dangerous drugs law essay

What is the Importance of Dangerous Drugs Law?

Dangerous drugs existed way centuries before. From herbal produce to chemical-based drugs, all of them have adverse effects to our body system.

Science has proven the detrimental effects of the usage of these dangerous drugs. Their chemical composition primarily affects our mental state, and their consequences are either short-term or permanent. Even when a person has stopped the use of said drugs, its damage may be continuous.

Dangerous drugs, just as human beings, evolve. When our ancestors discovered drugs as products of herbs and plants coupled with developing societies, people discovered the scientific mixing of various chemicals, which, in effect, produces these detrimental drugs.

Dangerous drugs can now be either injected, ingested, and inhaled. For instance, the effect of a drug injected goes directly in our bloodstream. Thus, the aftermath is immediate. Even a medically prescribed drug, when overused can cause adverse outcome, worse of which is death.

1) those prescribed by a duly licensed physician;

3) the most important is that the drug is not enlisted as one of those narcotics and other dangerous drugs.

Brief Antecedents
In 1839, a war against drugs commenced between Qing Dynasty of China and Britain as the latter, as part of free trade, included opium in their barter.
This has been known as the First Opium War. However, British forces defeated the Qing Dynasty and the former imposed a treaty with open trades with China.
The Emperor wrote a letter to Queen Victoria to halt the opium trade completely. The war ended completely after China signed the unequal Treaty of Nanjing which effectively granted Britain’s free trade in the Chinese ports.

Now, as the international community are well aware of the damaging side effects of these dangerous drugs not only to one’s person, but also to the greater society, these countries have promulgated their respective laws which regulate and sanction the use of dangerous drugs.

What is Dangerous Drug Act?

The first United States Anti-drug law was enacted way back November 15, 1875. It was enacted in San Francisco where it banned opium smoking and opium.

The measure on banning of opium smoking and opium dens were subsequently followed by Virginia City, and Carson in Nevada, Cheyenne, Wyoming and Montana on the succeeding years.

Due to this international treaty, the importation of opium has been vastly affected as the same was declined in several countries.

Then came 1946 when the defunct League of Nations transferred the drug control in international sphere to the newly created United Nations.

1) The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, which was subsequently amended in 1972;

2) the Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971; and

What is the Dangerous Drugs Act in the Philippines and What is its Purpose?

The new law in 1972 added heroin and morphine; coca leaf and its derivatives alpha and beta eucaine; hallucinogenic drugs, such as mescaline, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) and other substances producing similar effects were added in the list of prohibited drugs.

The purpose of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Law is anchored in its Declaration of Policy of the State to “safeguard the integrity of its territory and the well-being of its citizenry particularly the youth, from the harmful effects of dangerous drugs on their physical acts.” (Section 2, RA 9165)

What is the Target of Republic Act No. 9165

The State, in its capacity as Parens Patriae, has the obligation to ensure that its citizenry, particularly the youth, will not be destructed by the harmful effects of dangerous drugs.

Who are Punished by the Law and Why are they Punished?

1.b] Persons who are engaged in the trading or the transactions involving the illegal trafficking of dangerous drugs using electronic devices or acting such a broker in any of those transactions. It is necessary that there is money or consideration

1.c] Persons without the authority to administer dangerous drug into the body of any person, with or without the latter’s knowledge, by injection, inhalation, ingestion or other means, or by assisting any person in administering said dangerous drug to himself, unless these persons are duly licensed practitioner, and the purpose of administration is for medication.

1.d] The law also punishes any person who passed on possession of a dangerous drugs to another, and such delivery is not authorized by law. Further, for a person to be punished, the “accused must knowingly made the delivery. Worthy of note is that the delivery may be committed even without consideration.” (People vs. Maongco, G.R. No. 196966, October 23, 2013)

4] Those who operate or maintain a drug den, dive or resort where dangerous drug is used or sold in any form or any controlled precursor and essential chemical is used or sold in any form. Moreover, this provision also punishes the employee of such den, dive, or resort who is aware of the nature of such place, as well as those persons visiting the place who are also aware of the nature of such place. (Sec. 6, RA 9165

6] Those persons who are unnecessarily prescribing dangerous drugs and who unlawfully prescribe dangerous

What are the Common Acts Punished under RA 9165 and their Respective Penalties?

