WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1985/97 by Olivier DUPUIS to the Council. Drugs and freedom of expression
Date: 1997-06-10
Institutions: DUPUIS, European Parliament
Subjects: competence of the Member States, consumer motivation, criminal law, drug addiction, narcotic, offence, work of art

17. 3. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 82/23

In  any  case,  it  is  not  the  task  of  the  Commission  to  ensure  that  Member  States  will  be  able  to  meet  their
obligations with respect to pension liabilities. This is within the sole responsibility of each Member State. The
economic and monetary union and the introduction of the Euro currency has no bearing whatsoever upon this
responsibility, nor does it have any direct impact on the sustainability of a pension scheme.

(1) 

(For  further  information  including  quoted  results  of  pension  liabilities  estimates,  see  European  Commission,  1997  Annual  Economic
Report, Brussels, 12.2.1997; II/671/96-EN).

(98/C 82/31)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1985/97

by Olivier Dupuis (ARE) to the Council

(10 June 1997)

Subject: Drugs and freedom of expression

On  3  July  1997  the  Paris  Court  of  Appeal  upheld  the  sentence  on  Ge·rard  Jubert,  editor  of  the  (cid:145)ELEPHANT
ROSE(cid:146), to 10 months prison and a fine of FF 300 000 for incitement to consume cannabis and its presentation in a
favourable light.

The Joint Action of the Council of 17 December 1996 (96/750/JHA) (1) lays down that (cid:145)Member States (shall)
undertake, subject to their constitutional principles and the basic concepts of their legal systems, to make it an
offence publicly and intentionally to incite or induce others, by any means, to commit offences of illicit use or
production of narcotic drugs(cid:146).

With a view to ensuring that its Joint Action does not prompt all the other Member States to introduce laws and
penalties as repressive as those in force in France, can the Council clarify whether:

1.  publicly inciting the consumption of legal narcotics, such as alcohol, should be treated as a criminal offence?

2. 

3. 

the  thousands  of  artworks,  of  every  genre  and  every  period,  which  present  legal  or  illegal  drugs  in  a
favourable light, should be banned or censured?

the public expression of the hope that all drugs currently banned will be legalized › a hope which is also
mine › should be prosecuted in law?

(1)  OJ L 342, 31.12.1996, p. 6.

Answer

(16 October 1997)

The  implementation  of  the  Joint  Action  is  a  matter  for  each  Member  State  of  the  European  Union  and

1.
remains subject to their constitutional principles and the basic concept of their legal system.

The present distinction between legal and illegal narcotics within the EU Member States is generally based on
commitments of Member States under the relevant Convention of the United Nations. Moreover, the Joint Action
does not include alcohol in the concept of narcotics.

2.
It is obviously difficult to draw a clear distinction between works of art and other comparable expressions
in the form of pictures, sculptures, music, literature and other traditional forms of art. It is anyway up to the
criminal laws of each Member State to determine whether the characteristics of incitement or inducement to
commit offences are fulfilled.

3.
The public expression of the hope that all drugs currently banned be legalised is not covered by the Joint
Action. if however this public expression also includes an incitement or inducement to commit offences, the
situation may be different.