This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52008XG1220(01)
EU Drugs Action Plan for 2009-2012
EU Drugs Action Plan for 2009-2012
EU Drugs Action Plan for 2009-2012
IO C 326, 20.12.2008, p. 7–25
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
20.12.2008 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 326/7 |
EU Drugs Action Plan for 2009-2012
(2008/C 326/09)
Introduction
Illicit drugs are a major concern for the citizens of Europe, a major threat to the security and health of European society and a threat to living conditions worldwide.
In December 2004, the European Council unanimously endorsed the EU Drugs Strategy for 2005-2012 (1), which aims to achieve a high level of protection, well-being and social cohesion by preventing and reducing drug use.
The adoption of the Strategy in itself gave a clear signal that political concern about drugs across the European Union transcends the differences in approach that exist among Member States. The Strategy, implemented by two successive EU Drugs Action Plans, confirmed that all Member States subscribe to the same set of basic principles: that there should be a balanced approach to reducing the supply and demand for drugs, which is based first and foremost on the fundamental principles of EU law and, in every regard, upholds the founding values of the Union: respect for human dignity, liberty, democracy, equality, solidarity, the rule of law and human rights. The Strategy and its Action Plans aim to protect and improve the well-being of society and of the individual, to protect public health, to offer a high level of security for the general public. This should be accompanied by horizontal measures in which drug policy is based on reliable data regarding the nature and extent of the problem, on — increasingly — cross-border — coordination and on cooperation with and towards third countries and international organisations. The Strategy and its Action Plans are also based on the relevant UN Conventions, which are major legal instruments for addressing the world drug problem.
The Drugs Strategy also provides the framework for two consecutive four-year Action Plans. The first Action Plan (2005-2008) (2) set out over 80 actions to help coordinate major areas of government intervention in the field of illegal drugs, covering public health, law enforcement, customs, criminal justice and external relations. While implementation is often the responsibility of the Member States, the Commission plays an active part in facilitating and evaluating the work in progress, in addition to monitoring anti-drug legislation, such as Council Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA on Illicit Drug Trafficking, on which it will report in mid 2009. Moreover, guided by the lessons learnt over the past four years, the Commission is now proposing a second Action Plan (2009-2012) to be endorsed by the Council.
What has the present Action Plan on Drugs achieved so far?
The current Plan states as its ultimate aim to:
‘… significantly reduce the prevalence of drug use among the population and to reduce the social and health damage caused by the use of and trade in illicit drugs’.
The evaluation report (3) is a joint effort by the Commission, the Member States, the European Monitoring Centre on Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), Europol, and European NGO networks represented in the Civil Society Forum. It is the most extensive assessment of the implementation of EU drug policy to date and shows that the objectives of the present Plan have been partly achieved:
— |
drug use in the EU remains at high levels. Available data suggest that the use of heroin, cannabis and synthetic drugs has stabilised or is declining but that cocaine use is rising in a number of Member States. The total number of people in the EU who have at some time taken drugs (lifetime prevalence) — is estimated at 70 million for cannabis, at least 12 million for cocaine, 9,5 million for ecstasy, and 11 million for amphetamines, while at least half a million people are known to be receiving substitution treatment for drugs like heroin (4), |
— |
although there is no reason for complacency, data available for comparable countries in other parts of the world show that the consumption of cannabis, cocaine, and amphetamines in the EU is significantly lower than, for instance, in the US. The same is true for the number of reported HIV infections related to drug injections, |
— |
the evaluation also shows that Member States' drug policies are converging and that there is a shift towards underpinning national policies with action plans, |
— |
evidence so far shows that the EU is succeeding in at least containing the complex social phenomenon of widespread substance use and abuse in the population, and that it is increasingly focusing on measures to address the harm caused by drugs to individuals and society. It is important to note that it has done so in spite of the fact that over the period under review the world's illicit opiate production rose sharply and an unprecedented traffic of cocaine has been targeted at the EU. Seen against this background of sharply increased supply, the EU's record of managing the problem emerges in a more positive light, |
— |
in terms of international cooperation, there is now better coordination of EU positions in international fora on drugs, as in the UN's Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) for instance. Moreover, the EU's integrated and balanced approach to drugs is increasingly serving as a model for other countries worldwide. |
The current Action Plan (2005-2008) is an ambitious exercise. While progress has been made in many areas, weaknesses have also been identified.
Policy coordination problems persist in many areas, and even if the quality of information on the EU situation regarding drug use, prevention and treatment has consistently improved, considerable knowledge gaps remain: there is a persistent lack of reliable data on drug supply but also on the scope and outcomes of drug-related assistance to third countries.
