Bruxelles, den 22.10.2004

KOM(2004)707 endelig

KOMMISSIONENS MEDDELELSE TIL RÅDET OG EUROPA-PARLAMENTET

om resultaterne af slutevalueringen af EU's narkotikastrategi og handlingsplan for bekæmpelse af narkotikamisbrug (2000-2004)

1. EU'S NARKOTIKASTRATEGI OG HANDLINGSPLAN FOR BEKÆMPELSE AF NARKOTIKAMISBRUG (2000-2004)

I 1999 udsendte Kommissionen en meddelelse om EU's handlingsplan for bekæmpelse af narkotikamisbrug (2000-2004)[1]. På grundlag af denne meddelelse godkendte Det Europæiske Råd på sit møde i Helsingfors EU's narkotikastrategi for 2000-2004[2]. Der er tale om en tværfaglig, integreret og afbalanceret strategi, hvor begrænsning af narkotikaefterspørgslen og -udbuddet betragtes som lige vigtige elementer, der understøtter hinanden.

På Det Europæiske Råds møde i Feira i juni 2000 vedtog man EU's narkotikahandlingsplan for 2000-2004[3]. Denne handlingsplan omsatte EU's narkotikastrategi til omkring et hundrede konkrete tiltag, som skulle gennemføres af medlemsstaterne, Kommissionen, Det Europæiske Overvågningscenter for Narkotika og Narkotikamisbrug (EONN) og Europol.

I henhold til handlingsplanen skal Kommissionen sørge for en midtvejs- og slutevaluering af EU's narkotikastrategi for 2000-2004. I november 2002 udsendte Kommissionen en meddelelse om midtvejsevalueringen[4].

Den foreliggende meddelelse indeholder resultaterne af slutevalueringen og danner grundlag for den fremtidige udvikling af EU's narkotikapolitik under hensyn til de erfaringer, man har opnået ved gennemførelsen af den nuværende politik.

2. SLUTEVALUERINGENS MÅLSÆTNINGER OG FORLØB

2.1. Målsætninger

Det er formålet med slutevalueringen at fastslå, i hvilken udstrækning handlingsplanen er gennemført, og hvorvidt narkotikastrategiens mål er nået, og at fastlægge såvel narkotikastrategiens som handlingsplanens virkninger for narkotikasituationen i EU.

Evalueringen af narkotikapolitikkens virkninger er stadig i sin vorden, og manglen på nøjagtige og kvantificerbare praktiske målsætninger i den nuværende narkotikastrategi og handlingsplan gør ikke opgaven lettere. Evalueringsprocessen og fastlæggelsen af nøgleindikatorer og redskaber, der i fremtiden kan tjene som kvalitetsstandarder for vedtagelse af nye strategier og politikker, er dog gået i gang.

2.2. Forløb

Denne evaluering blev indledt i april 2003 med oprettelse af en styringsgruppe (bestående af repræsentanter for Kommissionen, de fire medlemsstater, der skulle have formandskabet i 2003-2004, EONN og Europol), som skulle føre tilsyn med og fastlægge retningslinjer for slutevalueringen. Denne gruppe er trådt sammen fire gange for at fastlægge evalueringsredskaberne og -metoderne og føre tilsyn med processen.

I november 2003 blev der udsendt et spørgeskema til de daværende medlemsstater[5] med det formål at indhente udførlige oplysninger om de foranstaltninger, de havde gennemført i henhold til handlingsplanen (bilag 1). Et tilsvarende opfølgningsskema blev fremsendt til Kommissionens berørte tjenestegrene, EONN og Europol (bilag 2).

EONN og Kommissionen udarbejdede en række temadokumenter med fokus på særlige aspekter ved narkotikaproblemet[6]. EONN har sammen med Europol udarbejdet en kort statistisk oversigt med de vigtigste data om narkotikasituationen i 1999 og i 2002-2003[7].

I april/maj 2004 blev der foretaget en Eurobarometerundersøgelse af unges holdning til narkotika[8]. Resultaterne heraf blev sammenholdt med resultaterne af en tilsvarende undersøgelse i 2002. Desuden blev der taget hensyn til den endelige rapport om retshåndhævende myndigheder og deres rolle i bekæmpelsen af ulovlig narkotikahandel[9], gennemførelsesplanen for foranstaltninger til bekæmpelse af forsyning med syntetisk narkotika[10], dokumentet om begrænsning af udbud og efterspørgsel[11], den af Rådet godkendte rapport om, hvordan gennemførelsen skrider frem[12], samt andre initiativer (bilag 3).

