Comunicação da Comissão ao Conselho e ao Parlamento Europeu sobre os resultados da avaliação final da Estratégia da União Europeia de Luta contra a Droga e do Plano de Acção da União Europeia em matéria de luta contra a droga (2000 2004) /* COM/2004/0707 final */
Bruxelas, 22.10.2004 COM(2004)707 final COMUNICAÇÃO DA COMISSÃO AO CONSELHO E AO PARLAMENTO EUROPEU sobre os resultados da avaliação final da Estratégia da União Europeia de Luta contra a Droga e do Plano de Acção da União Europeia em matéria de luta contra a droga (2000-2004) 1. ESTRATÉGIA DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA DE LUTA CONTRA A DROGA E PLANO DE ACÇÃO DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA EM MATÉRIA DE LUTA CONTRA A DROGA (2000-2004) EM 1999, a Comissão apresentou uma Comunicação relativa a um plano de acção da União Europeia em matéria de luta contra a droga (2000-2004)[1], com base na qual o Conselho Europeu de Helsínquia subscreveu a Estratégia da União Europeia de luta contra a droga (2000-2004)[2]. A estratégia insta a uma abordagem multidisciplinar integrada em matéria de droga, considerando a redução da respectiva procura e oferta igualmente importantes e mutuamente reforçadoras de uma estratégia equilibrada. Em Junho de 2000, o Conselho Europeu de Santa Maria da Feira adoptou o Plano de Acção da UE em matéria de luta contra a droga (2000-2004)[3], que traduzia a Estratégia da União Europeia de luta contra a droga em cerca de uma centena de acções concretas a realizar pelos Estados-Membros, a Comissão, o Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência (OEDT) e a Europol. O Plano de Acção determina que a Comissão organize avaliações adequadas a título intercalar e uma vez terminada a Estratégia da União Europeia de luta contra a droga (2000-2004). Em Novembro de 2002, a Comissão apresentou uma Comunicação sobre a avaliação intercalar[4]. A presente Comunicação apresenta os resultados da avaliação final e alicerça a evolução futura da política da União Europeia em matéria de droga nas lições retiradas da aplicação da actual política. 2. OBJECTIVO E PROCESSO DE AVALIAÇÃO FINAL 2.1. Objectivo O objectivo da avaliação final consiste em apreciar o nível de realização das actividades previstas no Plano de Acção, em que medida se alcançaram os objectivos da Estratégia de luta contra a droga, bem como o impacto da Estratégia e do Plano de Acção na situação em matéria de droga na União Europeia. A avaliação do impacto da política em matéria de droga está ainda a decorrer e a falta de objectivos operacionais precisos e quantificáveis na actual Estratégia e Plano de Acção de luta contra a droga não facilitam a tarefa. No entanto, deu-se início ao processo de avaliação do impacto e à definição de indicadores-chave e de instrumentos que poderão, no futuro, funcionar como normas de qualidade para a adopção de novas estratégias e políticas. 2.2. Processo A avaliação teve início em Abril de 2003, com a criação de um grupo director (composto por representantes da Comissão, dos quatro Estados-Membros que detiveram a Presidência em 2003-2004, do OEDT e da Europol), que fiscalizasse e orientasse a avaliação final. O grupo reuniu-se quatro vezes, para determinar os instrumentos e métodos de avaliação e para acompanhar o processo. Em Novembro de 2003, foi enviado um questionário aos Estados-Membros[5] para se obterem pormenores das acções do Plano de Acção por eles implementadas (Anexo 1). Os serviços da Comissão relevantes, o OEDT e a Europol receberam um quadro de acompanhamento semelhante (Anexo 2). O OEDT e a Comissão prepararam uma série de documentos temáticos incidindo sobre aspectos específicos da problemática da droga[6]. O OEDT preparou um panorama estatístico, juntamente com a Europol, que contém os dados fundamentais sobre a situação em matéria de droga em 1999 e em 2002-2003[7]. Em Abril/Maio de 2004 procedeu-se a um inquérito Eurobarómetro sobre as atitudes/percepções dos jovens em matéria de droga[8]. Os principais resultados são comparados com os de um inquérito semelhante realizado em 2002. Foram ainda tidos em consideração o relatório final sobre a aplicação da lei e seu papel na luta contra o tráfico de droga[9], os planos de execução de acções contra a oferta de drogas sintéticas[10] e sobre a redução da procura e da oferta[11], o relatório aprovado pelo Conselho sobre a evolução da respectiva implementação[12] e outras iniciativas adoptadas (Anexo 3). Os dados recolhidos nas diferentes fontes foram analisados de forma a salientar os principais resultados ao longo do período em questão e as áreas onde são necessários progressos. Foram igualmente utilizados para avaliar o nível de resultados das actividades definidas no Plano de Acção e a que ponto corresponderam aos objectivos definidos na Estratégia de luta contra a droga. O panorama estatístico fornece a base de avaliação do impacto da Estratégia de luta contra a droga e do Plano de Acção na prática. Os dados fornecidos para a avaliação final abrangem o período compreendido entre 1999 e Junho de 2004. 3. PRINCIPAIS RESULTADOS E ÁREAS QUE REQUEREM PROGRESSOS 3.1. Coordenação Resultados a nível nacional - Os Estados-Membros têm vindo a adoptar novas estratégias em matéria de droga desde 1999. A maior parte abrange todas as actividades relacionadas com a droga. - A sensibilização dos Estados-Membros relativamente à necessidade de coordenação pluridisciplinar em matéria de droga aumentou. Todos os Estados-Membros reconhecem tratar-se de um elemento essencial da política em matéria de droga, mesmo se não existe uma definição única do termo "coordenação". Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível nacional - É necessário que a coordenação nacional em matéria de droga seja alargada a todas as áreas da política neste domínio, incluindo consultas regulares à sociedade civil. - As delegações beneficiariam de uma maior coordenação preliminar a nível nacional (por exemplo, entre os serviços de saúde pública, da justiça e assuntos internos, relações externas e autoridades orçamentais), na articulação das suas posições no Conselho. Resultados a nível da UE - Desde a adopção do Plano de Acção, realizaram-se reuniões dos coordenadores nacionais em matéria de droga duas vezes por ano. - A Comissão apresentou uma Comunicação sobre coordenação em matéria de droga, em 2003. Foi discutido um documento com os pareceres do Grupo horizontal "Drogas" sobre a Comunicação. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível da UE - É necessário garantir o seguimento adequado à Comunicação da Comissão sobre a coordenação em matéria de droga. As reuniões dos coordenadores nacionais devem privilegiar mais questões específicas. - A Comissão deve reforçar e simplificar os seus mecanismos de coordenação interna: é necessária uma coordenação mais visível e operacional de todos os serviços envolvidos nesta matéria. Deverão ser mantidos os elos estruturais com o OEDT. - Não há uma divisão clara de responsabilidades entre os grupos de trabalho do Conselho que se debruçam sobre questões de droga. O Grupo horizontal "Drogas" deve ter uma responsabilidade global pela coordenação do trabalho dos diferentes grupos sobre a matéria. - A sociedade civil não foi regularmente consultada no âmbito da formulação da política da UE em matéria de droga e é necessário que tais consultas passem a ser efectuadas regularmente. A Comissão abordará este assunto numa Comunicação em 2005. 3.2. Informação e avaliação Resultados a nível nacional - A disponibilidade e a qualidade dos dados sobre a situação em matéria de droga melhoraram na maioria dos Estados-Membros, tal como o apoio político necessário às actividades específicas de informação e avaliação. - Todos os Estados-Membros concordaram em aplicar os cinco indicadores epidemiológicos fulcrais[13] e em fornecer dados comparáveis e consolidados. - Alguns Estados-Membros avançaram no que respeita ao desenvolvimento de instrumentos de avaliação regular da eficácia das suas acções no domínio da droga. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível nacional - Há que melhorar o acompanhamento sistemático da implementação das estratégias/planos de acção nacionais em matéria de droga. Há igualmente que assegurar a avaliação regular da sua aplicação. - Os Estados-Membros devem prosseguir esforços no sentido da total implementação dos indicadores epidemiológicos. - É ainda necessário melhorar o fornecimento de informações sobre as despesas públicas no domínio da droga e a análise da relação custo-eficácia das políticas prosseguidas. Resultados a nível da UE - A disponibilidade e a qualidade dos dados e das informações sobre a situação em matéria de droga melhoraram sobretudo graças ao trabalho do OEDT e dos pontos nacionais de convergência. - O processo de avaliação final conduziu ao desenvolvimento de instrumentos metodológicos fulcrais e à criação de um grupo director que poderá constituir a estrutura para futuras avaliações das políticas da UE em matéria de droga. - Verificou-se uma melhoria no intercâmbio de informações sobre novas tendências em matéria de consumo de estupefacientes, em parte devido à criação de um sistema de alerta precoce no âmbito da Acção Comum sobre drogas sintéticas[14]. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível da UE - Constata-se falta de informações sobre o crime relacionado com a droga e impõe-se o aperfeiçoamento de indicadores adequados, tendo em consideração o trabalho do OEDT e da Europol nesta matéria. - Os mecanismos para controlo das novas tendências de consumo de estupefacientes requerem aperfeiçoamento. Há que desenvolver investigação sobre estas tendências. 