1. Drug Law in Practice in a Polish City Sobeyko J (1), Leszczyszyn-Pynka M (2), Duklas T (7), Parczewski M (2), Bejnarowicz P (1), Chintalova-Dallas R (4), Lazzarini Z (4)(6), Case P (5), Burris S (3)(6). (1) Infectious Disease Prevention Association of Western Pomerania, (2) Department of Infectious Diseases & Hepatology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, (3) Temple University Beasley School of Law, (4) University of Connecticut Health Center, (5) Fenway Community Health Center, (6) Center for Law and the Public’s Health at Georgetown and Johns Hopkins Universities, (7) Association for Health Promotion and Social Risks Prevention “TADA”

2. Acknowledgements NIDA: Grant # 5 R01 DA17002-02 NIDA: Grant # 5 R01 DA17002-02 Open Society Institute Open Society Institute –Funded early development and training of RPAR Members of our Community Action Board Members of our Community Action Board Infectious Disease Prevention Association of Western Pomerania Infectious Disease Prevention Association of Western Pomerania City Government of Szczecin City Government of Szczecin

3. The Polish Drug Policy Debate, 1994-2000 Possession of small amounts of illegal drugs was not a crime under the law enacted in 1985 Possession of small amounts of illegal drugs was not a crime under the law enacted in 1985 Proponents of criminalization argued for a change on several grounds: Proponents of criminalization argued for a change on several grounds: –Required by Poland’s ratification of 1988 UN Convention on drug trafficking –Criminalization would increase demand for treatment –Criminalization would deter new drug users –Police need the ability to arrest users to get at dealers

4. The Polish Drug Policy Debate, 1994-2000 1997 legislation exempted possession of small amounts from criminal sanction 1997 legislation exempted possession of small amounts from criminal sanction In 2000, however, the exemption was removed In 2000, however, the exemption was removed –Users possessing small amounts “shall be subject to a fine, the penalty of limitation of liberty or imprisonment for a term up to 1 year.” Art. 62, para. 3 An effort to restore the exemption in 2005 was unsuccessful An effort to restore the exemption in 2005 was unsuccessful 1997 law also provided multiple Rx options 1997 law also provided multiple Rx options

5. Methods: Rapid Policy Assessment and Response (RPAR) RPAR mobilizes local knowledge and capacity to fight HIV/AIDS among legally marginalized populations at the city level. RPAR mobilizes local knowledge and capacity to fight HIV/AIDS among legally marginalized populations at the city level. A research team from a site city works with a Community Action Board (CAB) to collect A research team from a site city works with a Community Action Board (CAB) to collect – laws and written policies; –existing epidemiological and criminal justice data; –qualitative interviews with police, judges, prosecutors, drug users, sex workers and others who can describe how the laws are put into practice. Data collection and interpretation are guided by the CAB, which develops an action plan and final report. Data collection and interpretation are guided by the CAB, which develops an action plan and final report.

6. Methods: Rapid Policy Assessment and Response (RPAR) RPAR began in January, 2005; research was completed in September and a final report was released in March, 2006. RPAR began in January, 2005; research was completed in September and a final report was released in March, 2006. CAB included participants from law enforcement (tpolice, judiciary, prisons), public and private drug treatment providers, health care (physicians, nurses) and social welfare agencies (Family Support office). CAB included participants from law enforcement (tpolice, judiciary, prisons), public and private drug treatment providers, health care (physicians, nurses) and social welfare agencies (Family Support office). Existing laws and formal policies in ten domains relevant to drug policy and health (including harm reduction, drug treatment and prevention) were collected. Existing laws and formal policies in ten domains relevant to drug policy and health (including harm reduction, drug treatment and prevention) were collected. Three focus groups were conducted, and the team interviewed 24 people in law enforcement, health care and social services, as well as 14 IDUs. Three focus groups were conducted, and the team interviewed 24 people in law enforcement, health care and social services, as well as 14 IDUs.