Oplysningerne fra de forskellige kilder blev analyseret for at fremhæve de vigtigste resultater i den pågældende periode og for at påpege de områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt. De blev også anvendt til vurdering af, i hvilken udstrækning handlingsplanen er gennemført, og hvorvidt resultaterne af handlingsplanen opfyldte narkotikastrategiens mål. Den korte statistiske oversigt danner grundlag for vurdering af narkotikastrategiens og handlingsplanens virkninger for narkotikasituationen. De oplysninger, der ligger til grund for slutevalueringen, strækker sig fra 1999 til juni 2004.

3. DE VIGTIGSTE RESULTATER OG DE OMRÅDER, HVOR DER ER BEHOV FOR YDERLIGERE FREMSKRIDT

3.1. Koordinering

Resultater på nationalt plan

- Siden 1999 har medlemsstaterne vedtaget mere udførlige nationale narkotikastrategier. De fleste af dem omfatter alle former for narkotikarelaterede aktiviteter.

- Medlemsstaterne er blevet mere opmærksomme på behovet for en tværfaglig koordinering på narkotikaområdet. Samtlige medlemsstater erkender, at det er et væsentligt led i narkotikapolitikken, selv om der ikke findes nogen fast definition på udtrykket "koordinering".

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på nationalt plan

- Den nationale koordinering på narkotikaområdet bør udvides til at omfatte alle områder af narkotikapolitikken, herunder regelmæssige høringer af det civile samfund.

- Større forudgående koordinering på nationalt plan (f.eks. mellem sundhedssektoren og de myndigheder, der er ansvarlige for retlige og indre anliggender, for eksterne forbindelser og for budgetter) ville være til gavn for delegationerne, når de skal redegøre for deres holdninger i Rådet.

Resultater på EU-plan

- Siden handlingsplanens vedtagelse er der holdt møder mellem de nationale narkotikakoordinatorer to gange om året.

- Kommissionen udsendte i 2003 en meddelelse om koordinering på narkotikaområdet i EU. Man har drøftet et dokument, der behandler Den Horisontale Narkotikagruppes holdning til meddelelsen.

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på EU-plan

- Der må sikres en tilstrækkelig opfølgning af Kommissionens meddelelse om koordinering på narkotikaområdet. De nationale koordinatorers møder bør i højere grad være koncentreret om bestemte problemer.

- Kommissionen bør styrke og strømline sine interne koordineringsmekanismer: der er behov for en mere synlig og funktionsdygtig koordinering mellem alle de tjenestegrene, der er involveret på narkotikaområdet. Kommissionens strukturelle forbindelser med EONN bør fortsætte.

- Der er ikke nogen klar ansvarsfordeling mellem Rådets arbejdsgrupper, som behandler narkotikaspørgsmål. Den Horisontale Narkotikagruppe bør have det overordnede ansvar for de forskellige gruppers arbejde vedrørende narkotikaspørgsmål.

- Det civile samfund bør høres regelmæssigt om fastlæggelsen af EU's narkotikapolitik, hvilket ikke har været tilfældet hidtil. Kommissionen vil udsende en meddelelse herom i 2005.

3.2. Oplysning og evaluering

Resultater på nationalt plan

- Oplysningerne om narkotikasituationen er blevet bedre og mere tilgængelige i de fleste medlemsstater, ligesom den politiske støtte, der er nødvendig i forbindelse med bestemte oplysnings- og evalueringsaktiviteter, er blevet forbedret.

- Samtlige medlemsstater har vedtaget at anvende de fem epidemiologiske nøgleindikatorer[13] og at fremlægge sammenlignelige og pålidelige data.

- Der er i nogle medlemsstater gjort fremskridt med hensyn til udvikling af redskaber til regelmæssig vurdering af, hvorvidt deres indsats på narkotikaområdet er effektiv.

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på nationalt plan

- Det systematiske tilsyn med gennemførelsen af nationale narkotikastrategier/handlingsplaner bør forbedres. Der bør også gøres en større indsats for at sikre en regelmæssig vurdering af gennemførelsen.

- Medlemsstaterne bør forsætte deres bestræbelser på at gennemføre de epidemiologiske indikatorer fuldt ud.