There are several acts punished under RA 9165, but these are the most common acts in our jurisdiction:

It is reasonable to impose maximum penalty of life imprisonment in acts transgressing and compromising the public order and integrity, and the State in its Parens Patriae capacity, has the obligation to protect to the fullest extent the interests beneficial to the youth of this country.

The penalties provided under the aforementioned provisions are again reasonable as the maintenance of drug dens, dives, or resort and the manufacture of any dangerous drugs play vital role in the malignant commerce of dangerous drugs in the society.

The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from P500,000.00 to P1,000,000.00 is imposable upon any person who shall unlawfully posses 10 grams or more of opium, morphine, heroine, cocaine, marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil, ecstasy, paramethoxyamphetamine (PMA), trimethoxyamphetamine (TMA), lysergic acid diethylamine (LSD), gamma hydroxyamphetamine (GHB), and those similarly designed; 50 grams or more of methamphetamine hydrochloride or “shabu”; and 500 grams or more of marijuana.

The penalty for illegal possession of drug paraphernalia is imprisonment ranging from 6 months and 1 day to 4 years and a fine ranging from P10,000.00 to P50,000.00.

Related Jurisprudence

The Supreme Court, through the years, have promulgated several cases in relation to violations of RA 9165 and set many precedents to be followed by all inferior courts in deciding drugs cases at trial court level.

Criminal intent is not an essential element.

“Marking vs. Chain of Custody”

“Marking” means the placing by the apprehending officer or the poseur-buyer of his/her initials and signature on the items seized to identify it as the subject matter of the prohibited sale. Marking after seizure is the starting point in the custodial link and is vital to be immediately undertaken because succeeding handlers of the specimens will use the markings as reference. Chain of custody is defined as “the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in court for destruction.” Such record of movements and custody of seized item shall include the identity and signature of the person who held temporary custody of the seized item, the date and time when such transfer of custody were made in the course of safekeeping and use in court as evidence, and the final disposition. 7

The Supreme Court moreover added guidelines in chain of custody in a buy-bust situation.

Come 2018, when the Supreme Court imposed a stricter and mandatory requirement for drug enforcement authorities in conducting anti-dangerous drug operations. This was elucidated in the case of  People vs. Romy Lim. Justice Peralta, stressed down the following policy  to be enforced in connection with arrests and seizures in cases involving dangerous drugs, viz:

“In order to weed out early on from the courts’ already congested docket any orchestrated or poorly built up drug- related cases, the following should henceforth be enforced as a mandatory policy:

1] In the sworn statements/affidavits, the apprehending/seizing officers must state their compliance with the requirements of Section 21 (1) of R.A. No. 9165, as amended, and its IRR.

4] If the investigating fiscal filed the case despite such absence, the court may exercise its discretion to either refuse to issue a commitment order (or warrant of arrest) or dismiss the case outright for lack of probable cause in accordance with Section 5, Rule 112, Rules of  Court”

The declaration as unconstitutional the prohibition against plea bargaining in drug cases, is a landmark case in drugs cases. In the case  of Estipona vs. Lobrigo, 9 the Supreme Court held that:

“[t]he power to promulgate rules of pleading, practice and procedure is now [the Supreme Court’s] exclusive domain and no longer shared with the Executive and Legislative departments.”

Thus, the power to promulgate rules of procedure is lodged with the Supreme Court and this cannot be repealed or amended by subsequent substantive laws the Congress has to enact.

Final Thoughts

RA 9165 is a broad yet concise law. It was carefully crafted by our lawmakers. As I have mentioned, this law is a valid exercise of the State’s Police Power.

The proper exercise of the police power requires the concurrence of a lawful subject and a lawful method . ( Gerochi v. Department of Energy, as cited in Southern Luzon Drug Corporation vs. DSWD, G.R. No. 199669, April 25, 2017)

The lawful subject in here is the suppression of the dangerous drugs in our country and the lawful method is to impose the maximum penalty imposable in our jurisdiction to those who will be found guilty of the acts punishable under RA 9165.

This is a special penal law. Thus, defense of good faith is untenable .

It is an elementary rule in Criminal Law that the criminal intent in crimes malum prohibitum is not necessary and cannot be invoked as a defense.

It is because, crime malum prohibitum , in a literal term- PROHIBITS one from doing this and that, as in this case, in RA 9165, it is prohibited to possess dangerous drugs without lawful authority or satisfactory justification.

RALB Law | RABR & Associates Law Firm

Leave a reply.

