Federal plan for security and penitentiary policy. January 2000. Aims: decrease criminality. Willingness to develop alternative to prison with treatment as a diversion measure

Circular 17. June 1999. ‘Judicial responses to addicts’. The courts should more frequently have resource to measures alternative to legal proceedings and imprisonment. 10 February 2000. Drug users with absence of maximum 3 years to leave if they enter treatment

Drug addicts may be granted permission to serve their sentence in part or as a whole in a special treatment institution, cf. Section of the Act on Execution of Punishment (until 1 July 2001) pursuant to section 49 (S2) of the criminal code

Since 1995, a contact group set up by the Ministry of Social affairs and probation service. Recommended guidelines for cooperation between social authorities and the institutions/departments under the prison and probation service

The circular of 17 June 1999 ‘regarding judicial responses to addicts’ proposes that the courts should more frequently have recourse to measures alternative to legal proceedings and imprisonment. Ensure that at all stages of the procedure, from arrest to execution of sentence, access is open to the medical care system via a wide range of responses: particular alternatives to proceedings are encouragement to seek treatment, social education under court supervision and the alternatives to incarceration

The local security contracts draw up an inventory of the local arrangements for prevention, enforcement and care. They should seek to reduce barriers between them and to define individual projects, such as the creation of suitable community service places, in collaboration with the local elected representatives

Select committees on the fight against drugs and drug addiction. These bodies perform a coordinating function with the departmental councils for the prevention of delinquency by acting in a consultative capacity

Current legislation also provides for those cases of dependent users who have committed petty crime to secure their dose (Laws 2331/1995, 2721/1999). According to these provisions, prosecution or sentencing can be suspended if the offender has voluntarily entered and successfully completed an authorised treatment programme

A Fine and Compensation Order Release under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1907: in this instance, a decision is made not to proceed to convict

Probation Order (Probation of Offenders Act, 1907)

The Criminal Justice Act makes amendments to the Misuse of Dugs Act, 1977. The new section (15A) creates a new offence related to the possession of drugs with a value of 12,700 Euros, or more, for the purpose of sale or supply. A person found guilty of such an offence may be imprisoned for up to life and be subject to an unlimited fine. However, where it is found that addiction was a substantial factor leading to the offence being committed, the sentence may be reviewed after half of the mandatory period, at which time the courts may suspend the remainder of the sentence on any condition it sees fit

Alternative measures to criminal proceedings by the prosecuting authority (art. 23/1973)

Alternatives to sentence by Court (art. 24 / 1973)

Alternatives to drug-related offence sentences do exist. Alternative drug treatment (to criminal sentence) may be provided by all recognised national drug care facilities. The Multidisciplinary Committee chaired by a member of the Directorate of Health reported on treatment progress of drug law offenders under the therapeutic injunction regime to the prosecution authority. The Multidisciplinary Committee has been set up by law within the Ministry of Health and commissioned to coordinate and control ordered and proposed alternative treatment measures and report to the ‘Parquet’

In 1998, a legislative proposal indicated that chronic drug-addict offenders might best be coerced to commit themselves to an extramural treatment programme for a maximum of 2 years. The proposal has been debated in Parliament since then and there is still substantial debate about the ethical acceptability and the feasibility of this legal measure. Technically, this innovation is a penal law measure and not a sanction. This means that application does not depend on the seriousness of the offence

The Prison Act of 12 December 1958, No 7, Section 12, allows treatment to be substituted for a prison sentence

The reform of Spanish Criminal Legislation by means of the Organic Act 10/1995, 23rd November, of the Penal Code and the Royal Decree 190/1996, 9th February of the Penitentiary Regulatory Norm created a juridical frame for the reintegration of criminal drug users

A special paragraph in the Prison Law (paragraph 34 KvaL; ‘paragraph 34-care’) states that the imprisonment might be served outside prison under certain conditions

Early detection. Police services offer ‘therapeutic advice’ and referral to centre for mental health care. Investigation and prosecution level

