDP - Students for Sensible Drug Policy, our American sister organization. You can learn more about Zara by reading her bio or following her on Twitter (@zarasnapp).

Two weeks ago in Mexico City, the organization Mexico United Against Delinquency (MUCD in Spanish) held a large forum on drugs and the need for a shift in drug policy. Several factors made this forum different from others held in the past. 

 
In the first place, MUCD is a primarily conservative organization, started by high-class folks who were beginning to feel the effects of both delinquency and the increased violence related to drug trafficking. They began to demand greater accountability for crimes and have been working towards lowering the high impunity rate in Mexico (currently at 98%). It is interesting that the issue of drug legalization has begun to creep into the discussion of businessmen and entrepreneurs. Traditionally, the public discourse regarding legalization has been kept within academia and activism. When you looked around the Forum, there was a mix of participants, activists, high-class “señoras,” academics and businessmen. In socioeconomic terms, it might have been the most diverse conferences I have ever attended.

The second factor that made this conference stand out was the curious inquiry into different international models—with a focus on Canada. While the conference also featured Mexican academics, politicians, activists and practitioners, several of the speakers were either Canadian or mentioned the Canadian drug policy model as one that could be duplicated. Participants were impressed with the story of Insite, the supervised injection site in Vancouver, and how it was politically possible through actions by practitioners such as Donald MacPherson (Note: Donald sits on our CSSDP Board of Directors!) While injection drug use is not the primary policy concern in Mexico, harm reduction strategies are entering the general discussion and folks are working to deal with both the increasing consumption and the hugely increasing transit of narcotics to the north. During the conference, we also heard from a former Vancouver police officer who shared that he had not been trained to instill fear, but rather to help people. This is in sharp contrast to the Mexican context where most folks are afraid of cops, who are seen as extremely corrupt.

Looking North - beyond the United States, to Canada - is something that is happening more and more in Mexican drug policy circles. There is a growing realization that while the United States may not act on these policies, we can begin to develop a regional strategy: collaborating across Latin America and Canada will yield greater results than just complaining about the regressive policies of the United States. This weekend, CSSDP will be hosting its 5th annual conference in Calgary. For those of you who want to learn from the Canadian model, both the accomplishments and the challenges, but can’t make it all the way up north (like me) - you can watch the conference through livestream right here! Good luck, enjoy the conference and get ready for action afterwards! Abrazos from Mexico!

Video: what Portugal does about drugs

by David Hewson

Recently, the government of Portugal revealed that 10 years after it had decriminalized all drugs in 2001, drug abuse had reduced by half. It was a heartening validation for those of us against the drug war, and the news got plenty of press coverage, including an article in Forbes.

But how exactly does this system work? If drugs aren't fully legalized, but drug users aren't criminals, then what is the government's role, exactly?

This video clip should answer some of these questions. The speaker, Nuno Capaz, works for one of the governments drug commissions, and he talks (in very candid terms) about how things work.

Here's the link: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/20469537/highlight/244293

Some of my favourite quotes from his 20-min presentation:

On how the government decided on decriminalization:
"Quite frankly, for me, one of the reasons our drug policy actually works, is that the government decided to take all the expert's recommendations and pass them into law...they said, 'if these guys are the experts, we're not gonna say they're wrong and to do other things that they don't say to do.'"

On funding addiction treatment programs:
"The government pays at least 80-100% of the treatment programs...and it's still cheaper than jail. It might not work, but at least we know that in jail, it won't work at all. At least in treatment they have a chance."

On the inherent problems with the criminal system:
"Normally, a court tends to be a coercive structure. And normally, drug users don't tend to do well with coercive structures."

On the importance of being fast:
"We do a lot of networking...if we have a drug addict that wants to go to treatment, we can refer them that day...if we say you can go there 15 days from now, he will not stop using drugs for those 15 days, and it won't work."

On use vs. abuse:
"A huge majority of users do not have a problem with using. It's pretty much like alcohol. A lot of people here  today drink alcohol regularly, and most of you don't have a problem with it."

On their approach to their work:
"We are not there to give more problems to drug users...we try to give them solutions to solve their problems."

I thought the guy made a lot of sense. What do you think?

Pass that Dutch...Legislation

by Alex Rowan

This past October, I, like so many travelers before me, travelled to the Netherlands knowing little more about the country than that that I could buy pot or hash from my corner “coffee shop”. I stayed not in Amsterdam itself, but in a nearby town named Hilversum, about 20 minutes by train outside of the city. While the folks I met in Amsterdam couldn’t fathom my decision to sleep away from the action, in retrospect I feel that the decision (which was prompted simply by the lower cost of accommodation) helped me to develop a far more informed view of the country than I would have otherwise. As with so many countries in which one major urban hub is viewed as culturally supreme, to know Amsterdam is to know an incredible metropolis, but is not to know the life of the (for lack of a better term) “average” Dutchman. Throughout the time I spent in Hilversum, I was able to observe the manner in which the liberal drug policies of the country are both influenced by and influence the sensible mindset of the bulk of Dutch people, a mindset which I will forever admire and strive to propagate.