How to increase commitment across society to reduce drug use
Clearly the EU needs to do more to reduce the impact of health, social, developmental, and economic problems caused by drug use. If millions of Europeans have at some stage taken drugs or are doing so right now, there is a gap between public policy and public behaviour that no society can afford to ignore.
There is evidence to suggest that one of the more (cost-) effective approaches to deal with drug use is for public services engaged in prevention, treatment, harm reduction and law enforcement, to work together in partnership with voluntary organisations and service providers. In other words, an alliance between citizens and the institutions created by them and for them.
It is time to put the people of Europe at the centre of policy in this field and to get Europe's citizens more involved. As a first step, the Commission helped set up the European Civil Society Forum on Drugs, in 2006. To support the implementation of the EU Action Plan on Drugs, the Commission will, during the life of the next Action Plan, examine ways to mobilise all those who wish to take part for a formal commitment to do what is necessary at their level and with the means at their disposal to reduce the harm that drugs do to people. An idea to develop in this respect is the formulation of a ‘European Alliance on Drugs’, which aims to mobilise a broad range of civil society structures that are active both within and outside the drug field.
Towards a new Action Plan on Drugs 2009-2012
The EU Drugs Strategy deals with a complex phenomenon that requires a long-term approach to bring about change. It is centred on the two key dimensions of drug policy, drug demand reduction and drug supply reduction, complemented by three cross-cutting themes, coordination, international cooperation and information, research and evaluation.
To support the Strategy, the Commission proposes a new Action Plan on Drugs (2009-2012), which builds on the existing framework but also on the lessons learned over the past four years. With due regard to national legislation, it identifies the following priorities:
1. Improving coordination, cooperation and raising public awareness
Coordination and cooperation in the drug field can be strengthened at both European and national level so that drug policies are relevant to professionals and civil society, while at the same time enabling these structures to provide feedback to inform policy.
2. Reducing the demand for drugs
We need to further improve the effectiveness of measures to reduce drug use and its consequences by improving the coverage, quality and effectiveness of demand reduction interventions, i.e. prevention, treatment and harm reduction services. This includes particular attention for vulnerable groups and the prevention of poly-drug use (combined use of illicit and licit substances, including alcohol, volatile substances and tobacco).
3. Reducing the supply of drugs
We need more effective law enforcement at EU level to counter drug production and trafficking, making full use of the capacities of Europol and other EU structures. Actions should be based on an intelligence-led approach that systematically prioritises the suppliers causing the most harm or posing the most serious threat. The work currently being undertaken to strengthen the links and coherence between the data used by the various EU JHA entities will be necessary to support this. More coordinated operations via regional security platforms should be supported. The new platforms should be set up without overlapping and be compatible with existing structures.
4. Improving international cooperation
The effectiveness of EU, the world's major donor in the struggle for sustainable solutions to the global drug problem, would benefit greatly from better coordination of national and Community policies. We are ready to intensify our commitment in the field of international cooperation to this end, while reaffirming that effective drug control must be based on the concept of a ‘balanced approach’ — emphasizing that illicit drug cultivation is an important component of drug supply.
5. Improving understanding of the problem
We need to increase our knowledge of all aspects of drug use through more and better coordinated research and data, including data on drug-related crime and on the way the illicit drug supply market works.
The Action Plan that follows is intended as a framework to implement these priorities and to add European value where appropriate.