Email * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• Subscribe Now

The dangers of the Dangerous Drugs Act

Already have Rappler+? Sign in to listen to groundbreaking journalism.

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

MANILA, Philippines – It is one of the Philippines’ main weapons against illegal drugs yet Republic Act 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002  looks good only on paper.

With President Rodrigo Duterte’s fight against drugs, this 14-year-old measure was suddenly put under the spotlight.

RA 9165 mandates the government to “pursue an intensive and unrelenting campaign against the trafficking and use of dangerous drugs and other similar substances.”

Under the law, those caught importing, selling, manufacturing, and using illegal drugs and its forms may be fined and imprisoned for at least 12 years to a lifetime, depending on the severity of the crime.

Since the law was passed at a time the death penalty was still applicable, it is the maximum punishment imposed by the original law. This, however, is moot at present as the death penalty was already abolished in 2006.

If such strict law was passed 14 years ago in 2002, the question remains: Why does the multi-billion drug industry remain unstoppable?

Duterte’s strong drive against drugs has raised more questions than answers involving the measure: Is the law effective? What else can be done? What went wrong?

For Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III, principal sponsor of the law, the legislation is anything but a failure.

Had the law been implemented properly and consistently, Sotto said the country’s drug problem would not be as massive as it is now.

“Kaya lumala hindi inimplementa nang tama ang batas noong mga nakaraang taon. Mula 2002 hanggang ngayon, every now and then parang roller coaster, may panahon na aasikasuhin, may panahon na hindi. Talagang execution ang problema. Ang ganda na nga eh,” Sotto told Rappler.

(That’s why it got worse because the law was not properly implemented in the past year. Starting 2002 until now, it’s like a roller coaster. It’s implemented every now and then, there are times it would be prioritized, there are times not. Execution is really the problem. The law is already good.)

Past administrations had their own respective focus. Now, Duterte’s single agenda of fighting criminality has opened the floodgates of issues that had long been neglected.

Politics? PDEA vs DDB

RA 9165 repealed RA 6425 or the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972. The law mandates the Dangerous Drugs Board to be the policy- and strategy-making body that plans and formulates programs on drug prevention and control.

Article 9, Section 77 of the law states that the DDB “shall develop and adopt a comprehensive, integrated, unified and balanced national drug abuse prevention and control strategy. It shall be under the Office of the President.”

The DDB is composed of 17 members, including the chairman with the rank of Secretary.

The law also created the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), which serves as the implementing arm of the DDB, and is automatically part of the 17-member DDB.

These two, ideally, work hand in hand to fight drugs. In reality, however, politics and bureaucracy get in the way of things.

The DDB chair has a rank of secretary, while the PDEA Director General is considered an undersecretary. But since it is PDEA that implements the law and does the operations on the ground, Sotto said PDEA tends to reject being under the DDB.

“May leadership problem. Yung PDEA at DDB chair, hindi nagkakasundo. May feeling sila di sila subservient sa isa’t isa. So ang nangyari, ang PDEA feeling nila di sila subservient sa DDB, di nga umaattend ng forum regularly. Magkasama yan sa opisina. Ilang taon yan. Ewan ko kung bakit,” Sotto said.

(There’s a leadership problem. The PDEA and the DDB chairmen are not on good terms. Each of them has a feeling that they are not subservient to each other. So what happens, PDEA feels it is not subservient to DDB, it does not attend regularly. They share the same office. It has been going on for years, I don’t know why.)

DDB Chairman Felipe Rojas Jr, for his part, admitted politics exists inside but downplayed its effect, saying it is not enough to jeopardize the entirety of the anti-drug effort.

“Yung appointment of officials, yung iba hindi qualified, minsan intervention ng pulitika, ” Rojas said. (The appointment of officials – some are not qualified, sometimes politics intervenes.)

This does not come as a surprise to some, as such is the situation in most government offices in the country.

Senator Grace Poe, former Senate committee chair on public order, said the track record of appointees should be checked.

“I really think it all boils down to the credibility of the people you will assign in those posts. In the past kasi, mga nandun sa PNP (Philippine National Police), nandun sa iba’t ibang organizations, so sila-sila pa rin (In the past, those from the PNP are also in other organizations, so it’s just always them). I really think kailangan ma-vet mabuti yung Dangerous Drugs Board (I really think those in the Dangerous Drugs Board should be properly vetted) ,” Poe said.