At the center of Dutch drug policy is the very mantra of CSSDP, that to ignore, hide, or simply condemn a prevalent issue in society does nothing to combat it. In fact, the more illicit an activity, the more appealing it is to many, and the less it can be effectively monitored. From what I’ve seen, the studies that have come out of the Netherlands on drug use at home and abroad have in many cases proven to be comprehensive than those of their international counterparts. I feel that the reason for this is because there is a true faith among the people that the government is out to gain knowledge to better improve public health, rather than to wage war. Furthermore, as there is no conclusive evidence to link marijuana use to the use of harder drugs (i.e. the gateway affect), the Dutch government will never assume that a marijuana user is also a hard drug user. In speaking to the Dutch folk I met about their drug use and their run-ins with officials, it became clear that they had always been forthcoming in a way that, as a jaded Canadian youth who has had her share of negative experiences with the cops, I had never even imagined. Again aligned with the mantra of the CSSDP, the Opium Act outlines the view that drug use should always be seen as a health issue first, and a criminal justice issue second. That being said, trafficking of illegal drugs is still a criminal offense, and initiatives are consistently underway to prevent the trafficking of what the Opium Act classifies as ‘hard drugs’, for example heroin and cocaine. What is this Opium Act, you query? Also called the Narcotics Act, it is the most important piece of drug legislation active in the Netherlands, and was first enacted in 1919, following an international conference headed by the USA. With a pivotal change in the policy to make the distinction between hard and soft drugs in 1976, Marijuana use in the Netherlands was decriminalized.

It begs the question: if drug trafficking is still considered illegal, how is that coffee shops exist with little to no governmental interference? The Opium Act includes the following key provisions: no legal action against a coffee shop shall be taken as long as no minors are permitted entrance, no promotion is done for the establishment, sales capped at five grams per person, and no more than 500 grams are on the premises at any given time. Cultivation, while also technically illegal, is dismissed up to five plants, and jail time is extremely rare even in cases of large-scale growth. So just remember smokers, five is the Netherlands’ magic number. While many a conservative politician has tried to prove that the Netherlands’ liberal drug policies have increased Cannabis and other drug use, in fact, as we can well predict, they have had the opposite effect. According to one comparison pieced together by DrugWarFacts.org from the U.S. and Netherlands’ national surveys, the lifetime prevalence of marijuana use in the Netherlands in 2001 was 17%, just under one half of the 36.9% stat for the U.S.
It is important to note that the Netherlands’ liberal drug policy extends beyond recreational use. The Netherlands became the first country to legalize euthanasia in 2002, provided such cases are put before a review committee by the physician who has deemed the procedure warranted. The Netherlands is also known for pioneering other conscientious public health initiatives such as heroin-assisted treatment, which has had great success in limiting the reliance on heroin and instances of overdose among heroin addicts.

Admittedly, a far greater respect and belief in social pluralism was present within the Netherlands government in 1976 than in the Canadian here and now, fostering the responsiveness to public need necessary for dramatic political change. Yet I remain inspired. Upon leaving the Netherlands, and this was reinforced in Portugal which also has more lax drug legislation, I was inspired to stop being a disenchanted, passive youth, and start truly believing what I wish I’d encouraged myself to believe all along, that a shift to health-oriented drug policy can be a reality. Here goes and cheers, I’m starting with this blog.


To find out more about the Netherlands’ drug policies and their relationship with drug use in the country, here are just a few of the great sites available to us:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/371/ille/library/dolin1-e.htm http://drugwarfacts.org http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4607233.stm http://www.amsterdam.info/drugs/ http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/aus/can_ch3_6.htm

Sophie Feltes

The Peaceful Oktoberfesters

by David Hewson

photo credit: Muenchen Kotzt


Hi all, I'm writing this from Germany, where I'm doing an internship at the moment.

One of the most natural, and enjoyable, things to do when travelling is to just stop, look around, and realize that you're in a foreign country. Sometimes the differences are subtle. But in the case of the Munich Oktoberfest, which I was able to visit this year, they're about as subtle as a frying pan to the jaw.

I grew up in Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario, which has its own Oktoberfest - the world's second-largest, after Munich. But it just can't compare to number 1. Here's why:

1. The sheer scale of the proceeedings: 6.9 MILLION people visited the Munich Oktoberfest this year (still less than the 1981 record of 7.1 million).
2. Beer is consumed exclusively in 1L glasses.
3. There are a bunch of roller coasters and other stomach-turning attractions...right next to the beer tents. Where people have just been drinking 1L glasses of beer. You might think that would be a bad combination, but the people of Munich seem to disagree.