Police: public prosecution officials decide the seriousness of the offences detected by the police and the gendarmerie. The most serious cases result in the opening of a judicial enquiry

Police. Where drugs are involved, the police do not have discretionary powers to issue a caution (informal or formal) nor to impose an on-the–spot fine

All of these resources are a response to the need for an early identification of risk factor and to intervene against them and prevent relapse, since younger age and a shorter criminal record is a positive factor towards better results

Another recent sanction-related change was the implementation of intensive supervision with electronic monitoring, as an alternative to shorter prison terms. In an evaluation made by the NCCP, it was stated that a consequence of this new sanction might be an increased concentration of habitual criminals in prison (Brottsförebyggande rådet 1999b)

Police stage. Arrest referral schemes. Arrest referral schemes are partnership initiatives between the police and local agencies. They are not an alternative to prosecution or due process and use the point of arrest as a key opportunity to encourage problem drug users who are arrested to take up appropriate treatment or other effective programmes of help. A proactive model was found to be most effective and dedicated drug workers have been employed to work in custody suites in police forces across England and Wales. The UK Anti-Drugs Strategy target is that by the end of March 2002 all police forces in England and Wales will be operating a face-to-face (dedicated worker) arrest referral schemes covering all custody suites

Praetorian probation. Sentence mediation. Most used with first offenders

1995: suspended sentence on condition of treatment as an alternative to imprisonment between 6 and 12 months. Target: drug addicts who had committed an offence against property, typically with the intent of financing their drug use. The convicted person is subject to the supervision of the prison and Probation Service

Before sentence: a user under threat of court proceedings can voluntarily engage in a treatment or rehabilitation procedure before appearing in front of the magistrate’s court. According to this principal - encouragement to seek treatment - the accused must be able to obtain appropriate guidance from the judicial system. Even if no court order is made, the courts will take this voluntary initiative into account when pronouncing sentence

Travaux d’intérêt general (TIG). The JAP can propose that the user before the court should volunteer for community service. This usually usually applies to those cases being tried for illicit usage or possession and purchase of drugs

A Community Service Order: Requires offenders to perform unpaid work for between 40 and 240 hours. A Fine. Has statutory limits, fixed for a particular offence. The money goes to Central Funds and if unpaid can be enforced by committal to prison. A Compensation Order: has a specific statutory format as laid down in the Criminal Justice Act, 1993, and is related to the wrong done. The money goes to the victim as opposed to Central Funds

The Garda Pilot Juvenile Diversion Programme was introduced in 1963 with the aim to divert juvenile offenders from criminal activity. If certain criteria are met, a juvenile offender may be cautioned as an alternative to being prosecuted. The programme operates on the basis of the common law principle of police discretion (An Garda Siochana, 1999). While this programme is specifically aimed at juvenile offenders committing first offences, it can be adapted/extended to include juveniles committing subsequent offences. A juvenile offender who is eligible for inclusion in the programme is dealt with by way of a caution, as opposed to being prosecuted for a criminal offence. Cautions may be either formal or informal. A Juvenile Liaison Officer (JLO) becomes involved with the offender and the family. While an informal caution may be given by the JLO, the Garda Superintendent of the district where the offender lives must give a formal caution. There is no provision for a similar system of cautioning for adults

Before sentence: The ‘suspension du prononcé’ may be applied once a person has been found guilty but before he/she actually serves a sentence. The suspension of sentence may be applied once the person is in prison. Once criminal proceedings for illicit drug use have started, the instructing judge may instruct detoxification treatment for adult illicit drug users. If the treatment is successfully completed (report from the Multidisciplinary Committee), the case will be closed without proceedings (if not completed, the offender is prosecuted). The demand for detoxification treatment (instructed by the Instruction Judge) has to be addressed by the Public Prosecutor or the offender him/herself. The judge could decide to postpone the sentencing (sentence suspension) for a determined length of time, but he has to decide on the culpability. When the case goes back to the court, the judge may decide not to give a sentence. There are three types of postponements: simple postponement, postponement accompanied by probation, postponement accompanied by therapy