3.3. Redução da procura Resultados a nível nacional - Todos os Estados-Membros estão conscientes da necessidade de adoptarem acções preventivas desde uma idade muito jovem. Criaram programas globais de prevenção implicando os peritos pertinentes e a sociedade civil. - São cada vez mais implementados projectos específicos de prevenção que visam o combate ao consumo de drogas diversas e ao abuso de substâncias lícitas e ilícitas. As campanhas de informação são cada vez mais dirigidas a grupos-alvo e visam comportamentos de risco, bem como a dependência em geral. - A maioria dos Estados-Membros aumentou o financiamento e a disponibilização de serviços de tratamento, tendo igualmente diversificado a gama de opções de tratamento. - Os Estados-Membros estão a dedicar maior atenção aos toxicodependentes sujeitos a sanções penais, tal como o ilustra o aumento das alternativas de carácter comunitário à prisão e uma maior disponibilidade de intervenção psicossocial e sanitária nas prisões. - Todos os Estados-Membros efectuaram pesquisa sobre os efeitos das drogas ilícitas e dos medicamentos na condução, tendo alguns introduzido medidas de controlo mais severas. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível nacional - Impõe-se uma avaliação mais regular da eficácia das medidas de tratamento e das medidas destinadas a reduzir as consequências nefastas para a saúde derivadas da toxicodependência. - Os Estados-Membros devem criar qualificações reconhecidas para os profissionais nas áreas da prevenção da toxicodependência e da redução dos efeitos perniciosos da toxicodependência sobre a saúde. Resultados a nível da UE - O Conselho adoptou diversas resoluções em matéria de prevenção da toxicodependência (cf. Anexo 3). - O Programa de Acção comunitária de prevenção da toxicodependência (1996-2002)[15] e o novo Programa de Acção no domínio da saúde pública (2003-2008)[16] providenciaram o co-financiamento de projectos de prevenção da toxicodependência. O tratamento é uma questão nova. - A Recomendação do Conselho relativa à prevenção e redução dos efeitos nocivos da toxicodependência para a saúde foi adoptada em 2003[17]. - Foram adoptados o Programa de Acção europeu destinado a reduzir o número de vítimas da estrada[18] e a Resolução do Conselho relativa ao impacto do uso de substâncias psicoactivas nos acidentes rodoviários[19]. Ambos têm em consideração os efeitos do álcool, das drogas e dos medicamentos na condução. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível da UE - É necessário que a UE promova a investigação em matéria de factores biomédicos, psicossociais e outros subjacentes ao consumo e dependência da droga, em especial em áreas onde este tipo de investigação é ainda limitado (por exemplo, consumo prolongado de canabis ou de drogas sintéticas). - Há que melhorar a divulgação de informações seguras e de elevada qualidade, bem como das melhores práticas. - A Comissão vai acompanhar os pontos fulcrais da Recomendação do Conselho de 2003, acima mencionada. 3.4. Redução da oferta Resultados a nível nacional - A cooperação entre os serviços responsáveis pela aplicação da lei foi melhorada na maioria dos Estados-Membros através da criação/reforço das estruturas e actividades, como por exemplo, equipas conjuntas polícia/alfândegas, operações conjuntas de aplicação da lei e protocolos de acordo. - Parece haver mais Estados-Membros com capacidade para operar de acordo com as disposições do artigo 17.º (Tráfico ilícito por mar) da Convenção das Nações Unidas contra o tráfico ilícito de estupefacientes e substâncias psicotrópicas (1988). - Todos os Estados-Membros transpuseram para a legislação nacional a Primeira Directiva relativa ao branqueamento de capitais[20], tendo onze de entre eles transposto a directiva que a altera[21]. Acresce ainda que os Estados-Membros introduziram novas medidas destinadas a reduzir o branqueamento de capitais, tais como poderes para impedir transacções e maior poder de controlo de viajantes que importem grandes somas em dinheiro. - Dez Estados-Membros transpuseram as disposições da Decisão-quadro do Conselho relativa às equipas de investigação conjuntas[22] e/ou ratificaram a Convenção relativa ao auxílio judiciário mútuo em matéria penal[23] ou indicaram dispor de legislação que lhes permite a criação deste tipo de equipas. - Dez Estados-Membros ratificaram a Convenção relativa à assistência mútua e à cooperação entre as administrações aduaneiras (Nápoles II)[24]. Catorze Estados-Membros ratificaram a Convenção sobre a utilização da informática no domínio aduaneiro (CIS)[25]. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível nacional - Os Estados-Membros que não comunicaram dispor das estruturas formais de cooperação entre os seus serviços responsáveis pela aplicação da lei deverão considerar a criação de estruturas formais adequadas. - Os Estados-Membros devem garantir que dispõem dos procedimentos necessários para operar de acordo com o previsto no artigo 17º da Convenção das Nações Unidas de 1988, bem como considerar a possibilidade de elaboração de um guia sobre a respectiva implementação. - Os Estados-Membros que ainda o não tenham feito deverão transpor a Segunda Directiva relativa ao branqueamento de capitais[26], a Decisão-quadro do Conselho sobre equipas de investigação conjuntas e/ou ratificar a Convenção da UE relativa ao auxílio judiciário mútuo em matéria penal, bem como ratificar a Convenção Nápoles II e a Convenção CIS. Resultados a nível da UE - Registou-se um avanço em matéria de cooperação entre os serviços responsáveis pela aplicação da lei ao nível da UE, através da criação/reforço de estruturas, das actividades da Europol e da Eurojust e de actividades como investigações conjuntas, operações aduaneiras conjuntas, cooperação marítima, equipas conjuntas e centros de cooperação policial e aduaneira. - Foram criados e estão a decorrer diversos projectos da UE (por exemplo, CASE, EELS e EILCS) que visam a identificação da produção e tráfico de drogas sintéticas. - Desde 2000, cinco substâncias foram objecto de medidas de controlo a nível da UE, com base na Acção Comum sobre drogas sintéticas. - Os programas de financiamento da UE, como o AGIS[27], têm desempenhado um papel significativo em matéria de cooperação entre as autoridades responsáveis pela aplicação da lei dos Estados-Membros. - Chegou-se a acordo político no que respeita à Decisão-quadro do Conselho sobre o estabelecimento de disposições mínimas relativas aos elementos constitutivos das infracções penais e das sanções aplicáveis no domínio do tráfico ilícito de droga[28]. Espera-se para breve a sua adopção formal. - Foi adoptado o Regulamento do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho relativo aos precursores de drogas (comércio intracomunitário)[29]. A Comissão apresentou uma proposta de regulamento do Conselho relativa ao comércio externo de precursores de droga[30]. - O OLAF contribuiu para um intercâmbio importante de informações em matéria de risco de desvio de precursores, mantendo o apoio aos sistemas Yachtinfo e Marinfo. - Está em discussão o desenvolvimento de uma unidade de coordenação operacional permanente de apoio às operações aduaneiras conjuntas. - A Comissão adoptou a proposta de terceira directiva relativa ao branqueamento de capitais[31]. - A adopção da Decisão do Conselho[32] relativa a disposições de cooperação entre as Unidades de informação financeira dos Estados-Membros em matéria de troca de informações veio providenciar um melhor quadro de cooperação. - Diversos Estados-Membros estão envolvidos em discussões no que respeita à constituição de equipas conjuntas e à atribuição de poderes adicionais e mais abrangentes de operação às respectivas autoridades policiais e judiciárias nos territórios uns dos outros. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível da UE - Os Estados-Membros devem criar equipas conjuntas de investigação que lhes permitam abordar os problemas de tráfico de droga entre si, tal como previsto na Decisão-quadro do Conselho e na Convenção. - É necessário discutir o desenvolvimento das operações conjuntas entre os serviços responsáveis pela aplicação da lei dos Estados-Membros. A criação e os resultados destas operações deverão ser comunicados ao Conselho e à Comissão. - Há que explorar a possibilidade de aumentar as operações que abordem a produção e o tráfico de drogas sintéticas. As sugestões da Comissão, no sentido de se localizarem as redes de distribuição, poderão ser um bom ponto de partida neste processo. - Impõe-se a aplicação integral da Recomendação do Conselho relativa ao alinhamento das estatísticas sobre as apreensões de drogas e precursores desviados efectuadas pelos serviços de aplicação da lei[33]. - A terceira directiva relativa a branqueamento de capitais deve ser adoptada pelo Parlamento Europeu e pelo Conselho o mais rapidamente possível. 3.5. Alargamento Embora o alargamento tenha ocorrido apenas oito meses antes do final do período abrangido pela Estratégia contra a droga, as iniciativas em matéria de droga fazem parte do acervo da UE. Todos os novos Estados-Membros e dois dos países candidatos responderam numa base voluntária ao questionário da Comissão[34]. Um resumo destes dados será incluído num relatório separado. Resultados - O programa PHARE e outros programas comunitários pertinentes foram especialmente úteis para familiarizar os novos Estados-Membros e os países candidatos com os elementos do acervo em matéria de droga. - Quase todos os Estados-Membros prestaram assistência aos novos Estados-Membros nos esforços envidados para tratar a toxicodependência e o tráfico de droga. Os Estados-Membros prestaram assistência equivalente aos países candidatos. - Todos os novos Estados-Membros transpuseram os elementos em matéria de droga do acervo para as respectivas legislações nacionais e os países candidatos estão a fazê-lo. - O capítulo JAI do acervo foi provisoriamente encerrado para a Bulgária e estão em curso as negociações com a Roménia. - Foram rubricados os acordos com a Bulgária, a Roménia e a Turquia relativos à participação nos trabalhos do OEDT. Áreas em que são necessários progressos - Impõe-se uma cooperação mais estreita com os novos Estados-Membros e os países candidatos em matéria de transposição dos elementos relativos à droga do acervo. - Os novos Estados-Membros deverão utilizar plenamente o AGIS e outros programas relevantes destinados a facilitar a cooperação com os restantes Estados-Membros. - Os acordos com três países candidatos que lhes vão permitir participar nos trabalhos do OEDT deverão entrar em vigor o mais rapidamente possível. - O programa PHARE e outros programas comunitários deverão continuar a providenciar assistência aos países candidatos na área da droga. 