- Formidlingen af oplysninger om offentlige udgifter på narkotikaområdet og analysen af politikkernes omkostningseffektivitet bør forbedres yderligere.

Resultater på EU-plan

- Oplysningerne om narkotikasituationen er blevet bedre og mere tilgængelige, hvilket fortrinsvis skyldes arbejdet i EONN og de nationale kontaktcentre.

- Slutevalueringen har ført til fastsættelse af vigtige metoder og oprettelse af en styringsgruppe, der kan danne ramme om fremtidige evalueringer af EU's narkotikapolitik.

- Informationsudvekslingen om nye tendenser i narkotikamisbrug er blevet bedre, hvilket til dels skyldes indførelse af et varslingssystem som led i den fælles aktion vedrørende syntetisk narkotika[14].

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på EU-plan

- Der mangler oplysninger om narkotikarelaterede forbrydelser, og der må arbejdes mere med de relevante indikatorer, idet der skal tages hensyn til EONN's og Europols arbejde på dette område.

- Ordningerne for tilsyn med nye tendenser i narkotikamisbruget bør forbedres. Forskningen i sådanne tendenser bør øges.

3.3. Begrænsning af efterspørgslen

Resultater på nationalt plan

- Samtlige medlemsstater er særdeles opmærksomme på behovet for at træffe forebyggende foranstaltninger over for børn allerede på et tidligt tidspunkt, og de har indført globale forebyggelsesprogrammer, som involverer de relevante eksperter og det civile samfund.

- Der gennemføres i stigende omfang særlige forebyggelsesprojekter, som tager sigte på at tackle blandingsmisbrug og misbrug af legale og illegale stoffer. Oplysningskampagnerne rettes i stadig højere grad mod bestemte målgrupper og vedrører risikoadfærd og misbrug generelt.

- De fleste medlemsstater har forbedret adgangen til behandling, afsat flere midler dertil og udvidet behandlingsmulighederne.

- Samtlige medlemsstater er mere opmærksomme på kriminelle narkotikamisbrugere, således som den stigende anvendelse af samfundstjeneste i stedet for fængsling og det større udbud af fængselsbaserede psykosociale og medicinske løsninger viser.

- Alle medlemsstater har foretaget undersøgelser af kørsel under påvirkning af ulovlige stoffer og medicin, og nogle har indført strengere kontrolforanstaltninger.

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på nationalt plan

- Der bør foretages en mere regelmæssig vurdering af, hvor effektivt der sættes ind for at mindske helbredsskader i forbindelse med afhængighed af narkotika, og en mere regelmæssig vurdering af behandlingen.

- Medlemsstaterne bør sikre, at professionelle, der beskæftiger sig med forebyggelse af narkotikamisbrug og formindskelse af helbredsskader i forbindelse med afhængighed af narkotika, har anerkendte kvalifikationer.

Resultater på EU-plan

- Rådet har vedtaget en række resolutioner om forebyggelse af narkotikamisbrug (jf. bilag 3).

- EF-handlingsprogrammet vedrørende forebyggelse af narkotikamisbrug (1996-2002)[15] og programmet for Fællesskabets indsats inden for folkesundhed (2003-2008)[16] sikrer samfinansiering af projekter for forebyggelse af narkotikamisbrug. Behandling er et nyt spørgsmål.

- I 2003 vedtog Rådet en henstilling om forebyggelse og reduktion af helbredsskader forbundet med narkotikamisbrug[17].

- Der er vedtaget et europæisk handlingsprogram for trafiksikkerheden[18] og Rådets resolution om forholdet mellem brug af ulovlig narkotika og af medicin og færdselsulykker[19]. De tager begge i betragtning, hvordan alkohol, narkotika og medicin påvirker kørsel.

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på EU-plan

- EU bør fremme forskningen i biomedicinske, psykosociale og andre årsager til narkotikamisbrug og -afhængighed, specielt på områder, hvor en sådan forskning stadig er begrænset (f.eks. langtidsbrug af cannabis eller syntetisk narkotika).

- Formidlingen af pålidelige oplysninger af høj kvalitet og den bedste praksis bør forbedres.

- Kommissionen vil foretage en opfølgning af de vigtigste punkter i Rådets ovennævnte henstilling af 2003.