During a specially organised SOV-day of the Amsterdam Court many addicts who were brought before court showed remorse and were eager to commit themselves to this type of treatment. All arrested addicted offenders with an extensive criminal history of drug-related crime and who have served at least one prison sentence for such crimes may be subject to this new measure. Both policy-makers and professional workers considered SOV a possibility for drug addicts to combat their problem and to set a ceiling to drug-related criminal careers (Swierstra, 1999; Wolf, 1999). This chance will be offered to a subgroup of drug addicts with a longer history of (petty) crime to enable them to change their life. Legally these addicts cannot be condemned for longer periods, so detoxification, treatment and rehabilitation is precluded. The SOV offers a possibility ‘to get these people on the road again’

The alternative measures to prison are the following: suspended sentence. This can be applied to sentences of less than 3 years when proved that the convict is not a regular offender and has been, or still is, under detoxification treatment. This option is also available for incurable patients

Courts. When the user is a juvenile, it is the juvenile court that decides on the educational assistance or penal measure that is to be applied. Special courts: with the exception of some deputies there are no procedures in place that specialise in the fight against infringements of drug law. Addiction officers are being established in the courts in order to facilitate diagnosis and guidance of drug users. In the absence of any agreement, it is the section in charge of treatment orders that is responsible for medical and social guidance and referral arising from the justice system. DDASS (Direction départmentale d’action sanitaire et sociale) can be designated as a permanent point of reference. Sentence: the Judge Application des Peines (JAP) can give a suspended sentence with probation requiring the user to accept obligatory treatment. The sentence is entered on his criminal record. The JAP also can decide to adjourn sentencing to the end of a period of probation. The decision on sentencing is then suspended for a defined period during which the user is required to undergo medical treatment

A suspended sentence ‘supervision during deferment of penalty’/intensive supervised probation: this facility was designed to increase restraints on offenders in the community. Offenders are required to report for frequent urine testing. The type and levels of demand placed on offenders differ enormously by jurisdiction

The purpose of a probation order is to secure the rehabilitation of the offender, to protect the public and to prevent the offender from committing further offences. This is used for drug users by imposing conditions. Conditions may include attendance for treatment and the provision of urine for analysis. This is the preferred procedure in the District Court when dealing with drug users

Order of Recognisance (Misuse of Drugs Act, 1977, Section 28, as amended by the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1984): this is an order requiring an offender to undergo treatment for his/her drug condition in a residential centre or in the community

Court stage. The decision of the courts in relation to the imposition of a custodial or non-custodial sentence may be influenced by a Pre-sanction Report, where available. This report is complied by the Probation and Welfare Services and includes information on factors such as addiction that may have contributed to the criminal committing the offence. These reports are normally not available, however a judge may request that one be provided. A Drug Court was established in Ireland in January 2001 on a pilot basis in one area of Dublin City. The Court has as its primary aim: ‘the reduction of crime through rehabilitation of the offender but not excluding punishment should the circumstances so warrant. The purpose of the proposed Drug Court is to provide a scheme for rehabilitation, under the auspices and control of the court, of persons who are convicted of, or who have pleaded guilty to, drugs offences, relating to possession for own use or for supply to others on a minor scale, and crimes triable in the District Court which are related to the drug misuse of the offender’ (Drug Court Planning Committee 1999, p.15). In order to access the court the person must be 17 years of age or older, and either have pleaded guilty or been convicted in the District Court of a drug or drug-related offence that would warrant a prison sentence. The offender must express a wish to be admitted to the Drug Court and, at the recommendation of either the police, the Probation Service, a drug-treatment professional or the defending solicitor, the individual will be assessed as to their suitability for engagement in the Drug Court process (Drug Court Planning Committee 1999). Another community-based intervention in this field is the Cornmarket Project, launched in March 2002, in a joint venture between Wexford Area Partnership and the Probation and Welfare Service. The project includes a counselling intervention and support service for young offenders with alcohol and drug use problems, and the building of structured development programmes for those involved in substance misuse and/or criminality. It also provides an educational and training programme, providing a UCD/NUI Diploma in Intervention and Counselling Skills, aimed at professional and voluntary people whose work brings them into contact with issues of substance misuse and crime. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform contributes to the funding