3.6. Cooperação internacional Resultados a nível nacional - Os Estados-Membros fornecem assistência a países terceiros no âmbito da droga numa base bilateral e/ou através do Gabinete das Nações Unidas para o controlo da Droga e a prevenção do crime. - Diversos Estados-Membros cooperam com países terceiros no sentido de desenvolver e melhorar os sistemas de luta contra o branqueamento de capitais. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível nacional - Todos os Estados-Membros devem alimentar sistematicamente a base de dados criada pela Comissão relativa a projectos de assistência técnica nos países candidatos e em países terceiros em matéria de droga. - Os Estados-Membros devem informar regularmente o Conselho e a Comissão das actividades bilaterais que desenvolvem em regiões e países terceiros. Resultados a nível de UE - A Comissão concentra esforços nas duas principais rotas de tráfico para a UE. - A Comissão manteve o Conselho regularmente informado da assistência que presta em matéria de droga aos países terceiros/regiões, bem como do processo integrado através do qual financia projectos relacionados com a droga nesses países terceiros/regiões. - No contexto da política europeia de vizinhança, estão a ser discutidos planos de acção com diversos países. Estes planos incluem normalmente uma secção relativa à droga. - Todos os acordos externos da Comunidade e da UE contêm disposições específicas em matéria de droga. Áreas em que são necessários progressos a nível da UE - Os Estados-Membros e a Comissão devem continuar a assegurar posições coordenadas da UE em fóruns internacionais sobre a questão da droga, em especial na Comissão de Estupefacientes das Nações Unidas. - Os Estados-Membros e a Comissão devem continuar a sujeitar a assistência em matéria de droga que fornecem à Ásia Central, América Latina e Caraíbas e aos países dos Balcãs ocidentais a planos de acção em matéria de droga adoptados com estas regiões. Neste aspecto, pode ser conveniente estudar um mecanismo de financiamento. - É necessário garantir a existência de um nexo entre a adopção de novos planos de acção da UE em matéria de droga para várias regiões do mundo e a afectação de recursos para a respectiva implementação. - Os peritos em matéria de droga dos Estados-Membros deverão continuar a participar activamente e a salientar a importância das questões relacionadas com a droga quando são estudados/revistos documentos de programação regional/nacional. Requer-se uma maior coordenação entre os grupos geográficos e o Grupo horizontal "Drogas". - Há que acompanhar e ter em consideração o aparecimento de novos produtos e as novas tendências em matéria de consumo e produção de droga em países/regiões específicos. - Há que utilizar integralmente os mecanismos de coordenação internacional em matéria de droga, de que é exemplo o Grupo de Dublim. 4. CONCLUSÕES I. Avaliação do nível de resultados das actividades previstas no Plano de Acção - Cerca de 95% das acções previstas no Plano de Acção da União Europeia de luta contra a droga foram implementadas ou estão a sê-lo. - A Estratégia da UE de luta contra a droga e o Plano de Acção em matéria de luta contra a droga foram considerados como o ponto de referência central de actuação e forneceram um quadro para as actividades e iniciativas em matéria de droga ao nível nacional e da UE. - Quase todos os Estados-Membros adoptaram uma estratégia ou plano de acção nacional de luta contra a droga. Entre os elementos destas estratégias e planos nacionais de luta contra a droga registam-se elementos comuns ao da abordagem da UE, tal como consta da Estratégia e do Plano de Acção da UE de luta contra a droga. II. Avaliação do nível de resultados do Plano de Acção relativamente aos objectivos da Estratégia de luta contra a droga - Não há dúvidas de que a implementação das acções previstas no Plano de Acção contribuiu, em maior ou menor grau, para se alcançarem os onze objectivos da Estratégia da UE da luta contra a droga. III. Avaliação do impacto na situação em matéria de droga - Pelo menos parcialmente, registaram-se progressos relativamente aos objectivos constantes da Estratégia da UE de luta contra a droga (Objectivo 2 e, em especial, Objectivo 3)[35]. - Com base nos instrumentos de avaliação, nada permite afirmar que o Objectivo 1, que consiste em reduzir significativamente o consumo de estupefacientes, tenha sido alcançado ou que haja menos jovens toxicodependentes. No entanto, os dados sugerem globalmente uma estabilização na tendência ascendente do consumo de droga, embora se tenham atingido níveis considerados historicamente elevados. - Do mesmo modo, as informações disponíveis não sugerem que a disponibilidade de droga tenha sido substancialmente reduzida (Objectivo 4). De igual modo, os Objectivos 4 e 5, na sua globalidade, constituíram um catalisador para diversas iniciativas ao nível da UE que reforçaram as medidas de aplicação da lei contra o tráfico e a oferta de droga. - Foram ainda lançadas diversas iniciativas importantes para combater o branqueamento de capitais (Objectivo 6.1). No que respeita ao Objectivo 6.2, os Estados-Membros participaram em diversas iniciativas importantes de combate ao desvio de precursores, tais como a unidade comum europeia em matéria de precursores. Foram apresentadas propostas importantes de alteração da legislação comunitária no domínio do controlo do comércio de precursores. 5. PROPOSTAS - A futura estratégia da UE de luta contra a droga deverá incluir objectivos claros e precisos, bem como prioridades que possam ser traduzidos em indicadores operacionais e em acções contempladas em futuros planos de acção, com responsabilidades e prazos de implementação claramente definidos. Há que ter em consideração os sistemas de informação e os instrumentos de avaliação ao definir objectivos e prioridades. - Há ainda que manter uma evolução contínua no que respeita à disponibilidade, qualidade e comparabilidade da informação em matéria de acompanhamento da situação relativa à droga. - A Comissão vai apresentar uma proposta no início de 2005 de um plano de acção de luta contra a droga 2005-2008. Além disso, vai elaborar um relatório anual de evolução sobre a implementação do referido plano de acção, prevendo-se ainda a organização de uma avaliação de impacto em 2008, tendo em vista a proposta de um segundo plano de acção para 2009-2012. No período compreendido entre 2009 e 2012, a Comissão deve continuar a apresentar relatórios anuais de evolução. Em 2012, deverá organizar uma avaliação global da estratégia e dos planos de acção da UE de luta contra a droga, a apresentar ao Conselho e ao Parlamento Europeu. - Os objectivos da nova estratégia e dos planos de acção em matéria de luta contra a droga deverão reflectir-se no programa plurianual de consolidação do espaço de liberdade, segurança e justiça. - A principal incidência do trabalho do Grupo horizontal do Conselho "Drogas" deverá centrar-se no avanço e no acompanhamento da implementação das acções previstas nos futuros planos de acção de luta contra a droga, bem como no desempenho de um papel de liderança na coordenação do trabalho dos outros grupos do Conselho em matéria de droga. - Há diversas actividades interessantes e úteis no domínio da droga em vias de implementação. Os resultados deverão ser partilhados de uma forma mais abrangente no sentido de promover actividades semelhantes noutras instâncias. Neste contexto, há que ter em atenção a realização de um seminário anual sobre os aspectos da política em matéria de droga relacionados com as referidas actividades. - A presente avaliação deverá ser tida em conta no desenvolvimento da nova estratégia da UE de luta contra a droga 2005-2012. ANNEX 1 Summary of 15 Member States responses to the questionnaire on the implementation of the EU Action Plan on Drugs (2000-2004) 1. Co-ordination 1.2.2 What steps has your country taken towards the establishment or the strengthening of the national co-ordination mechanisms since 1999? Has your country appointed a National Drugs Co-ordinator in the related period? Does your country envisage carrying out or has your country carried out an evaluation of the co-ordination mechanisms? All Member States recognise the importance of coordinating the activities of the multiple actors involved in the drugs issue. They report to have mechanisms in place for coordinating their national drugs policies. Member States have adopted different models of coordination, depending on their national administrative structures and on the aspects of the fight against drugs they intend to focus on; some have interdepartmental committees, some have appointed national drug coordinators (e.g. France, Germany, Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Spain and Sweden) and/or established dedicated coordination units or bodies (e.g. Austria, Greece, Ireland, Finland). Some, however, lack coordination mechanisms that cover all aspects. Few Member States provide for evaluation of their coordination mechanisms. 1.2.4 In what way has your country ensured a balanced and multidisciplinary approach in national drugs programmes and policies and their implementation? The importance of maintaining a multidisciplinary and balanced approach is clearly recognised by all Member States. Most have adopted a national plan or strategy on drugs (Belgium Denmark, Greece, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain and the UK). 