But while the suggestion is good, the reality is that appointments still depend on one person – the president. He himself chooses who leads the crucial agencies of PDEA and the executive offices that comprise the DDB.

As of posting time, Rojas was already relieved from his post after Duterte ordered appointees of former president Benigno Aquino III to submit a courtesy resignation. The President has now assigned the post to former assistant secretary Benjie Reyes.

As simple as quorum

The politics inside the board may have more repercussions than what meets the eye. Another problem of the board is the lack of quorum, which requires 9 out of 17 members. While it may not necessarily be political, such challenge shows the seemingly shaky dynamics inside, which in turn sheds light on the struggles of policy formation and implementation.

The DDB has 17 members from all aspects of drug rehabilitation precisely because the law wants a holistic approach to the complex drug problem. But while the intent is good, the same could not be said about the agencies involved. 

The law mandates that the DDB meet once a week or “as often as necessary at the discretion of the Chairman or at the call of any 4 other members.”

One may call it lucky if the board gets to meet weekly. At the very least, the Board meets once a month, according to Rojas.

Asked if he, as chair, has powers to compel and convince other board members to attend, Rojas only had this to say:

“Very limited, in fact, wala talaga. In some agencies sa abroad, ang DDB ang may hawak ng pondo. As they say, the one who holds the gold rules. Kapag ikaw may hawak ng pondo susunod sa ‘yo yan pero wala sa akin,” he said.

(Very limited. In fact, none. In some agencies abroad, the DDB holds the funds. As they say, the one who holds the gold rules. If you hold the funds, they will follow you but it’s not with me.)

Sotto, former DDB chairman, echoed Rojas’ sentiment.

“’Di nagmi-meet regularly dahilan lagi walang quorum. Hindi uma-attend secretaries. Yung mga secretaries nagpapadala ng undersecretaries, puwede naman yun na representative lang, pero yun mga Usec nila di rin uma-attend eh,” said Sotto.

(The board does not meet regularly, the usual excuse is lack of quorum. The secretaries do not attend. The secretaries send their undersecretaries as their representatives, which is allowed, but the undersecretaries do not attend too.)

The surge in the popularity of Duterte’s anti-drug campaign has given the DDB a huge role to fill, something difficult to accomplish all at once, especially if institutions have long been weak. 

“Matagal ang decision-making process – convene the board, magno-notice ka pa. You have to wait for the resolution. Unlike other countries, isa lang ang decision-making at mabilis,” Rojas said.

(The decision-making process takes a while – convene the board, you have to submit notice. You have to wait for the resolution. Unlike other countries, their decision-making process is unified and fast.)

To be concluded   – Rappler.com

(READ: Part 2: The dangers of the Dangerous Drugs Act )

Add a comment

Please abide by Rappler's commenting guidelines .

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

How does this make you feel?

Related Topics

Camille Elemia

Recommended stories, {{ item.sitename }}, {{ item.title }}.

Checking your Rappler+ subscription...

Upgrade to Rappler+ for exclusive content and unlimited access.

Why is it important to subscribe? Learn more

You are subscribed to Rappler+

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

The War On Drugs: 50 Years Later

After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us'.

During the War on Drugs, the Brownsville neighborhood in New York City saw some of the highest rates of incarceration in the U.S., as Black and Hispanic men were sent to prison for lengthy prison sentences, often for low-level, nonviolent drug crimes. Spencer Platt/Getty Images hide caption

During the War on Drugs, the Brownsville neighborhood in New York City saw some of the highest rates of incarceration in the U.S., as Black and Hispanic men were sent to prison for lengthy prison sentences, often for low-level, nonviolent drug crimes.

When Aaron Hinton walked through the housing project in Brownsville on a recent summer afternoon, he voiced love and pride for this tightknit, but troubled working-class neighborhood in New York City where he grew up.

He pointed to a community garden, the lush plots of vegetables and flowers tended by volunteers, and to the library where he has led after-school programs for kids.

But he also expressed deep rage and sorrow over the scars left by the nation's 50-year-long War on Drugs. "What good is it doing for us?" Hinton asked.

Revisiting Two Cities At The Front Line Of The War On Drugs

Critics Say Chauvin Defense 'Weaponized' Stigma For Black Americans With Addiction

As the United States' harsh approach to drug use and addiction hits the half-century milestone, this question is being asked by a growing number of lawmakers, public health experts and community leaders.