In case of a recorded drug use offence, the Public Prosecutor (‘Parquet’) may decide: to close the case without proceedings with a caution (e.g. when the recorded drug user has been admitted to a detoxification treatment prior to the drug use offence record); to propose to a recorded drug user to undergo detoxification treatment on a voluntary basis. If treatment is successfully completed (report from the Health Service), the case will be closed without proceedings (if not completed, the offender is prosecuted)

Early intervention of the probation office (Vroeghulp Interventie Aanpak) was initially meant for specific drug addicts who were arrested for drug-related criminal acts and has now been expanded to all arrested drug users. Early intervention will be given within 3 weeks of the arrest by offering the treatment possibilities that are inherent to probation

Alternatives to prison sentence. The sentence is replaced by other punishments such as community work, monetary fines or weekend arrest. This measure can be applied to regular offenders, either drug addicted or not

Security measures for drug users. These are to be applied in case of criminal responsibility. The judge may apply different security measures such as entering a detoxification centre, in case of partially extenuating circumstances, and the judge may apply a security measure followed by a non-imprisonment sentence, should it endanger the effects of the security measure

DTTOs (Drug Treatment and Testing Orders), an alternative to custody, were made available in courts in England and Wales to combat drug-driven crime. Drug Treatment and Testing Orders were introduced in courts in England and Wales from the 1 October 2000 following successful piloting. DTTOs are a new form of disposal targeted at persistent offenders who have committed a large amount of crime to fund their drug misuse and who might otherwise be sent to prison. The Order can only be made if the offender consents and also requires the courts to continue to be closely involved by regular reviews of the Orders made. Offenders will also be subject to frequent drug testing. DTTOs provide a means for sentencers to direct drug-using offenders to drug treatment. It is a key government initiative to combat drug-driven crime. The DTTO is recommended for high-tariff offenders who have a propensity to misuse drugs. Requiring these offenders to undergo frequent mandatory drug tests, it is considered an alternative to custody

The offender must also be tested regularly for drug use and this together with the treatment provider’s reports provides a clear indication of how well the offender is responding to treatment. Finally, and uniquely in English/Welsh law, the courts have a formal role in the reviewing process. These reviews are designed both to motivate the offender and to give the court confidence that the treatment is being complied with. Treatment services to support DTTOs are purchased by the probation service and provided by a mixed economy of specialist substance misuse treatment and probation service

Transitional or emergency accommodation, including socioeducation and medical support. Host family networks created in 1970 - ‘half freedom’: person may leave during daytime for work or treatment under electronic surveillance. Weekend arrest and limited detention Probation has been possible since 1964. Probation with suspension; no conviction, maximum 5 years. Probation with reprieve: conviction, but no sentencing, maximum 5 years. Prisons: conditional release after one-third of the sentence has been served

Prison: it has to be seen as a measure that fits between the legal concepts of ‘prolonged leave’ and conditional liberty

Penal Placement of Addicts in a Penitentiary Treatment Institution (Strafrechtelijke Opvang Verslaafden or SOV) in December 2000: this legal measure has been accepted by Parliament and facilities for clients are now organised in several Dutch cities. In September 2001 only a fraction of the total of 240 SOV places in Amsterdam and Rotterdam were utilised (12) because it usually takes some time after conviction to start SOV treatment. Recently, the Ministry of Justice began an experiment by planning a special section in the central prison of Amsterdam (Bijlmerbajes) to introduce this type of coercive treatment for a maximum of 48 treatment-resistant addicts, and Utrecht followed, resulting in three cities where chronic drug offenders can legally be coerced to detoxification (gedwongen afkicken) and a follow-up programme