I. COORDINATION |
|||||||||||||||
Main priority: More efficient policy development and implementation |
|||||||||||||||
Objective |
Action |
Timetable |
Responsible party |
Indicators |
Assessment tools |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS COM Council |
Objectives of the EU Drugs Strategy and Action Plans included in national policies Drug policy at EU level reflects the objectives of the Drugs Strategy |
Commission Progress Review |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
Council |
Relevant Council Working Parties (5) inform/involve HDG actively and vice versa |
Report on drug-related work of Council working groups to HDG |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM Council |
Coherence between internal and external drug policy realised By 2010: COM Communication on the coherence between internal and external drug policy |
Commission Communication on coordination in internal and external drug policy |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
Council COM MS EMCDDA Europol Eurojust |
Council conclusions |
Presidency conclusions |
|||||||||||
|
Twice annually |
PRES MS |
Effective impact on policy coordination Council conclusions |
Presidency report to HDG |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Member States' contributions in the HDG and other working groups are coherent |
Commission Progress Review Reitox national reporting's |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
COM |
Forum meets at least once a year Commission reports outcome to HDG |
Commission Progress Review Reports from Civil Society Forum on Drugs |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM |
Wide commitment to Alliance (COM) |
Activity assessment report |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM MS |
Civil society takes part in national dialogue Input received from civil society |
Commission Progress Review MS report to COM |
|||||||||||
II. DEMAND REDUCTION |
|||||||||||||||
Main priority: To reduce the demand for drugs, and the health and social consequences of drug use by improving the coverage, quality and effectiveness of services of prevention, treatment and harm reduction |
|||||||||||||||
Objective |
Action |
Timetable |
Responsible party |
Indicator |
Assessment tools |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Increased availability of evidence-based evaluated programmes and comprehensive strategies in MS, including those targeting first use Prevalence of youth drug use & perception of peer drug use |
Reitox national reporting's ESPAD & HBSC surveys on school children |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Trends in drug use Analysis of risk and protective factors in drug use Increased availability of outcome-evaluated, targeted prevention programmes in MS |
PDU key epidemiological indicator Reitox national reporting's |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Trends in drug use Analysis of risk and protective factors in drug use Increased availability of outcome-evaluated, targeted prevention programmes in MS |
PDU key epidemiological indicator Reitox national reporting's |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Trends in treatment demand outcome and retention Increased availability of diversified and evidence-based treatment in MS |
TDI key epidemiological indicator Reitox national reporting's |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Increased availability and effectiveness, when possible, of rehabilitation and reintegration programmes in MS |
Data on availability of social reintegration Reitox national reporting's |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Information strategies in place in MS Public register of services available (e.g. internet portal) |
Reitox national reporting's |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Increased availability of ATP ATP implementation monitored (COM) |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
2009-2012 |
MS COM EMCDDA |
Existence of relevant guidelines and/or quality standards Level of implementation of guidelines and/or standards |
Commission Progress Review Reitox national reporting's |
||||||||||
|
2012 |
MS COM EMCDDA |
Methodological framework for the survey developed Number of Member States that complete the survey |
COM inventory of MS survey reports |
|||||||||||
|
2012 |
MS Council COM EMCDDA |
Development of the consensus on quality standards and benchmarks for prevention, treatment, harm reduction and rehabilitation interventions and services |
COM proposal on EU consensus Council conclusions |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Availability of relevant services |
Reitox national reporting's |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Drug policies and interventions implemented specifically for delivery of drug services in prison and follow-up of ex-prisoners Decrease in drug-related health problems in prison |
Commission Progress Review Reitox national reporting's |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS COM EMCDDA |
Indicator to monitor drug use, drug-related health problems and drug services conceived and implemented Report on progress |
Standardised monitoring protocol for prison drug situation & responses |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS |
COM to report on progress Decrease in drug-related infectious diseases Decrease in number of drug-related deaths Improved coverage of harm reduction services |
COM follow-up survey of CR 2003/488/EC DRID key epidemiological indicator DRD key epidemiological indicator |
||||||||||
III. SUPPLY REDUCTION |
|||||||||||||||
Main priority: A measurable improvement in the effectiveness of law enforcement in the field of drugs at EU level. Europol, Eurojust and other EU structures to fully exercise the respective roles for which they were created, in the interest of efficiency, EU compatibility of national initiatives, intra-EU coordination, and economies of scale |
|||||||||||||||
Objective |
Action |
Timetable |
Responsible party |
Indicator |
Assessment tools |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS Europol Eurojust Council |
Number of criminal organisations posing serious threats that are targeted by MS using the ECIM concept Number and nature of emerging threats (such as new drugs, new trafficking routes and methods, new manufacturing methods) identified |