In many parts of the U.S., some of the most severe policies implemented during the drug war are being scaled back or scrapped altogether.

Hinton, a 37-year-old community organizer and activist, said the reckoning is long overdue. He described watching Black men like himself get caught up in drugs year after year and swept into the nation's burgeoning prison system.

"They're spending so much money on these prisons to keep kids locked up," Hinton said, shaking his head. "They don't even spend a fraction of that money sending them to college or some kind of school."

Aaron Hinton, a 37-year-old veteran activist and community organizer, said it's clear Brownsville needed help coping with the cocaine, heroin and other drug-related crime that took root here in the 1970s and 1980s. His own family was devastated by addiction. Brian Mann hide caption

Aaron Hinton, a 37-year-old veteran activist and community organizer, said it's clear Brownsville needed help coping with the cocaine, heroin and other drug-related crime that took root here in the 1970s and 1980s. His own family was devastated by addiction.

Hinton has lived his whole life under the drug war. He said Brownsville needed help coping with cocaine, heroin and drug-related crime that took root here in the 1970s and 1980s.

His own family was scarred by addiction.

"I've known my mom to be a drug user my whole entire life," Hinton said. "She chose to run the streets and left me with my great-grandmother."

Four years ago, his mom overdosed and died after taking prescription painkillers, part of the opioid epidemic that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans.

Hinton said her death sealed his belief that tough drug war policies and aggressive police tactics would never make his family or his community safer.

The nation pivots (slowly) as evidence mounts against the drug war

During months of interviews for this project, NPR found a growing consensus across the political spectrum — including among some in law enforcement — that the drug war simply didn't work.

"We have been involved in the failed War on Drugs for so very long," said retired Maj. Neill Franklin, a veteran with the Baltimore City Police and the Maryland State Police who led drug task forces for years.

He now believes the response to drugs should be handled by doctors and therapists, not cops and prison guards. "It does not belong in our wheelhouse," Franklin said during a press conference this week.

Aaron Hinton has lived his whole life under the drug war. He has watched many Black men like himself get caught up in drugs year after year, swept into the nation's criminal justice system. Brian Mann/NPR hide caption

Aaron Hinton has lived his whole life under the drug war. He has watched many Black men like himself get caught up in drugs year after year, swept into the nation's criminal justice system.

Some prosecutors have also condemned the drug war model, describing it as ineffective and racially biased.

"Over the last 50 years, we've unfortunately seen the 'War on Drugs' be used as an excuse to declare war on people of color, on poor Americans and so many other marginalized groups," said New York Attorney General Letitia James in a statement sent to NPR.

On Tuesday, two House Democrats introduced legislation that would decriminalize all drugs in the U.S., shifting the national response to a public health model. The measure appears to have zero chance of passage.

But in much of the country, disillusionment with the drug war has already led to repeal of some of the most punitive policies, including mandatory lengthy prison sentences for nonviolent drug users.

In recent years, voters and politicians in 17 states — including red-leaning Alaska and Montana — and the District of Columbia have backed the legalization of recreational marijuana , the most popular illicit drug, a trend that once seemed impossible.

Last November, Oregon became the first state to decriminalize small quantities of all drugs , including heroin and methamphetamines.

Many critics say the course correction is too modest and too slow.

"The war on drugs was an absolute miscalculation of human behavior," said Kassandra Frederique, who heads the Drug Policy Alliance, a national group that advocates for total drug decriminalization.

She said the criminal justice model failed to address the underlying need for jobs, health care and safe housing that spur addiction.

Indeed, much of the drug war's architecture remains intact. Federal spending on drugs — much of it devoted to interdiction — is expected to top $37 billion this year.

The Coronavirus Crisis

Drug overdose deaths spiked to 88,000 during the pandemic, white house says.

The U.S. still incarcerates more people than any other nation, with nearly half of the inmates in federal prison held on drug charges .

But the nation has seen a significant decline in state and federal inmate populations, down by a quarter from the peak of 1.6 million in 2009 to roughly 1.2 million last year .

There has also been substantial growth in public funding for health care and treatment for people who use drugs, due in large part to passage of the Affordable Care Act .

"The best outcomes come when you treat the substance use disorder [as a medical condition] as opposed to criminalizing that person and putting them in jail or prison," said Dr. Nora Volkow, who has been head of the National Institute of Drug Abuse since 2003.