1.3.2 Has your country developed a specific strategy for co-operation with civil society regarding drug abuse? Please give details. Most Member States make provisions for involving civil society in the fields of prevention, health care and treatment, mainly at local level. Most of them also consult civil society on an ad hoc basis, e.g. for specific projects. Many Member States mention financial support for community groups and organisations as a way of cooperating with civil society. Some countries (Germany, Greece, Ireland, and Sweden) have more regular contacts with the networks of NGOs, the voluntary sector, associations, etc. These countries recognise the importance of linking policy making and practice through dialogue with civil society, but also refer to the supporting work done by these organisations to influence public opinion. 1.4.2. In which way has your country encouraged the provision of funding for the prevention of drug use, the prevention of drug related crime, the reduction of the negative health and social consequences of drugs and other proactive measures? Public expenditure on prevention and risk reduction programmes and measures are different from one country to another depending on the national administrative structure, ministerial budgets and social security systems. Some Member States (Belgium, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, and United Kingdom) indicate an increase of funding for drug-demand reduction. 1.5 In which way has your country shared information with other Member States on national strategies and action plans? Has your country made use of the EMCDDA database on drug laws, the Falcone and OISIN programmes or any other tools for information exchange and operational co-operation? Please describe. Member States consider other national measures, strategies and action plans as useful examples for orienting their own national debate. Very often information exchange is made via bilateral contacts and visits. The Horizontal Drugs Group and the meetings of the national coordinators are recognised as important occasions to share information and views. All Member States acknowledge the importance of learning from the others and quote internet as an important source of information. Most of them report regular input and consultation of the EMCDDA databases (EDDRA, ELDD). As far as law enforcement information sharing is concerned, most Member States mention the Europol national liaison officers. All Member States were able to take part in joint projects co-financed by the Commission's OISIN and/or the Falcone programmes. Since 2003 XXX (can we give a figure??) have received funding under the new AGIS programme[36]. 2. Information and Evaluation 2.1.1 and 2.1.4 Does your country fully or partly provide information on the 5 key epidemiological indicators of the EMCDDA? If your country does not fully provide information on the 5 key epidemiological indicators when do you believe you will be in a position to do so? Please give brief description of the evolution of political and financial support to implement the 5 harmonised key indicators. All Member States have established systems for the gathering and treatment of data which will provide comparable and reliable data on the 5 key epidemiologic indicators, and most Member States are able to provide (partial) information on all indicators. In order to improve the data quality of the used sources and to alleviate the lack of information on some indicators, Member States have introduced the necessary amendments in their legislative systems, organised special workgroups composed of representatives from various Ministries, services, and NGOs specialised in the fight against drugs and actively participated in EMCDDA workshops In most Member States, political and financial support provided by the government for establishing the five indicators (particularly through the national budget to the REITOX Network) is considered sufficient. 2.2.6 and 2.2.7 Which measures are used in your country to assess the effectiveness of preventing and combating organised drug related crime? What kind of crime and policy indicators has your country developed? Has your country drafted an annual assessment on the role of organised crime groups involved in drug trafficking? No unanimity exists among member States on the methodology used to evaluate the effectiveness of preventive actions and measures to fight organised crime related to drug-trafficking, but all annual reports include statistics which illustrate the number of confiscations and their quantities, the share of dismantled clandestine laboratories, the number of arrests, the number of drug-related deaths and other indicators of repressive actions by the relevant agencies. Member States contribute to the annual EU Organised Crime report, which includes a section on drugs, in accordance with the criteria set out in Enfopol 35 Rev 2 (21.4.1997). Some Member States undertake further research on the linkage between drug phenomena and criminal activities, e.g. Ireland's public surveys on the nature of the policing, the visibility and perception of crime, including drug related crime. 3. Reduction of Demand, Prevention of Drug Use and of Drug Related Crime 3.1.1.1 Does your country have general programmes for the prevention of both licit and illicit drug use, including poly-drug use? In which way, if any, does your country encourage the inclusion of drug use prevention in school curricula? Are there programmes set-up to assist parents? If yes, please describe briefly. Member States underline the importance of prevention, and the need for better and accurate information campaigns and prevention programmes focused on the promotion of health as well as on the personal and social development of the young people. Prevention programmes can involve, among many other measures, the creation of prevention centres, specific training for experts and civil society (teachers, parents, support organisations...), health professionals and even representatives of the law enforcement services, working in the school environment and among young people. The importance of regular cooperation with young people's associations, sports clubs, as well as taking preventive actions in nightclubs and major music and dance events are also stressed, in a way to promote healthy initiatives. Frequently decentralised, organised at local level in collaboration with the local autorities and the civil society, whit a short duration, they address to youngsters and other target groups. Specific prevention projects aimed at tackling the poly-drug use and the abuse of licit substances (alcohol, tobacco, doping substances and medicinal products) are more and more implemented in all Member States. Member States agree on the effectiveness of school based drug education programme, but only a few countries (France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Spain, and UK) have clear references to illicit substances and their effects inscribed on the schools curriculum. 3.1.1.3 Could you describe the way your country allocated resources for positive alternatives to drugs for youngsters, in particular in socially deprived urban areas? Member States have many projects on positive alternatives to drug use specifically targeted on older children and adolescents in disadvantaged urban areas, namely through the creation of youth consultation centres that provide recreational, sports and educational activities with job counselling. The budget allocated to these prevention projects came from different sources: health, youth or social services, youth organisations as well as local projects supported by local authorities. Sweden gives precise details on amounts allocated. 3.1.1.4 Could you mention and describe briefly a particularly innovative approach to the prevention of the abuse of synthetic drugs developed in your country? Member States are stressing their concern for the increasing popularity of synthetic drugs in the European Union and underline the importance of school-based programmes and information campaigns aimed at young people, but also on the internet, in all media, as well as dance clubs and music festivals. The distribution of informative material, the implementation of risk reduction measures at parties, pill testing and cooperation with owners of night clubs, medical staff and police are also mentioned. 3.1.2.1, 3.1.2.6, 3.1.2.7 Has your country developed outreach work and/or easy accessible services for drug users? Which steps were taken to increase access and availability of services designed to reach drug abusers who were not integrated or covered by mainstream services? Please describe these briefly. Which were the strategies for vaccinating drug users against hepatitis A and B? Several Member States have adopted integrated policies for risk reduction which propose « low-threshold » services, such as programmes for syringe exchange, condom distribution, access to substitution treatments and drug consumption rooms. Certain high risk groups such as addicted pregnant women, homeless people, prostitutes and prison inmates can benefit from specific programmes. Vaccination against Hepatitis B, prevention and treatment of contagious diseases linked to intravenous drug abuse has been recognised as priorities by all Member States. 3.1.2.2, 3.1.2.3, 3.3.1 Please report briefly on any awareness raising campaigns carried out on the dangers related to drug use as well as on major programmes on the reduction of risks and consequences related to use. Do the actions target all age groups, in particular children and young people? In what sense have these campaigns been innovative and have made use of new means of communication such as, for example, the Internet? All Member states underline the importance of information/awareness campaigns on drug related risks and organise regular campaigns in the media for the general public, as well as specific ones directed at target groups. Campaigns aimed at specific substances (cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy...) are also mentioned. The spread of hotlines on drugs and the use of internet in the field of demand reduction seem to be increasing in all countries. Sweden gives a number of examples of messages aimed at young at young people in different campaign contexts. Finland mentionnes a specific emphasis in the use of internet in drug demand reduction. 