7. Szczecin Port on Baltic Sea at the German border Port on Baltic Sea at the German border Region: 1.1-1.5 million; City: 420,000 Region: 1.1-1.5 million; City: 420,000 Substantial industrial base and shipping Substantial industrial base and shipping Active harm reduction and methadone programs Active harm reduction and methadone programs Regional HIV prevalence = 0,4/100 000, primarily among IDUs Regional HIV prevalence = 0,4/100 000, primarily among IDUs

8. Drug Treatment: 2 Routes in the Criminal Justice System Drug Arrest Def. enters Rx Pros. puts case on hold up to 5 years Trial Conviction Sentence suspended pending Rx Art. 57 Art. 56)

9. Practice: Drug Treatment and Imprisonment of Users Defendants and their lawyers (when defendants have them) don’t ask for treatment Defendants and their lawyers (when defendants have them) don’t ask for treatment Prosecutors don’t suspend cases Prosecutors don’t suspend cases Judges don’t put users in jail, but also don’t require treatment Judges don’t put users in jail, but also don’t require treatment

10. Disposition of AoCDA Cases

11. Drug Treatment Qualitative interviews with legal professionals confirm the rarity of treatment. Qualitative interviews with legal professionals confirm the rarity of treatment. –J udges and prosecutors in two focus groups said they had never used the treatment provisions and did not know anyone who had. Some believed that neither article had ever been invoked in Szczecin. –“It is not the court’s duty to cure/treat the drug user. It’s his duty is to adjudicate” – Judge, Focus Group –In a key informant interview, a prosecutor ascribed the problem to performance measures: for prosecutors, a case is “closed” for statistical purposes when it is resolved by a judge; “If we apply for treatment [under Article 57 ], the case is not closed.”

12. Police Tactical Use of Article 62 Police we interviewed said they used the threat of arrest to get users to identify dealers. Police we interviewed said they used the threat of arrest to get users to identify dealers. IDU interviews corroborated this. They quoted police: IDU interviews corroborated this. They quoted police: –“ Tell us who sold you the drug. Then we will let you go.” The police are interested in dealers, but buyers. The police are interested in dealers, but buyers. –Small-time dealer-users are treated as dealers.

13. Drug Treatment Defendants don’t know about the law. Defendants don’t know about the law. Defense lawyers are not much help Defense lawyers are not much help –Although free legal aid is mandated by law, defendants can rarely obtain it. –Defense lawyers are not interested in drug cases –“The defence lawyer paid by the state did nothing to help me.” –“ It was better when I defended myself. In previous case I had a laweyr and I was sentenced to prison. When some time later I defended myself, I managed o make the court feel sorry for me and i was sentenced to fine for the same crime.” –“My lawyer read files during the trial for the first time, He has never met me before, he didn’t talk to me”

14. Deterrence Both rural and urban drug users we interviewed reported that drugs were easy to get and widely consumed. Both rural and urban drug users we interviewed reported that drugs were easy to get and widely consumed. Amphetamine and club drugs are currently the drugs of choice. Amphetamine and club drugs are currently the drugs of choice.

15. Conclusions In the Szczecin area at least, Poland’s “get tough” drug policy as implemented has not served the purposes that justified it in debate: In the Szczecin area at least, Poland’s “get tough” drug policy as implemented has not served the purposes that justified it in debate: –Arrest has not been a route to treatment –Small-time user-dealers and some users are being arrested, but very few go to jail –Szczecin appears to have a serious new amphetamine problem

16. Conclusions Because drug laws are used primarily as leverage for information, drug users remain a hidden population with little access to drug treatment. The intent of the law was to promote treatment for convicted drug users, and these are not in place to prevent or minimize drug-related harms. Because drug laws are used primarily as leverage for information, drug users remain a hidden population with little access to drug treatment. The intent of the law was to promote treatment for convicted drug users, and these are not in place to prevent or minimize drug-related harms.

17. Conclusions RPAR findings support return to legal status before 2000, when possession of small amounts was exempt from criminal punishment. RPAR findings support return to legal status before 2000, when possession of small amounts was exempt from criminal punishment. Final action planning in the RPAR project included preparation of seminars for prosecutors and judges to enhance applicability of the treatment alternatives. Final action planning in the RPAR project included preparation of seminars for prosecutors and judges to enhance applicability of the treatment alternatives.