Of course, when 6.9 million people put their efforts towards drinking beer in 1L intervals, there are bound to be consequences. Starting in the late afternoon, you start to see people who have had far too much to drink scattered around outside the tents, resting, recovering, and um...taking care of business. It's not a pretty scene. If you're up for it, click here to get a sense of the mayhem.

Despite all the drunkenness, I couldn't help but think: where's the belligerency? Yes, wherever you looked, there were people in lederhosen and dirndls dropping like flies. But in the 4 days I was there I saw evidence of only one fight - a guy outside a beer tent had a bloody nose and was being restrained by bouncers. That was it. I remember thinking: in Canada, you just couldn't get this many drunken people together, and have so few problems.


Why is this?


One theory is that there is a special spirit to Oktoberfest, one of Gemütlichkeit or togetherness, that sets a friendly tone the proceedings. There might be something to that, but since Oktoberfest I've travelled to many other parts of Germany and found the same lack of belligerency, so that can't explain it completely.

A second explanation is that different types of alcohol lead to different types of drunk – an idea that the show "How I Met Your Mother“ had some fun with recently. As the theory goes, the Oktoberfesters – and Germans in general – tend to drink beer, so they are therefore friendlier.

Maybe there's something to that too. I have a friend whose mother has banned Jack Daniels whiskey from her house, after seeing generations of men in her family become a different kind of angry drunk after they've been drinking it.


A third theory has to do with alcohol policy, where Canada and Germany vary enormously. In Germany, the rules around alcohol are much more relaxed than Canadians are used to. Here are some differences:

- Germans can buy alcohol at grocery stores during the day, and when the stores are closed they can go to the convenience stores at gas stations. You can buy alcohol at any hour of the day.

- There is no set closing time for drinking establishments, although there are some local bylaws, and by 6am the staff usually kick you out because they want to clean up and go home.

- There's also a two-tier drinking age (16 years old for anything less than 13% alcohol, 18 years old for anything more concentrated) designed to encourage young people to start with beer and wine instead of hard liquor, which is easier to sneak around with but also increases the risks of alcohol poisoning. The argument is that this openness towards alcohol leads to Germans, on the whole, developing a more mature relationship with the substance than the more repressed Canadians.

Of course, policy questions like these are the sorts of things that we CSSDP members like to consider. What kind of relationship with drugs is best? What kind of legislation – laws, taxes, social programs, etc – is the right mix?

But here's the tricky part: since policies tend to vary on a country-by-country basis, when we compare different policies, we are also comparing between countries and the cultures that go with them. It's hard to tease the two apart. And that makes things complicated.


At the end of the day, I don't know why Oktoberfest was as (relatively) peaceful as it was. What I do know is this: when it comes to drugs, each culture is unique.

Germany has a long and storied history with alcohol, including the beer purity laws of 1516 and festivals like Oktoberfest – which began when a Bavarian Crown Prince invited everyone to come drink beer with him to celebrate his wedding. Fond memories for the people of Munich, indeed.

Canada has its own narrative, including the whiskey that was used in the fur trades, to Al Capone bootlegging Canadian Club into Chicago, to Bob and Doug McKenzie's stubby bottles. Untwisting the tangled threads of history, culture and drugs is no easy thing to do.

Thoughts from the 3rd Latin American Drug Policy conference

As I sat in the 3^rd Latin American Drug Policy conference last week in Mexico City, news emerged about two youths in Nueva Laredo who were brutally murdered because they were believed to have spoken out against narco traffickers online. It was about half way through the conference, creating a strange moment where my excitement about the energy and potential for reform collided with the harsh realities of failed drug policies.

Throughout the conference the urgent need for reform was made clear. Stats and arguments were presented throughout that demonstrated the disastrous effects failed policies were having on communities across Latin America and the world. The criminalization of people through drug laws has devastated communities, leading to such atrocious facts as ‘85% of those imprisoned for drug crimes in Ecuador are women, or that 1/3 of people imprisoned in Argentina are for drug crimes.’ The failure and limitations of supply reduction policies was made clear. Stats were presented on the failure of Plan Colombia, on the failing prices alongside rising potency of illegal drugs, as well as tales of human rights abuses from both organized crime elements and from military and police forces. Across Mexico, the leading cause of death for youths is murder. One panellist described an optimistic scenario in Mexico which saw 55 000 deaths as a result of drug market violence at the end of Felipe Calderone’s current term as president.