3.1.2.4 In which way does your country ensure that enough attention is paid to drug related issues in training and education of doctors, social workers and other professionals in the health and social sector? Are they included in the curricula of the education of these professionals? Training of teachers, social workers, health professionals, and law enforcement representatives is a priority in all Member States and budgets have been allocated for this purpose. In several countries (Ireland, France, Germany, Portugal), specialisations in addiction, alcoholism, , and new substitution treatments are organised within the context of university courses. 3.1.2.5 Has any research been carried out in your country about the effects of driving under the influence of illicit drugs and pharmaceuticals? If yes, could you please summarize the results which could be relevant for policy decisions? Several Member States (Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Spain, The Netherlands, Finland and UK) announced having undertaken research on driving under the influence of illegal substances, or in association with alcohol and/or medicines. In many cases legislation was reviewed and controls and sanctions reinforced. On the other hand, even though testing for alcohol is compulsory, testing drivers involved in accidents for narcotics is not yet systematic. 3.1.3.1 Which are the types of treatment services for drugs users, and measures to assist severely dependent individuals, including measures to reduce the health related damages provided in your country? Please describe briefly In accordance with their national situation and legislation, Member States have diversified drug care systems, which can include day-care centres, detoxification units, therapeutic communities, substitution centres, aftercare programmes and special units in prisons. Frequently carried out at local level and in collaboration with NGO's, they are directed towards different age groups, gender specific needs and drug dependent people in different stages of dependence. Some Member States have also underlined the existence of drug consumption rooms and programmes of medical heroin delivery (Belgium, Germany). 3.1.3.2 Which are the average waiting periods for accessing treatment in your country? Member States indicate that, after investments in treatment services mainly at local level, there are no waiting periods for accessing treatment other than for residential treatment and substitution treatment. 3.1.3.3 Has your country defined guidelines for the standards and goals of treatment services, and ensured the evidence-based evaluation of these treatments? If yes, please briefly describe the outcome. Does your country have a national protocol on treatment assessment? The majority of Member States has not developed models for the systematic and global evaluation of drug treatment. However, scientific research on the effectiveness of the proposed measures is undertaken using the monitoring of drug-addicts under treatment (among other indicators). 3.1.3.4 In which way does your country ensure that adequate attention is paid to the social and professional integration of former addicts? Please describe briefly the most relevant measures adopted in this area, including any projects implemented under the Community Programmes between 1999 and 2003 The professional and social integration of drug addicts, considered very important by all Member States, is promoted in co-operation with NGO's, local authorities and the business community, to provide for educational programmes, vocational training and special employment opportunities for ex-addicts. The Netherlands and UK underline the programmes aimed at tackling this issue within the criminal justice system and the measures to prepare the drug misusing offender reintegration into the labour market. 3.2.2 Have the resources for research into the biomedical and social causes of addiction, prevention and behavioural patterns of drug consumption been modified during the reference period? Several Member States indicate that they do not have exact figures for functions allocated to drug research, by the government departments, universities, NGOs, and research institutes. Nevertheless, they stress the importance of studies on epidemiology, public health and social sciences in achieving a better definition of public policies. 3.2.3 Has your country identified new areas where it is considered useful to implement actions at the European level to contribute to reduce drug-related harm? New consumption trends, international and trans-border cooperation are areas generally identified as deserving greater attention within the EU. 3.3.2 How has your country addressed risk behaviour and addiction in general, including aspects of alcohol, medicine, substances used for doping in sport and tobacco use? Member States' strategies and policies are increasingly geared towards addictions in general, linking licit and illicit drugs, with special measures concerning alcohol, tobacco, doping substances and abuse of medicinal products. Belgium also takes into account gambling and food dependency. 3.4.1.1 What programmes have been set-up in your country to promote best practices in the prevention of criminal activities linked with drugs, juvenile and urban delinquency? The prevention of drug related crime, juvenile and urban delinquency is a priority for Member States which have allocated funds for programmes based on in-service training of police and other prevention agents, information campaigns on drugs and measures for the development of a healthy lifestyle through sports, leisure and educational activities, acquisition of specific skills, implementation of peer groups, counselling/follow up, cultural activities, and treatment/counselling activities. In the Netherlands, the project "Communities that care", which involves civil society, aims to create a safe and liveable environment for young people. 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 Could you describe the mechanisms in place to provide alternatives to Prison (in particular for young offenders). Which measures have been foreseen to provide drug prevention and treatment services and, where appropriate, measures to reduce health damages in prisons and upon release from prison? In several Member States(Portugal, Denmark...), depending the penal system and on the basis of the voluntary acceptance of treatment, a large spectrum of alternative measures is proposed to drug addicts in order to avoid incarceration: financial penalties and administrative sanctions, community work, vocational training and follow-up, etc. In view of the high level of drug consumption in prisons, some countries have introduced risk reduction measures, such as vaccination programmes, needles exchange, drug free rooms, substitution treatments by methadone, etc. 3.4.4 Please mention the main examples of sharing with other Member States best practices on the handling of drugs addicts in the justice system. In what way were the results of the study prepared by the EMCDDA in this field considered by your country Some Member States refer to sharing best practices in the treatment of drug addicts in the justice system through active participation in the European Union Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN) and the European Network Drugs Services in Prison (ENDSP), as well as cooperation with other Member States within the EMCDDA and the Pompidou Group. The study of the EMCDDA is referred to by only few countries. 3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.5.3 In view of the need to develop expertise in the prevention of drug use, has your country promoted the creation of co-ordinated qualification skills in this area? What has been done in order to encourage the development and implementation of a network of trainers and other professionals in the health and social sector? How have the best practices been promoted and brought to the attention of other Member States and the Commission? Training of prevention agents is deemed paramount in all Member States, although efforts must still be made to create formal qualifications. In the context of health promotion strategies, expert networks and specialised training centres have been established to ensure permanent training of the various prevention agents. Several Member States underline the role of the EDDRA and EMCDDA networks, of the Pompidou Group and of the HDG in the exchange of information on prevention. 4. Supply Reduction 4.1.1.1 Please indicate which measures your country has applied to ensure a high and uniform level of security at the external borders of the EU in relation to drugs. Within Member States the law enforcement services involved in combating drug trafficking are involved in close co-operation. This co-operation can take the form of joint groups of risk analysis, a network of "contact points" between the relevant services, special teams of police and customs officers, a "coastal-watch" programme involving police, customs and the maritime rescue service, memoranda of understanding and operational protocols between the relevant services. In order to ensure a high level of security at the EU's external borders, Member State law enforcement services use a range of equipment such as drug detection scanners, patrol vessels, and drug detector dogs. Member States also refer to the training provided to law enforcement personnel in combating drug trafficking. Co-operation also takes place between the law enforcement services of different Member States. For example, there are police/customs co-operation centres, joint customs operations, and participation in training courses by one Member State in those hosted by another Member State. The Convention on mutual assistance and co-operation between customs administrations (Naples II) is also seen to have potential as a tool for cross-border co-operation. 