10

www.concrete-online.co.uk
Tuesday 13 March 2012 - Issue 267

@Concrete_UEA

facebook.com/ConcreteNewspaper THE DRUGS ISSUE

COMMENT

The hunt for Kony is best viewed in amazing technicolour

Only those not acquainted with social networking could have missed the emergence of the Kony 2012 campaign, and its aim to make Joseph Kony famous. The video, and its accompanying message, have racked up 26m views in the last few days alone, and shows no sign of slowing down. The organisation behind this, Invisible Children (IC), hopes to draw attention to the crimes of Lords Resistance Army (LRA) leader, Joseph Kony. These include abduction, murder, and sexual enslavement, and this is by no means a comprehensive list. The director, Jason Russell, hopes that by making Joseph Kony a household name, the US government will be inspired to aid Uganda in capturing Kony. The campaign, and the organisation itself, have received fairly harsh criticism from the outset. While some of it has basis, a lot was founded on incomplete or poorly interpreted information. Indeed, this led to the ironic situation in which a commentator would slate Kony 2012 for manipulative use of facts, when the source of their own accusation was itself skewed. The epicentre, and most concentrated criticism, comes from a Tumblr blog by the name of Visible Children. While the author does not doubt that those in Kony 2012 have great intentions, they raise a number of objections to the campaign, but as we will see, not all of them stand up to proper scrutiny. operations. The second objection is to ICs support of Ugandas armed forces (UPDF), and the Sudan Peoples Liberation Army: both the Ugandan army and Sudan Peoples Liberation Army are riddled with accusations of rape and looting. the Kony 2012 movement actually calls for is quite unclear. Their intention is to raise awareness, but beyond that they desire some form of action from the American government, perhaps in the form of assistance and training (as has been their role since 2008) or possibly to go further, towards direct military intervention. If the latter is indeed their intention, I for one think they need to be extremely careful of what they ask, and from whom. There is a tremendous amount of political capital hanging in the air right now, the bleeding hearts of 26 million voters, and any irresponsible action to seize upon this opportunity could have dire consequences. I for one support the Kony 2012 campaign, much in the same way as I support any campaign that teaches people to be more conscious of foreign affairs. We must not, however, let our enthusiasm and endorsement run wild, lest they evade scrutiny, and we find ourselves accountable for all manner of wrongdoings.

The videos director, Jason Russell, hopes that by making Joseph Kony a household name, the US government will be inspired to aid Uganda in capturing him
First and foremost is the matter of finance. A great deal of hostility was raised at allegations that IC only allocated 32% of their budget to direct services last year. While this may be the case, there are certain costs that cannot be avoided, and in an operation where the primary goal is raising awareness, is it unreasonable to invest in the film that delivered such great publicity? Last year IC employed 45 full time personnel. Divided amongst them, the $1.7m dollars spent on salaries equates to $38,000 (24,000) each. Whats important is that Invisible Children is not becoming rich from its charitable This is an unfortunate truth. However, as unfortunate as it may be, it does nothing to negate ICs statement that the Ugandan army is better equipped than that of any of the other affected countries. Some have even claimed the UPDF holds a worse record than the LDA, but this is hyperbole. A clear distinction can be drawn between the LRA and UDPF is that that the latter can be held accountable for their crimes. Red Pepper, a Ugandan newspaper, recently published an article detailing the imprisonment of more than 700 UPDF soldiers in Luzira Prizon. Despite its motivational content, what

Matthew Finucane

The UK can learn lessons from our European peers

response. Extensive studies in the years running up to 2001 assessed that criminalisation was in fact exacerbating the drugs problem. So instead of criminalising more and more users, Portugal changed the law to decriminalise possession for personal use. Possession remains prohibited, but those caught today face a dissuasion board with sanctions applied if theyre caught reoffending. Sanctions can be suspended by the board if users requiring treatment seek it. Users are no longer criminalised. 2001 significantly amongst teenagers. And has decriminalisation made Portugal a tourist destination for drug taking? The evidence suggests not. Every year since 2001, roughly 95% of those apprehended for drug offences have been Portuguese. The response of police officers to the changes is also worth considering. Many officers are reportedly now more likely to act when they see drug usage, as they believe the education and treatment options are far more effective than the criminalisation of users. opponents have not materialised. Indeed, political consensus in Portugal now seems to be firmly in support of the policy of decriminalisation. There are those in the UK that fear decriminalising drugs would send the wrong message to potential users, that to do so would undermine warnings that drugs harm users and those around them. While that concern may be understandable, we should focus primarily on evidence. The truth is that developing drugs policy has not always been an objective process, particularly in the UK. Politics gets in the way. You may remember Gordon Browns reclassification of cannabis against the advice of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. Professor David Nutt, the governments former chief drug advisor, accused the then government of making scientific decisions before theyve even consulted with their experts. Still, it went down well with the Daily Mail. The UK spends more than any other European country on tackling drug use, while at the same time having one of the biggest problems. Its time to take a hard look at how our European partners are succeeding where we are not. A very good start would be to review the impact of the changes in Portugal. If we are serious as a country about putting evidence based policy above political opportunism, then why not?

Simon Wright MP
During the 1990s, Portugal faced a problem with drugs that was strong and growing, particularly with heroin, and the social and health consequences were enormous. By the end of the decade, the country had become a gateway for drug trafficking. More than three quarters of drugs seized in Portugal were en route to other European countries. 2001 brought a radical shake-up by a government determined to address the countrys drugs problem. Based on our experience in the UK, you might be forgiven for thinking government action on drugs always means a hard-line crackdown on users, but youd be wrong. While UK politicians frequently pander to the hysterics of our tabloids when it comes to drugs, Portuguese politicians took a different and altogether braver approach. The government came to the view that while drug abuse was becoming an uncontrollable problem, the criminalisation regime was draining resources and preventing an effective

Its time to take a hard look at how our European partners are succeeding where we are not
Given that these changes took place in Portugal more than a decade ago, there is now enough empirical evidence to judge the impact that decriminalisation has had. Astonishingly, drug rates in Portugal today are amongst the lowest in Europe, and much lower than the UK with our far more punitive laws. In almost every important respect, Portugal, since decriminalisation, has outperformed the vast majority of states where drug use remains a criminalised offence. Lifetime prevalence rates, that measure how many people have consumed drugs during their lifetime, have fallen in many age-groups since Before decriminalisation, drug addicts in Portugal were fearful of seeking treatment in case it led to prosecution. That barrier has now been broken, which has meant effective treatment options have become more attractive to addicts. In addition, decriminalisation has freed up resources that are now used to support treatment and harm reduction programmes. As a result, the regime introduced in Portugal has had an incredibly significant impact in reducing drug addiction and the social problems that go with it. Nightmarish predictions made prior to the introduction of the new regime by its

Write for Comment | Email concrete.comment@uea.ac.uk to write for print or online (www.concrete-online.co.uk)