During meetings and discussions it became all too clear that while these facts are shocking, these realities cannot be looked at as exceptional. Across the world, drug prohibition is having devastating consequences, with countries sitting at different points in the spectrum of impacts. The issues we address as drug policy reformers must be borderless. While the scales may be different, Canada and Mexico both share needless deaths, human rights abuses, and wasted resources as a result of our countries’ failing drug policies. Both countries are consumers and producers of currently illegal substances, and both countries face similar problems when it comes to accessing treatment, harm reduction services, and honest education about substance use. We must recognize that the violence from drug traffickers and from the state in Mexico is related to the similar violence in communities across Canada.

Just as the prohibition related problems we face are on a shared spectrum, so too are the responses we take. Where injection drug use is a problem, clean needle distribution is a necessity. Where young people are disadvantaged by poor economic opportunity, creative community responses are needed. Where young people are using ‘party drugs’, peer led harm reduction strategies emerge. Where drug market violence threatens community safety, residents find ways to band together to demand changes to policies and practices that perpetuate the status quo.

With this in mind a group of young activists gathered before the conference to connect our movements across borders. I was honoured to be asked to participate in the video we produced for the closing panel of the conference. As we debated what the key messages should be, it became clear that we wanted this video to inspire other young people to action. Across the entire world, young people are organizing and taking action to end the war on drugs. Our video is an attempt to let other young people know that whenever they take action against the injustice of drug prohibition, they are not alone. We are everywhere, and we are together!

Remember that alcohol is a drug too! A CSSDPers perspective on travel to a "dry state"

by Priya Shah

I am about to embark on a journey to India... the place of my ancestors. I am of Indian descent but was born in Canada so I’ve always felt a bit removed from my culture. Doing research and trip-planning has led to some interesting discoveries. I am beginning my trip in Gujarat, suitably because it is where my grandparents are from. But it is also... a dry state! Because I’ll be spending 1-2 months there it’s important for me to get an idea of the current state of affairs; the laws, politics etc. So I’ve been reading up on what a ‘dry’ state means for Gujarat right now, and this is what I’ve learned:

Basically, prohibition in Gujarat has been in effect since 1960 when the state was formed (more than a decade after Independence) and it has created an illicit liquor trade; an industry that generates revenue and employment for thousands of people. The law was mainly put in place as a tribute to Mahatma Ghandi, who hails from Gujarat.

The high demand fuels the smuggling and production. The police and other officials are involved in the trade, which generates the most money around elections because the politicians turn to bootleggers* and form power alliances when they need money to boost their campaigns. This highlights perfectly the degree of corruption among police and government officials in Gujarat. The party members and the electorate drink alcohol discretely, just the same as the majority of working and lower class people, but the outcome of drinking illicit liquor is more fatal for them. This is because the former have access to IMFL (Indian Made Foreign Liquor) which is popular and more attainable among the middle and upper class, and the latter are familiar with cheaper types of liquor - responsible for the majority of deaths.

There are a few exceptions to alcohol prohibition in Gujarat, which include:

• personnel of the armed forces are permitted to buy alcohol 
• retired personnel are allowed to buy a specific quota per month:
• "anyone over 40 in Gujarat can apply for a liquor permit on “health grounds”, securing a monthly ration of one bottle of hard liquor or 10 bottles of beer” (Basant Rawat, The Telegraph) 
• liquor can be purchased for medical reasons, if prescribed by a doctor 
• foreigners are allowed to acquire a permit and drink liquor 
• “to encourage corporate houses to hold business conferences in Gujarat instead of going over to nearby Mount Abu (Rajasthan) or Diu, the government allowed group permits so that delegates could drink liquor at hotels” (Rawat) 

However, liquor permits in Gujarat are expensive, and whether the officials like it or not, people prefer to buy from bootleggers! For example, a bottle of whisky costs Rs 1,000 in permit shops, which are located in select hotels. But a bootlegger sells the same brand for Rs 750 (Rawat). This leads to events such as the hooch tragedy in Ahmedabad, Gujarat in July 2009 where over 109 people died. Vinay Dholakia, director of the award-winning Parzania (2005) is making a film that addresses the issue of prohibition in Gujarat. The film covers all related issues from revenues to religion, the politics of prohibition to communalism and the mafia involved. (http://box4.chakpak.com:9080/articles/?p=16470)

In any case, I’ve still got lots to learn and discover by seeing first-hand how people are suffering and dealing with alcohol prohibition in Gujarat. I’ll keep you posted!

*It is believed that the biggest gangsters in Gujarat started their careers as bootleggers, as opposed to gangsters in Mumbai who started with kidnapping and theft.

Here’s more information if you’re interested: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2003-09-23/ahmedabad/27215207_1_new-tourism-policy-foreign-tourists-tcgl

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090712/jsp/nation/story_11226165.jsp