4.1.1.3 Has your country, taking into account the existing EU systems for exchange of information and working with other Member States in the relevant Council bodies, reinforced its efforts against maritime drug trafficking? Has your country organised training courses on the identification and surveillance of suspicious vessels, and have you established procedures for boarding and searching vessels? Has your country implemented the principles laid down in Article 17 of the UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances? If so, please describe briefly how this has been done. A number of Member States have indicated that they are in a position to operate in accordance with the provisions of Article 17 of the 1988 UN Convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances or have incorporated Article 17 or parts of Article 17 into national law (Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Spain, Sweden, and the Netherlands). Member States refer to a number of techniques used for combating maritime drug trafficking such as risk profiling, ship surveillance and vessel search techniques. Use is made of the maritime information systems such as MAR-INFO and YACHTINFO in order to exchange information on suspected drug trafficking and on drug seizures. Maritime co-operation between Member States has led to the capture of ships which were used for drug smuggling and the seizure of illicit drugs. Some Member States indicate that they have training courses in the field of combating maritime drug trafficking or such training is included as a part of the training provided to the relevant personnel (France, Germany, Ireland, and the Netherlands). One Member State (France) indicates that it has established a guide regarding the implementation of Article 17 of the 1988 UN Convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. 4.1.1.4 Has your country, with the support of Europol, examined the means to combine forensic and law enforcement information in order to identify the production and trafficking of synthetic drugs and those involved in their production and trafficking? What are the results of this analysis? At national level, Member States combine forensic and law enforcement information in order to identify the production and trafficking of synthetic drugs. In, at least, one Member State (France) a sharing of databases between the relevant law enforcement agencies containing scientific information on synthetic drugs is to be developed. Many Member States emphasise the importance of the various EU projects aimed at identifying the production and trafficking of synthetic drugs such as CASE, Synthes-lab, EELS, EILCS, and CHEDDAR 4.1.1.5 Has the co-operation between police, customs and judicial authorities been improved in your country in the drugs field? Has your country participated in EU Third Pillar Programmes in the field of co-operation between these authorities? Please give details, in particular of the results and benefits of such programmes for your country. Member State police and customs services participate in joint enforcement operations and investigations against drug traffickers, joint training courses and have appointed police/custom liaison officers. Some Member States have permanent joint police/customs teams (France, Germany, the Netherlands). Greece refers to its Central Anti-Drug Coordination Body with police and customs representation and the UK refers to its Concerted Inter-Agency Drugs Action Group. Training courses and seminars aimed at improving police, customs and judicial co-operation at EU level have received funding from the European Commission under various programmes. In the Nordic Member States police and customs collaboration takes place within a specific framework PTN (Police and Customs Co-operation in the Nordic Countries). 4.1.1.6 Has your country implemented the project-based EU law enforcement strategy against transnational organised crime to combat drug trafficking? Please describe briefly. Techniques used to combat organised crime include surveillance, infiltration and phone-taping. Investigations into the activities of trans-national organised crime groups involved in the distribution of drugs have taken place. These investigations have involved the law enforcement authorities of several Member States. Member States also participate in relevant Europol Analysis Work Files (AWFs) such as Mustard, Cola and Genesis. 4.1.2.2 and 4.1.2.3 What measures has your country taken against money laundering? How does the analysis and exchange of information between your Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) and other FIUs work? All MS have transposed into national law Directive 91/308/CEE of the Council of 10 June 1991 on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and 11 (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and the UK) have transposed Directive 2001/97/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2001 amending Council Directive 91/308/EEC. In addition, Member States have introduced new measures to reduce money laundering such as powers to oppose the execution of a transaction and increased powers for the control of travellers who import large sums of money. Council Decision of 17 December 2000 relative to the exchange of information between the Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) of the Member States provides a primary framework for the exchange of information between the FIUs of the Member States. 8 Member States utilise the FIU-Net as a means of exchanging information between FIUs. Individual Member States also exchange information with third country FIUs. This exchange of information often takes place under the auspices of signed Memoranda of Understanding which generally are developed in accordance with the principles of the Egmont Group. The Egmont Secure Web is also utilised as a secure communication network. Some Member States also refer to the 40 Recommendations of the FATF (Financial Action Task Force), the Council Framework Decision on money laundering, identifying, tracing, freezing and confiscation of criminal assets and the proceeds of crime and the Council of Europe Convention on laundering, search, seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of crime. 4.1.2.6 What type of training for customs and police does your country provide in view of combating the diversion of chemical precursors, including possibly the assistance of the Commission and EUROPOL? Law enforcement officers receive training in combating the diversion of precursors through stand alone courses or through courses related to combating synthetic drugs production and trafficking. Some Member States refer to the assistance provided by Europol in this regard. 4.2.1 Please describe the joint investigative units which have been established in your country between police, customs and other law enforcement agencies specifically responsible for tackling drug trafficking. Some Member States have permanent joint police/customs teams. Other law enforcement authorities may be represented on these teams. In other Member States joint police/customs investigations take place as the need arises. 4.2.2 Please describe the measures your country has taken, with the assistance of Europol where appropriate, to reinforce co-operation with other Member States against drug trafficking. In particular, please mention if any joint teams with other Member States have been established when dealing with drug trafficking between Member States. If no such teams have been established, please explain why this is the case. Co-operation between Member States against drug trafficking generally takes place through exchanges of information, joint investigations or law enforcement co-operation in border areas. Some Member States have established a joint police/customs team to combat drug trafficking on road and rail routes between them. 6 Member States (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK) together with Europol are involved in a European Joint Unit to combat serious criminal activity in the field of precursor chemical diversion. A number of Member States have transposed into national law the provisions of the Council Framework Decision on joint investigation teams and/or have ratified the EU Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters or have indicated that legislation in place already enables the setting up of such teams (Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the UK). However, joint investigation teams, as provided for in the Framework Decision or the Convention, dealing with drug trafficking between Member States have not been established. Some Member States are involved in discussions with regard to forming joint investigation teams and giving their police and judicial authorities additional, more far-reaching powers to operate on each other's territories. 4.2.3 Please describe the measures your country has taken to promote regional co-operation with other Member States affected by similar drug problems. A number of Member States (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and Spain) have created police and custom co-operation centres on their common borders. Regional systems of exchange of information have been established by, for example, a permanent liaison bureau and the appointment of joint superintendents. Police officers from one Member States participate in police officer meetings of another Member State (Belgium and the Netherlands). In addition, a number of Member States have adopted a co-ordinated regional approach to combating drug tourism (Belgium, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands). The Nordic Member States are part of a regional law enforcement co-operation known as PTN with a significant focus on combating drug-related crime. These Member States and Germany are also part of the Task Force on Organised Crime in the Baltic Sea Region. 