EU Organised Threat Assessment (OCTA) (and subsequent Council conclusions setting EU priorities for the fight against organised crime) |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS Europol Eurojust |
Number and outcome of drug-related bilateral and multilateral cooperation initiatives, JITs and JCOs Number of MS involved |
Commission Progress Review MS reports to COM Assessment report on results achieved |
|||||||||||
|
2012 |
MS Europol |
Report of Europol assessing the quantity and quality of data received |
Commission Progress Review Europol assessment report |
|||||||||||
|
2012 |
MS Europol |
Expertise of Member States represented at management meetings and the seniority of MS representation Report of COSPOL drivers assessing the increase in identifiable operational results |
Commission Progress Review MS reports to COM |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
CEPOL MS |
Curriculum developed for drug law enforcement Additional relevant training included in CEPOL AWP Number of training courses Number of officers trained |
Curriculum published CEPOL annual report Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS Europol Eurojust |
Increase in international operational law enforcement cooperation reported by Member States, Europol, Eurojust Number of international law enforcement cooperations |
Commission Progress Review Evaluation report on MS, Europol and Eurojust contributions |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS COM Europol |
System or systems in place |
2012 Progress Review (including the assessment of value) |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS COM Eurojust |
Report on best practices and recommendations Increase in number of mutual assistance requests Increase in number of European arrest warrants Other indicators to be developed (cf. Action 61) |
COM assessment of Council Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA of 25 October 2004 laying down minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking COM progress review (new indicators) |
||||||||||
|
2012 |
MS COM Eurojust |
Existing national legislation |
Final report by the Presidency |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS COM Council Eurojust Europol |
COM Communication adopted Assessments of assets seized |
Commission Progress Review MS reports to COM on assets seized |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM MS Europol Eurojust |
Increase in number of supported investigations relating to asset tracing and identification Increase in number and value of cash and assets confiscated |
Commission Progress Review COM implementation report on Council Decision 2007/845/JHA |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS Council Europol COM |
Response measures to pro-actively handle risk and minimise threats have been put in place in relatively short time frame Increase in number of criminal operations disrupted (seizures, changing trafficking behaviour) Reports by regional security platforms |
Assessment report by MS concerned to Council Security platforms evaluation report |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS Europol Eurojust Council |
Operational and strategic outcomes of MS action taken |
Commission Progress Review MS reports to COM |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS Europol Eurojust |
Outcomes of joint projects initiated/completed Dismantled production facilities reported to EILCS Number of SYNERGY reports generated |
Commission Progress Review |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
COM Council MS |
Joint EU positions in international fora |
Commission Progress Review COM report on all practices |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Improvement in precursor control, detection, seizure and profiling situation compared with 2008 Drawing up of profiles for the determination of chemical precursors |
Commission Progress Review MS report to COM |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM MS |
Increase in number of stopped and/or seized shipments |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS EJUP Europol |
Increase of reporting to Europol projects on precursors trafficking by MS and EJUP |
MS and EJUP Progress Report |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM MS |
Conclusion of the evaluation |
Report published |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM |
Agreements established Reduction of illicit shipments of drug precursors from the countries concerned |
Commission Progress Review MS Reports to COM |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM MS/EJUP Europol |
Number of interdisciplinary meetings/joint initiatives established |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
IV. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION |
|||||||||||||||
Main priority: Improve the effectiveness of EU cooperation with third countries and international organisations in the field of drugs through closer coordination of policies within the EU. Promoting the consistent projection worldwide of the European balanced approach to the drugs problem |
|||||||||||||||
Objective |
Action |
Timetable |
Responsible party |
Indicator |
Assessment tool |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS COM |
Drug policy priorities increasingly reflected in relations with third countries |
Agreements, strategy papers, action plans, etc. Commission Progress Review |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
Council COM |
Cooperation initiatives established and implemented |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM MS |
Drug policy priorities reflected in projects funded Projects funded reflect balance between demand and supply reduction Synergies established between MS and EC funding programmes |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM MS |
New inter-regional cooperation initiatives established and implemented Synergies established between MS and EC funding programmes Increase in number and overall budget of projects funded |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
Annual |
Council MS COM |
Mechanism established Annual reports by this mechanism Overview of drug-related EC and MS projects in third countries |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
2010 |
COM |
Survey carried out |
COM survey report published |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS COM |
Priorities identified Level of implementation of the Action Plans |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS COM Dublin Group |
Number of Dublin Group recommendations implemented |