3.4. Begrænsning af udbuddet

Resultater på nationalt plan

- I de fleste medlemsstater er samarbejdet mellem de retshåndhævende myndigheder blevet forbedret ved indførelse/styrkelse af strukturer og aktiviteter, som f.eks. fælles efterforskningshold bestående af ansatte ved politi og toldvæsen, fælles håndhævelsestransaktioner og aftaler.

- Flere medlemsstater ser nu ud til at kunne opfylde artikel 17 (ulovlig transport til søs) i FN's konvention imod ulovlig handel med narkotika og psykotrope stoffer af 1988.

- Samtlige medlemsstater har gennemført det første direktiv om hvidvaskning af penge[20] i national lovgivning, og elleve har gennemført ændringsdirektivet dertil[21]. Desuden har medlemsstaterne indført nye foranstaltninger for at begrænse hvidvaskning af penge, såsom beføjelser til at forbyde transaktioner og øgede beføjelser til kontrol af rejsende, der indfører store pengebeløb.

- Ti medlemsstater har gennemført bestemmelserne i Rådets rammeafgørelse om fælles efterforskningshold[22] og/eller har ratificeret konventionen om gensidig retshjælp i straffesager mellem Den Europæiske Unions medlemsstater[23] eller har oplyst, at den eksisterende lovgivning i forvejen giver mulighed for at oprette sådanne hold.

- Ti medlemsstater har ratificeret konventionen om gensidig bistand og samarbejde mellem toldmyndighederne (Napoli II)[24]. Fjorten medlemsstater har ratificeret konventionen om brug af informationsteknologi på toldområdet (IT-konventionen)[25].

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på nationalt plan

- De medlemsstater, der ikke har indberettet, at de har formelle samarbejdsstrukturer for de nationale retshåndhævende myndigheder, bør overveje at indføre sådanne strukturer.

- Medlemsstaterne bør sikre, at de har indført de nødvendige procedurer for at kunne overholde artikel 17 i FN-konventionen af 1988, og bør overveje at udarbejde en vejledning til gennemførelsen deraf.

- Medlemsstater, der ikke allerede har gjort det, bør gennemføre andet direktiv om hvidvaskning af penge[26], Rådets rammeafgørelse om fælles efterforskningshold og/eller ratificere konventionen om gensidig retshjælp i straffesager og ratificere Napoli II-konventionen og IT-konventionen.

Resultater på EU-plan

- Samarbejdet mellem de retshåndhævende myndigheder på EU-plan er blevet forbedret gennem indførelse/styrkelse af samarbejdsstrukturer, Europols og Eurojusts aktiviteter samt tiltag i form af f.eks. fælles efterforskning, fælles toldtransaktioner, maritimt samarbejde, fælles efterforskningshold og samarbejdscentre for politi og toldvæsen.

- Der er udarbejdet og iværksat en række EU-projekter (f.eks. CASE, EELS og EILCS), som tager sigte på at påvise produktion af og illegal handel med syntetisk narkotika.

- Siden 2000 er fem stoffer blevet underlagt EU's vide kontrolforanstaltninger på grundlag af den fælles aktion vedrørende syntetisk narkotika.

- EU's finansieringsprogrammer, såsom AGIS[27], har spillet en betydelig rolle for fremme af samarbejdet mellem medlemsstaternes retshåndhævende myndigheder.

- Der er opnået politisk enighed om Rådets rammeafgørelse om fastsættelse af mindsteregler for, hvad der udgør kriminelle handlinger, og for straffene for ulovlig narkotikahandel[28]. Den forventes vedtaget formelt om kort tid.

- Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning om narkotikaprækursorer (samhandelen mellem EU's medlemsstater) er blevet vedtaget[29]. Kommissionen har fremsat forslag til Rådets forordning om regler for overvågning af handel med visse stoffer, der anvendes ved ulovlig fremstilling af narkotika og psykotrope stoffer[30].

- OLAF har gjort det lettere at foretage en betydelig informationsudveksling om risikoen for ulovlig anvendelse af prækursorer og støtter fortsat Yachtinfo- og Marinfo-systemerne.

- Oprettelse af et permanent operationelt koordineringsorgan til støtte for fælles toldaktioner er under drøftelse.

- Kommissionen har vedtaget et forslag til tredje direktiv om hvidvaskning af penge[31].

- Vedtagelsen af Rådets afgørelse[32] om udveksling af oplysninger mellem medlemsstaternes finansielle efterretningsenheder har skabt et bedre samarbejdsgrundlag.