4.2.5 In what way does your country promote new investigation techniques, research and documentation of drug related crime? Member States use investigation techniques such as controlled deliveries, undercover agents, simulated purchases in combating drug trafficking and drug related crime. Some Member States have at their disposal tools such as a specialist research centre, a national network of drug experts and a computerised system for the collection, development and analysis of data on operations against the illegal traffic in drugs. A number of Member States refer to research carried out or being carried out on drug-related crime. 5. International 5.1.3 During the reference period, which Candidate Countries has your country supported, with technical assistance and/or finance where necessary, in their efforts to counter drug abuse and drug trafficking? Almost all Member States have provided assistance to the candidate countries in their efforts to combat drug abuse and trafficking. This assistance has taken a number of forms such as: Participation in the PHARE programme and in particular in twinning projects under this programme; Organisation of study visits and seminars and provision of training to law enforcement officers; The signing of bilateral co-operation agreements in relation to internal security matters; Funding to the Council of Europe's Pompidou Group in the framework of training in drug demand reduction interventions provided to Central and Eastern European countries; Provision of financial assistance to drug related projects in candidate countries; and Provision of technical assistance and equipment. 5.1.5 Has your country implemented the pre-accession pact on organised crime and extended it to all applicant countries? A number of Member States refer to the utilisation of the PHARE programme in the implementation of the Pre-accession pact on organised crime and to the Council working group with responsibility for overseeing its implementation. In the context of the Pre-accession Pact contact points have been established. 5.2.2 and 5.2.3 How has your country co-ordinated its projects in third countries with other countries, multilateral and international organisations to enable their assessment? In this framework, has the co-operation with multilateral and international organisations been strengthened where this would increase the effectiveness of the actions carried out? Member States provide drug-related assistance to third countries on a bilateral basis and/or through the UNODC. Some Member States (Austria, France, Germany, Sweden, and the UK) indicate that they co-ordinate their bilateral projects with other Member States, multilateral and international organisations. A number of Member States refer to the provision of information to the Commission on drug-related assistance to third countries. The Dublin Group and the "major donors group" of the UNODC are cited as primary mechanisms for co-ordination and for strengthening co-operation with multilateral and international institutions. In this regard Member States also refer to their membership of or observer status to the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs, the Pompidou Group of the Council of Europe, CICAD and the work of the Paris Pact initiative. In the context of co-operation with Latin America and the Caribbean some Member States refer to the Co-ordination and Co-operation Mechanism on Drugs between the EU, Latin America and the Caribbean. 5.2.4 What resources have been made available for third countries for the implementation of programmes and projects for supply reduction and demand reduction? In what way have the projects undertaken been reported to the Horizontal Drugs Group of the Council? Many Member States provide financial assistance to demand reduction and/or supply reduction projects in third countries. Most of these countries indicate that the Commission and the Council's Horizontal Drugs Group are kept informed of their drug-related assistance to third countries. 5.2.5 Please describe in what way, in relations with non-candidate and non-European countries, all relevant Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) instruments take full account of the aims of the EU-Drug Strategy. A number of Member States (Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and the UK) affirm that in their relations with non-candidate and non-European countries in the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy they take account of the objectives of the EU Drugs Strategy. 5.2.6 Has your country drawn up an action plan on drugs co-operation with North Africa and implemented fully the action plans on Latin America and the Caribbean and Central Asia? No Member State has drawn up an action plan on drugs with North Africa. With regard to the implementation of the plans with Latin America and the Caribbean and Central Asia, Member States refer to the training, technical and financial assistance they provide and law enforcement operational co-operation. 5.2.7 Please describe the measures, if any, your country has taken to help non-EU countries and regions to develop their anti-money laundering systems A number of Member States refer to co-operation with non-EU countries to develop and improve anti-money laundering systems under the auspices of the Egmont Group (Belgium, France, and Greece) and to participation in the work of the Council of Europe's anti-money laundering programme PC-R-EV recently renamed Moneyval (Belgium and the Netherlands). Member States also refer to participation in the PHARE anti-money laundering programme and in initiatives of the FATF (Financial Action Task Force). Other assistance provided by Member States include study visits by/to non-EU Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs), participation in IMF and World Bank evaluations, financial support and observer status in FATF regional bodies. 5.2.8 Please describe the tools used to support the development of a common international set of indicators in the field of demand reduction and to promote a common standard for national reporting to international organisations Many Member States refer to their participation in the work of the EMCDDA in the development of a common international set of indicators in the demand reduction field. Member States also refer to the work of the Pompidou Group and the UN and to all of these bodies in the context of promoting a common standard for national reporting to international organisations. 5.2.9 Please describe the measures used by your country to integrate drugs as a cross-sectional issue into supranational co-operation schemes (particularly with the developing countries) Member States affirm that they see drugs as being a cross-sectional issue and stress the importance of dialogue on this issue within bodies such as the Dublin Group and the UN. ANNEX 2 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU ACTION PLAN ON DRUGS 2000-2004: FOLLOW-UP TABLE FOR THE COMMISSION, THE EMCDDA AND EUROPOL [37] +++++ TABLE +++++ ANNEX 3 Instruments of the European Union in the field of drugs (2000 - 2004). A. Instruments of the EU adopted during the period 1 January 2000 - 31 July 2004. - Council Resolution on cannabis. CORDROGUE 59 - 07.07.2004 - Progress report in relation to the Implementation Plans on Demand and Supply Reduction of Drugs and the Supply of Synthetic drugs - CORDROGUE 43 - 14.06.2004 - Council Recommendation regarding guidelines for taking samples of seized drugs. CORDROGUE 26 - 30.03.2004 - Regulation (EC) no 273/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 on drug precursors. OJ L 47, 18.02.2004 - P.1 -Council Decision 2003/847/JHA of 27 November 2003 concerning control measures and criminal sanctions in respect of the new synthetic drugs 2C-I, 2C-T-2, 2C-T-7 and TMA-2,OJ L 321,06.12.2003 - P. 64 - Resolution of the Council on combating the impact of psychoactive substances use on road accidents. CORDROGUE 97 - 13.11.2003 - Council resolution on the posting of liaison officers with particular expertise in drugs to Albania. CORDROGUE 95 - 13.11.2003 - Council Resolution of 17 December 2003 on training for drug law enforcement officers. CORDROGUE 96 - 12.11.2003 - Council Resolution on the importance of the role of the families in preventing drug abuse by adolescents. CORDROGUE 94 - 12.11.2003 - Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on coordination on drugs in the European Union. COM/2003/0681 final - 12.11.2003 - Resolution of the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, for the development of education curricula on substance misuse disorders for medical and other care students and professionals and their inclusion in university studies. CORDROGUE 57 - 19.06.2003 - Resolution of the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council for the integration of the effective management (diagnosis, brief intervention, referrals) and medically assisted treatment for opiate dependent patients within the national health care. CORDROGUE 56 - 19.06.2003 - Council Recommendation of 18 June 2003 on the prevention and reduction of health-related harm associated with drug dependence. OJ L 165, 03.07.2003 P.31 - Resolution of the Council on the importance of early intervention to prevent drug dependence and drug related harm among young people using drugs. CORDROGUE 58 - 13.06.2003 - Implementation paper on demand and supply reduction to deliver the EU Drugs Action Plan. CORDROGUE 40 - 27.05.2003 - Action Plan on Drugs between the EU and Countries of Western Balkans and Candidate Countries (Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey). CORDROGUE 3 REV 2 - 23.05.2003 - Agreement between the European Community and the Turkish Republic on precursors and chemical substances frequently used in the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. OJ L 064, 07.03.2003 - P.30 - Resolution of the Representatives of the Member States meeting within the Council on the treatment of drug abusers in prisons. CORDROGUE 54 REV 4 - 28.11. 