Prison stage. Paragraph 12 of the Sentencing law gives inmates with a drug problem the opportunity to be transferred to a halfway house or other treatment institution. The institution must be able to offer a programme that meets the individual’s needs. The law specifically requires that mitigating circumstances are present if a convicted person is to serve his/her entire sentence in an institution. Here, the law is directed to cases in which the convicted is so in need of treatment that the entire sentence should be carried out within a treatment institution. In practice, this decision is strictly applied for alternative sentencing for drug users only. The prison system does not operate according to specified overviews or approval codes for potential paragraph 12 institutions, but evaluates each concrete case according to whether one can offer an appropriate alternative. To fulfil the restrictions placed on such alternative sentencing, the chosen institutions must offer secure conditions under which the sentence can be served. Pure care facilities are generally not accepted as treatment institutions according to paragraph 12. Transfers can only be to institutions that lie within national borders. The inmate is to be subjected to total prohibition of alcohol and other substances as long as the sentence is being carried out. This prohibition is also applicable under any furloughs, leisure activities, etc. As a rule of thumb, the opportunity to carry out a sentence in a treatment facility/halfway house is not granted if the expected time until release exceeds 12 months. The Path-finder Project is a rehabilitation approach that is run in cooperation with the Oslo prison authority and the Tyrili Foundation, a rehabilitation facility. This alternative is directed to heavier drug users and currently has a yearly capacity of 18 treatment spaces. Participants are placed for 8 months in the ‘Path-finder house’ in association with an Olso prison where they undergo an introduction phase and a motivation phase. They are thereafter transferred to sentencing under paragraph 12 of the sentencing law, under the Tyrili Foundation’s treatment continuation programme, which includes life and work training

Treatment of inmates at extra-penitentiary centres. The Penitentiary Regulatory Norm establishes a wider regulation for extra-penitentiary treatments for drug users. Community surgery treatment by daily leaves of inmates. It is possible to establish contact to develop extra-penitentiary programmes through regular leaves. Drug-addicted inmates may develop treatment activities at external centres by means of the different types of régimen abierto (alternatives to imprisonment). Inmates may render sentence on a full boarding basis at public or private therapeutic centres. Probation may be subject to detoxification treatment. The Judge (Juez de Vigilancia Penitenciaria) may also enforce conduct rules to be observed, among which are included the acceptance of drug addiction treatment. Breach of this condition may be cause to deny probation and re-entering prison. The penitentiary centre Treatment Councils (Juntas de Tratamiento) may also suggest bringing forward the probation period under the above-described conditions on the filing of a favourable personal report towards social re-integration

Prison stage. If treatment motivation and needs cannot properly be taken care of within the prison system it is possible to be transferred to treatment outside prison. This is regulated by law, and thereby in everyday expression called ‘paragraph 34’. In case of misconduct the individual can be called back to the prison . Prisoners are always informed at detention, and later, about study programmes, therapy for drug abuse, testing for HIV, and the special drug-free units that are at hand. In the new programme on drug abuse this will be enhanced. All inmates will undergo ASI/MAPS-screening (Addiction Severity Index and Monitoring Area Phase System) at intake to get a clear picture of the certain need of the client. From that a treatment plan will be elaborated together with the client

The Prison Service is also currently working towards developing a central treatment model for rehabilitation and has agreed with the National Probation Directorate that it may adapt its ASRO (Addressing Substance-Related Offending) programme into a Prison Service model. This development of post-programme community links and linkage with the National Probation Directorate’s plans for ‘booster’ community drug programmes will be considerably enhanced because of the similarity of the probation and prison models. Prison stage: the Prison Service is leading an innovative pilot scheme to set up post-release hostels for short-term prisoners with histories of drug misuse. There will be up to five hostels in the pilot, one for women and four for men, planned to be open in summer 2002. The hostels will provide intensive support to this high-risk group through the first few months following release from prison. The aim is to reduce re-offending by preventing return to drug misuse. Responsibility for this project will pass to the National Probation Directorate of the Home Office later this year when contracts to deliver and run the hostels are awarded