- En række medlemsstater er involveret i drøftelser om oprettelse af fælles efterforskningshold og om at give deres politi- og retsmyndigheder yderligere, vidtrækkende beføjelser til at operere på hinandens territorier.

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på EU-plan

- Medlemsstaterne bør oprette fælles efterforskningshold, som skal behandle illegal handel med narkotika mellem medlemsstaterne, som fastsat i Rådets rammeafgørelse og i konventionen.

- En yderligere udbygning af de fælles aktioner mellem medlemsstaternes retshåndhævende myndigheder bør drøftes nærmere. Gennemførelsen og resultaterne af sådanne aktioner bør meddeles Rådet og Kommissionen.

- Det bør undersøges nærmere, hvorvidt man kan udbygge bekæmpelsen af produktion af og illegal handel med syntetisk narkotika. Kommissionens forslag til kortlægning af distributionsnet kunne være et nyttigt udgangspunkt for en sådan proces.

- Rådets henstilling om indbyrdes tilnærmelse af statistikkerne over beslaglæggelser af narkotika og ulovligt anvendte prækursorer bør gennemføres fuldt ud[33].

- Tredje direktiv om hvidvaskning af penge bør vedtages af Europa-Parlamentet og Rådet snarest muligt.

3.5. Udvidelsen

Selv om udvidelsen først fandt sted otte måneder før udløbet af den periode, som narkotikastrategien omfattede, indgår narkotikainitiativer i EU-retten. Alle nye medlemsstater og to af kandidatlandene har på frivilligt grundlag besvaret Kommissionens spørgeskema[34]. En oversigt over disse oplysninger vil blive medtaget i en særskilt rapport.

Resultater

- PHARE-programmet og andre relevante EU-programmer har været et særlig nyttigt middel til at gøre de nye medlemsstater og kandidatlandene bekendt med EU-rettens narkotikabestemmelser.

- Næsten alle medlemsstater har bistået de nye medlemsstater i deres bestræbelser på at bekæmpe narkotikamisbrug og -handel. Medlemsstaterne har på tilsvarende måde bistået kandidatlandene.

- Alle de nye medlemsstater har gennemført EU-rettens narkotikabestemmelser i deres nationale lovgivning, og kandidatlandene er i færd med at gøre det.

- Kapitlet vedrørende retlige og indre anliggender er blevet foreløbigt afsluttet for Bulgariens vedkommende, og forhandlingerne med Rumænien skrider frem.

- Aftalerne med Bulgarien, Rumænien og Tyrkiet om deltagelse i EONN's arbejde er blevet paraferet.

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt

- Der bør være et nært samarbejde med de nye medlemsstater og kandidatlandene om gennemførelsen af EU-rettens narkotikabestemmelser.

- De nye medlemsstater bør udnytte AGIS og andre relevante programmer til at lette samarbejdet med andre medlemsstater.

- Aftalerne med de tre kandidatlande om deltagelse i EONN's arbejde bør træde i kraft snarest muligt.

- PHARE-programmet og andre EU-programmer bør fortsat yde bistand til kandidatlandene på narkotikaområdet.

3.6. Internationalt samarbejde

Resultater på nationalt plan

- Medlemsstaterne yder tredjelande bistand på narkotikaområdet på bilateralt grundlag og/eller gennem FN's Kontor for Bekæmpelse af Narkotika og Kriminalitet (ODC).

- En række medlemsstater samarbejder med tredjelande om udvikling og forbedring af systemer til bekæmpelse af hvidvaskning af penge.

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på nationalt plan

- Alle medlemsstater bør systematisk bidrage til Kommissionens database for projekter vedrørende teknisk bistand på narkotikaområdet i kandidat- og tredjelande.

- Medlemsstaterne bør regelmæssigt underrette Rådet og Kommissionen om deres bilaterale aktiviteter i lande og regioner uden for EU.

Resultater på EU-plan

- Kommissionen koncentrerer sit arbejde om de to vigtigste smuglerruter til EU.

- Kommissionen har regelmæssigt holdt Rådet orienteret om sin bistand på narkotikaområdet til lande/regioner uden for EU og om den forbedrede integrerede proces, hvorved den finansierer narkotikaprojekter i sådanne lande/regioner.

- Som led i den europæiske naboskabspolitik er man ved at drøfte handlingsplaner med en række lande. Disse planer indeholder normalt et afsnit om narkotika.