2002 - Implementation plan on actions to be taken in regard to the supply of synthetic drugs. CORDROGUE 81 REV 2 - 26.11.2002 - Council Resolution on the generic classification of specific groups of new synthetic drugs. CORDROGUE 64 REV 4 - 11.11. 2002 - Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European parliament on the mid-term evaluation of the EU action plan on drugs. (2000-2004). COM(2002)599, 04.11.2002 - Council Decision of 30 September 2002 adopting a specific programme for research, technological development and demonstration: Integrating and strengthening the European Research Area (2002-2006). OJ L 232, 29.10.2002 - P.1 - Decision No 1786/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 adopting a programme of Community action in the field of public health (2003-2008). OJ L 271, 09.10.2002 - P.1 - Action plan on Drugs between the EU and Central Asian republics (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan). CORDROGUE 78 - 25.09.2002 - Council Decision of 22 July 2002 establishing a framework programme on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (AGIS). OJ L 203, 01.08.2002 - P.5 - Commission Regulation (EC) No 1232/2002 of 9 July 2002 replacing the Annex to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3677/90 laying down measures to be taken to discourage the diversion of certain substances to the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and amending Regulation (EEC) No 3769/92 . OJ L 180, 10.07.2002 - P.5 - Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on joint investigation teams. OJ L 162, 20.06.2002 - P.1 - Council Regulation (EC) No 988/2002 of 3 June 2002 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3677/90 laying down measures to be taken to discourage the diversion of certain substances to the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substancesOJ L 151, 11.06.2002 - P.1 - Resolution of the Council on the incorporation of drug prevention in school curricula. CORDROGUE 4 REV 3 - 08.05. 2002 - Council Recommendation of 25 April 2002 on improving investigation methods in the fight against organised crime linked to organised drug trafficking: simultaneous investigations into drug trafficking by criminal organisations and their finances/assets. OJ C 114, 15.05.2002 - P.1 - Council Recommendation of 25 April 2002 on the need to enhance cooperation and exchanges of information between the various operational units specialising in combating trafficking in precursors in the Member States of the European Union. OJ C 114, 15.05.2002 - P.3 - Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Member States on the prevention of the recreational use of drugs. CORDROGUE 2 REV 3 - 15.04. 2002 - Council Decision of 28 February 2002 concerning control measures and criminal sanctions in respect of the new synthetic drug PMMA. OJ L 063, 06.03.2002 - P. 14 - Joint declaration on drugs of the Ministers of the European Union in association with the European Commission, and the Candidate Countries. CORDROGUE 7 REV 2 - 15.02 2002 - Council Regulation (EC) No 2501/2001 of 10 December 2001 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2004. OJ L 346, 31.12.2001- P.1 - Directive 2001/97/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2001 amending Council Directive 91/308/EEC on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering - Commission Declaration. OJ L 344, 28.12.2001- P. 76 - Council Resolution on the implementation of the five key epidemiological indicators on drugs, developed by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). CORDROGUE 67- 15.11.2001 - Council Act of 16 October 2001 establishing, in accordance with Article 34 of the Treaty on European Union, the Protocol to the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union.OJ C 326, 21.11.2001 - P.1 - Council Decision of 28 June 2001 establishing a programme of incentives and exchanges, training and cooperation for the prevention of crime (Hippokrates). OJ L 186, 07.07.2001 - P. 11 - Council Framework Decision of 26 June 2001 on money laundering, the identification, tracing, freezing, seizing and confiscation of instrumentalities and the proceeds of crime. OJ L 182, 05.07.2001 - P. 1 - Council Decision of 28 June 2001 establishing a second phase of incentives, exchanges, training and cooperation for law enforcement authorities (Oisin II) - OJ L 186, 07.07.2001 - P.4 - Council Regulation (EC) No 1116/2001 of 5 June 2001 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3677/90 laying down measures to be taken to discourage the diversion of certain substances to the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.O J L 153, 08.06.2001 - P. 4 - Council Decision of 28 May 2001 setting up a European crime prevention network. OJ L 153, 08.06.2001 - P.1 - Council Decision of 28 May 2001 on the transmission of samples of controlled substances.O J L 150, 06.06.2001 - P.1 - Council recommendation on the alignment of law enforcement drug and diverted precursors statistics. STUP 26 - 30.10.2001 and STUP 29-13.11.2001 - Council conclusions on networking information on emerging trends and patterns in drug abuse and poly-drug use and the associated risks. O J C 017, 19.01.2001 - P. 2 - Initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden with a view to adopting a JHA Council Decision establishing a system of special forensic profiling analysis of synthetic drugs. OJ C 10, 12.01.2001 - P. 1 - Council Decision of 17 October 2000 concerning arrangements for cooperation between financial intelligence units of the Member States in respect of exchanging information. OJ L 271, 24.10.2000 - P. 4 - Council Regulation (EC) No 2220/2000 of 28 September 2000 amending Regulation (EEC) No 302/93 on the establishment of a European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. OJ L 253, 07.10.2000 - P.1 - Council Decision of 28 September 2000 on the conclusion of an agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Norway on the participation of Norway in the work of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. OJ L 257, 11.10.2000 - P.23 - Commission Regulation (EC) No 1610/2000 of 24 July 2000 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3769/92 implementing and amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3677/90 laying down measures to be taken to discourage the diversion of certain substances to the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. JO L 185, 25.07.2000 - P.30 - Convention established by the Council in accordance with Article 34 of the Treaty on European Union, on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union. JO C 197, 12.07.2000 - P-3 B. Pending EU instruments. - Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering, including terrorist financing. COM (2004) 448 - 30.06.2004 - Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down rules for the monitoring of trade between the Community and third countries in drug precursors". UD 81, CORDROGUE, COMER 120, 30.06.2004 - Proposal for a Council Regulation on the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (recast). COM (2003) 808 (01) - 19.12.2003 - Draft Council Recommendation on the monitoring of the chemical composition of narcotics, in order to improve investigation results in the fight against transnational drug trafficking within the European Union. CORDROGUE 82-13.11.2003 - Proposal for a Council Decision on the information exchange, risk-assessment and the control on new narcotic drugs and new synthetic drugs. COM(2003)0560 final - 03.10.2003. - Initiative by the Kingdom of Spain for the conclusion of a Convention on the suppression by customs administrations of illicit drug trafficking on the high seas. JO C 45, 19.02.2002 - Proposal for a Council framework Decision laying down minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking. COM (001) 259 final 23.05.2001. OJ C 304 E, 30.10.2001 - P.172 [1] COM(1999)239 final de 26.5.1999. [2] Cordrogue 64 Rev 3, 12555/3/99 de 1.12.1999. [3] Cordrogue 32, 9283/00 de 7.6.2000. [4] COM(2002)599 final de 4.11.2002. [5] Salvo indicação em contrário, por Estados-Membros deve entender-se os quinze antigos Estados-Membros. [6] Os documentos estão disponíveis em www.emcdda.eu.int ou em www.europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home e www.europa.eu.int/comm/taxation_customs. [7] Disponível em www.emcdda.eu.int. [8] Ver www.europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home. [9] Crimorg 43, Rev 3, 9615/3/03. [10] Cordrogue 81, Rev 2, 12452/2/02. [11] Cordrogue 40, Rev 2, 8926/2/03. [12] Cordrogue 43, 10481/04. [13] 1. A extensão e o padrão do consumo da droga entre a população em geral; 2) a preponderância do problema do consumo de droga; 3) a procura de tratamento pelos toxicodependentes; 4) o número de mortes associadas à droga e a mortalidade dos toxicodependentes; 5) a taxa de doenças infecciosas relacionadas com o consumo de droga. [14] JO L 167 de 25.06.1997, p. 1. [15] JO L 19 de 22.1.1997, p. 25. [16] JO L 271 de 9.10.2002, p. 1. [17] JO L 165 de 03.07.2003, p. 31. [18] COM (2003) 311 final. [19] Cordrogue 97, 13/11/2003. [20] Directiva 91/308/CEE, JO L166 de 28.06.1991, p. 77. [21] Directiva 2001/97/CE, JO L 344 de 28.12.2001, p. 76. [22] JO L 162 de 20.06.2002, p.1. [23] JO C 197 de 12.07.2000, p. 1. [24] JO C 24 de 23.01.1998, p. 2. [25] JO C 316 de 27.11.95, p. 34. [26] Cf. nota 21. [27] JO L 203 de 01.08.2002, p. 5. [28] COM (2001) 259 final. [29] JO L 47 de 18.02.2004, p. 1. [30] COM (2004) 244 final. [31] COM (2004) 448 de 30.06.2004. [32] JO L 271 de 24.10.2000, p. 4. [33] Stup 26 de 30.10.2001, Stup 29 de 13.11.2001. [34] Ver secção 2.2. [35] Para mais informações, ver o documento "Main lessons from investigation of evalution in the drug policy field in the European Union", no sítio web do OEDT. [36] The AGIS programme (Framework programme on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters) started in 2003 and incorporates previous Title VI programmes, such as Falcone and OISIN. [37] Only the actions where the Commission, the EMCDDA and EUROPOL are directly involved are analysed.