Transitional or emergency accommodation is available for short stays. Socioeducation and/or medical support is available, but is specially reserved for those who are offered an alternative to prison, those suffering from severe desocialisation and those coming out of prison

The Cuchulláin Probation Project, in Dundalk, is one such intervention. Developed by the Probation and Welfare Service for work with young offenders and their families in the Dundalk area, it is a community-based response to ‘at risk’ youths between the ages of 15 and 19 – mainly young offenders, those already involved in offending and those recently released from custody. Using various training and development programmes, including counselling and educational methods, the project has helped more than 50 young people since it opened over a year ago. The project promotes abstinence from drugs, where they are an issue (drug free). Activities include literacy, creative arts, IT, communication and social skills. Funding is provided through the Probation and Welfare Service from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Identical types of coercive treatment are found in forensic addiction clinics and in the experimental project Triple-Ex in The Hague. Forensic Addiction CareA forensic addiction clinic, intended for imprisoned drug-using recidivists resisting regular care and treatment, was opened in 1998 (IVON, 1998). The treatment programme distinguishes three subsequent stages: an intramural, a semimural and a resocialisation stage. The last stage is similar to ‘supported living’: clients are supported in learning to live independently again after release from prison. Working projects constitute the most important element of this long-term programme. The objective is offering an appropriate mix of therapies, practical and social skills training, education, and adaptation to the labour market situation. Only convicted addicts who are not allowed to enter other (regular) treatment programmes because of their severe addiction problems, their failures to complete treatments and/or their judicial history, are allowed to enter this special programme

Prison stage. Certain social reintegration programmes to be developed out of prison by means of the enforcement of sections in the Penitentiary Regulations that allow the period of permanent access of drug-addicted inmates to community resources. Penitentiary administration is making an effort to prepare inmates to leave prison and to continue their treatment in the community

The Drug Treatment and Testing Order was rolled out to courts in England and Wales on 1 October 2001. The main aim of the DTTO is to prevent re-offending, with the longer term aim of getting users off drugs for good. The Order is usually a stand-alone but a Community Rehabilitation Order can be imposed alongside the order (where a residence requirement is required, other than for residential treatment). The DTTO obliges the offender to undergo treatment at a specified place (residential centre or while continuing to reside in the community) for a set period which can be anything between 6 months and 3 years

2001: 147 places in 18 transitional accommodation/20 host family networks 1999: 215 families has welcomed 348 drug users, total capacity 2001: 1,250 places

T.E.A. 2001: 147 places in 18 facilities. TIG: 561 measures in 1998 to 511 in 1999 and to 504 in 2000. Approximately 200 annual punishments are pronounced for these two main related charges

A total of 716 have been diverted to receive detoxification treatment from Courts of Justice and 1,861 inmates have been diverted from penitentiary centres. In 2000, the number of individuals on alternative rendering of service that received treatment at community centres was 2,838. A total of 199 centres were used for this purpose, of which 21 were sentence-rendering apartments (99 users), 66 therapeutic communities (698 users) and other resources, mainly surgery centres where a total of 2,041 individuals received treatment during 2000. A total of 8,319 inmates have been diverted to community services in 2000. Most diversions affected inmates on parole or probation or after rendering sentences. On the 31 December 2001, 1.895 drug-dependent offenders were rendering alternatives to prison sentences. Of these, 1,401 was non-freedom restrictive measures (ambulatory treatment in a social-sanitary centre) and 494 were freedom restrictive measures (non-ambulatory treatment in a detoxification center)