- Alle EU's relevante eksterne aftaler indeholder særlige bestemmelser om narkotika.

Områder, hvor der er behov for yderligere fremskridt på EU-plan

- Medlemsstaterne og Kommissionen bør fortsat sikre, at EU indtager en koordineret holdning i internationale fora, der behandler narkotikaspørgsmål, især FN's Narkotikakommission.

- Medlemsstaterne og Kommissionen bør fortsat knytte den bistand på narkotikaområdet, som de yder Centralasien, Latinamerika, Caribien og landene på Vestbalkan, sammen med de handlingsplaner for narkotika, der er aftalt med disse regioner. I denne forbindelse kunne man overveje en velegnet finansieringsmekanisme.

- Det er nødvendigt at sikre, at der i forbindelse med vedtagelse af nye EU-handlingsplaner på narkotikaområdet for verdens forskellige regioner også afsættes midler til gennemførelse deraf.

- Medlemsstaternes narkotikaeksperter bør fortsat deltage aktivt og lægge vægt på narkotikaspørgsmål ved udarbejdelse/revision af programdokumenter for de forskellige lande/regioner. Der bør være en bedre koordinering mellem de geografiske arbejdsgrupper og Den Horisontale Narkotikagruppe.

- Nye fænomener og tendenser i narkotikamisbruget og -produktionen i bestemte lande/regioner bør kontrolleres og tages i betragtning.

- De eksisterende ordninger for international koordinering på narkotikaområdet, såsom Dublin-gruppen, bør udnyttes fuldt ud.

4. KONKLUSIONER

I. Vurdering af, hvorvidt aktiviteterne i handlingsplanen er gennemført

- Ca. 95 % af foranstaltningerne i EU's handlingsplan for bekæmpelse af narkotikamisbrug er blevet gennemført eller er ved at blive gennemført.

- EU's narkotikastrategi og handlingsplan er blevet anvendt som udgangspunkt for arbejdet og har dannet grundlag for narkotikarelaterede aktiviteter og initiativer på nationalt plan og på EU-plan.

- Næsten alle medlemsstater har vedtaget en national narkotikastrategi eller handlingsplan. Disse nationale narkotikastrategier og handlingsplaner indeholder bl.a. elementer, der svarer til EU's fremgangsmåde, som fastsat i EU's narkotikastrategi og handlingsplan.

II. Vurdering af, hvorvidt handlingsplanen har opfyldt narkotikastrategiens mål

- Der kan ikke herske megen tvivl om, at gennemførelsen af foranstaltningerne i handlingsplanen i større eller mindre omfang har bidraget til at nå de elleve mål i EU's narkotikastrategi.

III. Vurdering af virkningerne for narkotikasituationen

- Der er, i hvert fald i et vist omfang, gjort fremskridt med hensyn til at nå nogle af målene i EU's narkotikastrategi, (mål 2 og især mål 3)[35].

- På grundlag af evalueringsredskaberne findes der ingen afgørende beviser på, at man har nået mål 1, der går ud på at formindske narkotikamisbruget betydeligt, eller at færre unge tager narkotika. Den kortfattede statistiske oversigt tyder dog på, at den stigende tendens i narkotikamisbruget er ved at flade ud, selv om det stadig befinder sig på et historisk højt niveau.

- De foreliggende oplysninger tyder heller ikke på, at narkotika er blevet langt mindre tilgængelig (mål 4). Samtidig har mål 4 og 5 tilsammen været en katalysator for en række EU-initiativer, der har styrket retshåndhævelsen i forbindelse med narkotikahandel og -leverancer.

- Der er også taget en række vigtige initiativer til bekæmpelse af hvidvaskning af penge (mål 6.1). Med hensyn til mål 6.2 deltager medlemsstaterne i en række vigtige initiativer til bekæmpelse af ulovlig anvendelse af prækursorer, f.eks. European Joint Unit on Precursors. Der er fremsat vigtige forslag til ændring af EU's lovgivning om kontrol med handelen med prækursorer.

5. FORSLAG

- EU's fremtidige narkotikastrategi bør indeholde klare og præcise mål og prioriteringer, der kan omsættes til praktiske indikatorer og foranstaltninger i de fremtidige handlingsplaner, og klart fastlægge ansvaret og fristerne for deres gennemførelse. Informationssystemer og evalueringsredskaber bør tages i betragtning ved fastsættelsen af disse mål og prioriteringer.