Dublin Group Reports |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS COM |
Number of projects and programmes funded in line with the EU approach on Alternative development (9598/06 CORDROGUE 44 and UNODC/CND/2008/WG.3/CRP.4) Reported decrease in illicit drug crop cultivation and increase of social and economic development at the primary stakeholder level (13) in third countries financially supported from EU funds |
(Project/Programmes) Agreements Internal Project and Programme Monitoring and Evaluation system and reports National Statistics of third countries MS Reports to COM |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS COM |
National policies, strategies and action plans reflecting drug issues |
Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRSP),Country Assistance Strategies CAS), National Development Strategies, (National) Action Plans MS Reports to COM |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS COM |
Number of supported initiatives Impact of the supported initiatives on the sustainability of legal livelihood systems:
Number of evaluated projects that have shown positive impact |
Initiatives MS Reports to COM Internal Project and Programme Monitoring and Evaluation system and reports Baseline Surveys implemented by WHO, WFP, FAO |
|||||||||||
|
|
2009 |
Council PRES MS |
Coordination between Vienna delegations and HDG strengthened |
Commission Progress Review |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
PRES MS COM Council |
Number of joint EU resolutions EU common positions supported by other regions |
Commission Progress Review Convergence Indicator (9099/05 CORDROGUE 27) |
|||||||||||
|
2009 |
Council MS COM |
Inclusion of the EU's positions in the UN Political Declaration |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
MS COM |
Regular mutual information on activities in appropriate fora, in particular at HDG meetings Coordination strengthened |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS COM Council EMCDDA Europol |
Countries increasingly complying with EU acquis Number and quality of projects completed Advancement of dialogue and/or cooperation with relevant EU agencies Level of implementation of action plans |
Commission Progress Review Country reports |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS COM |
Effective result of dialogue |
Commission Progress Review |
||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM |
Number of drug-related projects implemented under the ENP Instrument |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
V. INFORMATION, RESEARCH, & EVALUATION |
|||||||||||||||
Main priority: Improving the understanding of all aspects of the phenomenon of drug use in order to expand the knowledge base for public policy and raise awareness among citizens of the social and health implications of drug use, and to carry out research |
|||||||||||||||
Objective |
Action |
Timetable |
Responsible party |
Indicator |
Assessment tools |
||||||||||
|
|
2009 |
MS COM EMCDDA Council |
Research priorities established Mechanisms identified and put in place |
COM proposal on research in EU Council Conclusions |
||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS EMCDDA |
Exchange of data required for monitoring & evaluation purposes Level of Reitox funding and other resources match requirements NFPs contribute according to agreed standards |
EMCDDA annual report on NFP capacity Reitox national reporting's |
||||||||||
|
|
2012 |
MS EMCDDA COM |
Increase compliance of MS with implementation criteria for key indicators Improvement in treatment demand and problem use (17) indicators Indicators/measures for rehabilitation and reintegration Measures in drug demand reduction Number of MS that have fully implemented Treatment Demand Indicator |
EMCDDA compliance report COM services paper on drug-related data |
||||||||||
|
2010 |
MS COM |
Outcomes of the scientific study |
Report of the study by COM |
|||||||||||
|
Ongoing |
COM EMCDDA Europol MS |
Key indicators identified Implementation strategy developed |
COM services paper on drug-related data |
|||||||||||
|
2010 |
COM EMCDDA MS |
Analytical instruments developed More accurate analysis of drug situation |
COM studies EMCDDA |
|||||||||||
|
2010 |
COM Council EMCDDA Europol EMEA |
Assessment conducted Possible amendment proposed |
Assessment report |
|||||||||||
|
|
Ongoing |
MS |
Number of countries that have evaluated drug policies |
MS evaluation reports published |
||||||||||
|
Annual |
COM EMCDDA Europol MS Council |
Annual progress review delivered Availability of relevant indicators |
Commission Progress Review |
|||||||||||
|
2012 |
COM Council MS |
Assessment of achievement of individual actions The impact on the overall drug situation is known |
External evaluation report published |
(1) 15074/04 CORDROGUE 77 SAN 187 ENFOPOL 187 RELEX 564.
(3) Commission Staff Working Paper — Report of the Final evaluation of the EU Drugs Action Plan (2005-2008) (doc. 13407/08 ADD 3).
(4) EMCDDA Annual Report 2007.
(5) These Council Working Parties include: Police and Customs Working Parties, the Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime, the Health Working Group, External Affairs Working Groups and the Economic Issues Working Group.
(6) This action builds on the Council Recommendation 2003/488/EC on the prevention and reduction of health-related harm associated with drug dependence.
(7) European Police College; Council Decision 2005/681/JHA.
(8) Including dismantling of illicit drug laboratories.
(9) Project SYNERGY includes the Analysis Work File (AWF), the Europol Illicit Laboratory Comparison System (EILCS) and the Ecstasy Logo System, the latter incorporated within the general Europol Synthetic Drugs Seizure System (ESDSS).
(10) 12353/02 CORDROGUE 78 CODRO 1 NIS 107.
(11) 7163/1/99 REV 1 CORDROGUE 19 CODRO 2; Port of Spain Declaration — 10451/07 CORDROGUE 34 COLAT 9 AMLAT 54.
(12) 5062/2/03 REV 2 CORDROGUE 3 COWEB 76 + COR 1.
(13) 13501/1/08 REV 1 CORDROGUE 71 UD 172, Annex III.
(14) Political Declaration (resolution S-20/2, Annex) of the twentieth Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly.
(15) 5062/2/03 REV 2 CORDROGUE 3 COWEB 76 + COR 1.
(16) Réseau Européen d'Information sur les Drogues et les Toxicomanies.
(17) EMCDDA indicator to be brought in line with criteria of public health relevance (such as intensity of use and health consequences) including international classifications (DSM-V/ICD-10).