In 1993, about one-third of all prisoners classified as drug users were in some of the above-mentioned drug treatment programmes on a census day. This share rose to 45 per cent in 1997 but is now back at the 1993 level again. During 1999, 1,209 persons received such a sentence, and in 2000 1,147. Out of those, approximately one-third were sentenced for a drug-related crime

1990-1999 (S2 criminal code). 70% of drug addicts successfully completed the alternative detention period. This alternative is often available late in the addict’s criminal career; criminal recidivism is relatively low in comparison with the clientele’s crime rate. Problem with being discharged after alternative detention period. Evaluation report on cooperation of social authorities and the prison probation service shows promising progress

Suspended sentence pilot: initial evaluations were positive. In autumn 2001, the results on completion and criminal recidivism were of such limited success that it has now been decided to stop the study. Only one-third of the participants succeeded in completing the pilot Criminal recidivism was more then 80%. One of the reasons was the very rigid time frame for the various phases of treatment (limited possibilities to allow for individual treatment needs), and that since its beginning in 1995 the pilot project scheme has become the poorer alternative for addicts

The record on treatment orders drawn up in 1997 by the Ministry of Employment and Solidarity shows a continued improvement in relations between the state prosecutors and the DDASS, with the development of cooperative methods that operate formally (agreements on objectives and guidelines for treatment orders) or informally (regular consultative meetings)

A Community Service Order. There is F22a perceived lack of suitability of community service for offenders with addictions (Expert Group on The Probation and Welfare Services 1999). This can be due to the Probation Service’s inability to provide occupational insurance in the event of an accident owing to known disability in the offender, e.g. addiction

A Community Service Order. There is a perceived lack of suitability of community service for offenders with addictions (Expert Group on The Probation and Welfare Services, 1999). This can be due to the Probation Service’s inability to provide occupational insurance in the event of an accident owing to known disability in the offender, e.g. addiction

Drug Court. To date, 44 offenders have been referred to the Drug Court. The pilot phase is being evaluated over its initial 12-month period, with a focus on ‘success’ in terms of changes in offending behaviour, cost and feasibility of expansion to cover the remaining areas of the city. The evaluation is due for completion in May 2002

Early intervention. Unfortunately, participation appeared to be low. At follow-up no differences in drug-related nuisance appear between those who participated in early intervention and those who did not participate. The criminality rate remains high. Two-thirds of the participants took part in treatments but did not comply to an entire treatment programme. Usually, outpatient treatment is ended very quickly, and most clinical treatment after 1 month. More than 75% of these clinical treatments end against the advice of the professionals. Low participation rates imply that the societal effects of early interventions are negligible

Evidently, imprisonment of criminal drug users partly solves public nuisance or criminal acts immediately, but in most cases criminal recidivism occurs after release from prison. Is early intervention (outpatient and inpatient) a solution for this recidivism? Is the stick an effective instrument? Will early intervention increase client compliance?

The effectiveness of this mandatory drug treatment order is still unknown. In September 2001, process evaluation of the SOV started and results will be available in 2004. Final results of the effect evaluation (started in June 2002) are expected in late 2006

A majority of Irish people are implicitly questioning the efficacy of the use of prison as a criminal justice sanction for drug addicts. A majority of the Irish public agrees with the statement that drug addicts charged with a petty offence ought to be allowed to choose between treatment and prison. Those against the decriminalisation argued that public opinion was opposed to such a change. A general population survey (Bryan et al. 2000) to examine drug-related knowledge, attitudes and beliefs could be interpreted to support this view - 66 per cent agreed that cannabis should be against the law. Results from the same study found that drug-related crime is considered to be a major problem in Ireland by 94 per cent (n = 998) of those interviewed, and three-quarters of the sample felt that the drug problem was out of control

In 1997 an evaluation project was begun to determine the feasibility and effects of an early intervention approach of the probation office for arrested addicts (Korf et al., 2000). All drug-related arrests were used for the feasibility study and a subsample of 200 arrests were used to study the effects