- Oplysningerne om kontrol med narkotikasituationen bør fortsat forbedres, hvad angår tilgængelighed, kvalitet og sammenlignelighed.

- Kommissionen vil i begyndelsen af 2005 fremsætte et forslag til en handlingsplan for bekæmpelse af narkotikamisbrug for 2005-2008. Desuden vil den udarbejde en årlig rapport om gennemførelsen af denne handlingsplan og foretage en vurdering af dens virkninger i 2008 med henblik på forslag til den næste handlingsplan for perioden 2009-2012. I perioden 2009-2012 vil Kommissionen fortsat udarbejde årlige rapporter om gennemførelsen. I 2012 vil Kommissionen foretage en samlet vurdering af EU's narkotikastrategi og handlingsplaner, som vil blive forelagt Rådet og Europa-Parlamentet.

- Målene i den nye narkotikastrategi og de nye handlingsplaner bør afspejles i det flerårige program for konsolidering af området med frihed, sikkerhed og retfærdighed.

- Rådets horisontale narkotikagruppe bør først og fremmest koncentrere sit arbejde om fremme af og kontrol med gennemførelsen af foranstaltningerne i EU's fremtidige handlingsplaner for bekæmpelse af narkotikamisbrug og bør desuden spille en førende rolle som koordinator for arbejdet i Rådets øvrige grupper for narkotikaspørgsmål.

- Der er ved at blive gennemført mange interessante og nyttige tiltag på narkotikaområdet, og der bør være en bredere formidling af resultaterne heraf for at fremme tilsvarende aktiviteter andre steder. I denne forbindelse bør det overvejes at afholde et årligt seminar om et narkotikapolitisk aspekt ved disse tiltag.

- Slutevalueringen bør tages i betragtning ved udarbejdelsen af EU's nye narkotikastrategi for 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] KOM(1999) 239 endelig af 26.5.1999.

[2] Cordrogue 64, Rev 3, 12555/3/99 af 1.12.1999.

[3] Cordrogue 32, 9283/00 af 7.6.2000.

[4] KOM(2002) 599 endelig af 4.11.2002.

[5] Når der henvises til medlemsstaterne, menes der de tidligere femten medlemsstater, medmindre andet er anført.

[6] Dokumenterne kan findes på http://www.emcdda.eu.int/ eller på http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/ og http://europa.eu.int/comm/taxation_customs.

[7] Kan findes på http://www.emcdda.eu.int.

[8] Jf. http://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. Narkotikamisbrugets omfang og mønster i befolkningen som helhed, 2. misbrugsproblemernes udbredelse, 3. narkomaners anmodning om behandling, 4. narkotikarelaterede dødsfald og dødelighed blandt narkomaner og 5. narkotikarelaterede infektionssygdomme.

[14] EFT L 167 af 25.6.1997, s. 1.

[15] EFT L 19 af 22.1.1997, s. 25.

[16] EFT L 271 af 9.10.2002, s. 1.

[17] EFT L 165 af 3.7.2003, s. 31.

[18] KOM(2003)311 endelig.

[19] Cordrogue 97 af 13.11.2003.

[20] Direktiv 91/308/EØF, EFT L166 af 28.6.1991, s. 77.

[21] Direktiv 2001/97/EF, EFT L 344 af 28.12.2001, s. 76.

[22] EFT L 162 af 20.6.2002, s.1.

[23] EFT C 197af 12.7.2000, s. 1.

[24] EFT C 24 af 23.1.1998, s. 2.

[25] EFT C 316 af 27.11.1995, s. 34.

[26] Jf. fodnote 21.

[27] EFT L 203 af 1.8.2002, s. 5.

[28] KOM(2001) 259 endelig.

[29] EUT L 47 af 18.2.2004, s. 1.

[30] KOM(2004)244 endelig.

[31] KOM(2004)448 af 30.6.2004.

[32] EFT L 271af 24.10.2000, s. 4

[33] Stup 26 af 30.10.2001, Stup 29 af 13.11.2001.

[34] Jf. afsnit 2.2.

[35] Jf. den kortfattede statistiske oversigt og temadokumentet "Main lessons from investigation of evaluation in the drug policy field in the European Union" på EONN's websted, der giver mere udførlige oplysninger.

[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.