The negative image of Dutch probation and subsequently the high refusal rate of arrested addicts is a fourth bottleneck. The stick (cooperation or detention) is supposed to be a better incentive than the carrot (‘it is better for you to cooperate’). The Netherlands Mental Health Care Organisation (GGZ-Nederland) recommended to push the moment of choice ahead to when clients are in fact imprisoned to increase the acceptability. Early intervention will then be changed to a type of coercive care in a later phase SOV. An experiment was set up in a big city (Rotterdam) in 1996 to determine for what categories of drug users the programme would apply

Therefore participants did not have to meet specific inclusion criteria. The evaluation results (de Koning, Intraval, 1998) showed that in the first year some 90 drug addicts participated. After 6 months working with SOV, professionals abandoned their initial ideas about collective methods and opted for individualised programmes. Experts argue against the SOV by stating that the effects of coercive treatment on criminality in general are small. SOV is also assumed to be inappropriate for addicts with serious mental problems and/or severe problems in social relations. For the first 4 years, this new intramural (Triple Ex) facility will operate as a scientific experiment. Initial results are planned to be presented at the end of 2001

For some addicts, the programme of 1.5 to 2 years might even be too short to change their behaviour. The conclusion is that it is unlikely that SOV will have positive effects on some categories of clients but, with some adjustments, other categories may benefit from it. Though relapses often occurred after offering clients more responsibility for their own behaviour, in general participants rated this compulsory treatment as positive. A large number of them reported that compulsion was necessary for completing the programme

Early intervention (V.I.A.). During the evaluation years few potentially eligible addicts are inclined to enter early intervention. Several bottlenecks might account for this lack of enthusiasm and recommendations were given for improvement. The first selection was made by police officers, their selection criteria remained unknown to probation officers, thus selection appeared to be suboptimal. A close cooperation between the police and probation is required. The lack of sufficient personnel (police, jurisdiction, probation officers) to realise early intervention is a second bottleneck. Besides an increase in personnel, a more efficient data management in Dutch probation office is proposed. Third, the communication between probation and addiction care partners need to be improved by enhancing accessibility and information exchange.

Treatment for local criminal addicts (Triple-Ex). This experimental 4-year project also includes detoxification and several types of aftercare (treatment of psychosocial problems, social relations, daily work). It has been restricted to the area of the city of The Hague. Evaluation of this programme showed that some 40 per cent of the ex-clients haven’t used drugs anymore during the following 2 years (Addiction Severity Index). The others started to use drugs again, three-quarters of them for longer than 6 months. Still, more than half of these relapsed clients did not take drugs anymore in the month before follow-up measurement. In the same month clients had worked for a mean of 25 days. More than 90 per cent entered another treatment after finishing Triple-Ex. During the follow-up most of them were arrested at least once for criminal acts, more than one-third more than once. A longer duration of treatment was related to a reduction in relapse rates. Satisfaction was not related to any outcome (Vermeulen et al., 1999)

Early interventions. Therefore, we should consider these programmes as one more resource in the network for the attention of drug-addicted individuals. These services have proved efficient and, in this sense, they must be supported, in order to encourage alternative rendering of sentence, since they allow an evaluation of drug addiction factors and the type of treatment, as well as the production of evaluation reports

The social services of the different penitentiary centres carry out the evaluation and control of inmates on parole. The Treatment Council (Junta de Tratamiento) produces an individual programme for the evaluation of inmates that must be followed by the penitentiary services with the collaboration from community services

.

Electronic monitoring. This new type of sanction seems to have been used to a lesser extent for drug users than for others, since the proportion of persons classified as such at the admission has increased from about 40 per cent to 50 per cent during the second half of the 1990s

There is emerging evidence that a few drug misusers are responsible for a huge amount of crime. The DTTO is, therefore, targeted at problem drug misusers aged 16 or over who commit crime to fund their drugs habit, show a willingness to cooperate with treatment and are before the court for an offence that is sufficiently serious to attract a community sentence