Volkow said data shows clearly that the decision half a century ago to punish Americans who struggle with addiction was "devastating ... not just to them but actually to their families."

From a bipartisan War on Drugs to Black Lives Matter

Wounds left by the drug war go far beyond the roughly 20.3 million people who have a substance use disorder .

The campaign — which by some estimates cost more than $1 trillion — also exacerbated racial divisions and infringed on civil liberties in ways that transformed American society.

Frederique, with the Drug Policy Alliance, said the Black Lives Matter movement was inspired in part by cases that revealed a dangerous attitude toward drugs among police.

In Derek Chauvin's murder trial, the former officer's defense claimed aggressive police tactics were justified because of small amounts of fentanyl in George Floyd's body. Critics described the argument as an attempt to "weaponize" Floyd's substance use disorder and jurors found Chauvin guilty.

Breonna Taylor, meanwhile, was shot and killed by police in her home during a drug raid . She wasn't a suspect in the case.

"We need to end the drug war not just for our loved ones that are struggling with addiction, but we need to remove the excuse that that is why law enforcement gets to invade our space ... or kill us," Frederique said.

The United States has waged aggressive campaigns against substance use before, most notably during alcohol Prohibition in the 1920s and 1930s.

The modern drug war began with a symbolic address to the nation by President Richard Nixon on June 17, 1971.

Speaking from the White House, Nixon declared the federal government would now treat drug addiction as "public enemy No. 1," suggesting substance use might be vanquished once and for all.

"In order to fight and defeat this enemy," Nixon said, "it is necessary to wage a new all-out offensive."

President Richard Nixon's speech on June 17, 1971, marked the symbolic start of the modern drug war. In the decades that followed Democrats and Republicans embraced ever-tougher laws penalizing people with addiction.

Studies show from the outset drug laws were implemented with a stark racial bias , leading to unprecedented levels of mass incarceration for Black and brown men .

As recently as 2018, Black men were nearly six times more likely than white men to be locked up in state or federal correctional facilities, according to the U.S. Justice Department .

Researchers have long concluded the pattern has far-reaching impacts on Black families, making it harder to find employment and housing, while also preventing many people of color with drug records from voting .

In a 1994 interview published in Harper's Magazine , Nixon adviser John Ehrlichman suggested racial animus was among the motives shaping the drug war.

"We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the [Vietnam] War or Black," Ehrlichman said. "But by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities."

Despite those concerns, Democrats and Republicans partnered on the drug war decade after decade, approving ever-more-severe laws, creating new state and federal bureaucracies to interdict drugs, and funding new armies of police and federal agents.

At times, the fight on America's streets resembled an actual war, especially in poor communities and communities of color.

Police units carried out drug raids with military-style hardware that included body armor, assault weapons and tanks equipped with battering rams.

President Richard Nixon explaining aspects of the special message sent to the Congress on June 17, 1971, asking for an extra $155 million for a new program to combat the use of drugs. He labeled drug abuse "a national emergency." Harvey Georges/AP hide caption

President Richard Nixon explaining aspects of the special message sent to the Congress on June 17, 1971, asking for an extra $155 million for a new program to combat the use of drugs. He labeled drug abuse "a national emergency."

"What we need is another D-Day, not another Vietnam, not another limited war fought on the cheap," declared then-Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., in 1989.

Biden, who chaired the influential Senate Judiciary Committee, later co-authored the controversial 1994 crime bill that helped fund a vast new complex of state and federal prisons, which remains the largest in the world.

On the campaign trail in 2020, Biden stopped short of repudiating his past drug policy ideas but said he now believes no American should be incarcerated for addiction. He also endorsed national decriminalization of marijuana.

While few policy experts believe the drug war will come to a conclusive end any time soon, the end of bipartisan backing for punitive drug laws is a significant development.

More drugs bring more deaths and more doubts

Adding to pressure for change is the fact that despite a half-century of interdiction, America's streets are flooded with more potent and dangerous drugs than ever before — primarily methamphetamines and the synthetic opioid fentanyl.

"Back in the day, when we would see 5, 10 kilograms of meth, that would make you a hero if you made a seizure like that," said Matthew Donahue, the head of operations at the Drug Enforcement Administration.

As U.S. Corporations Face Reckoning Over Prescription Opioids, CEOs Keep Cashing In

"Now it's common for us to see 100-, 200- and 300-kilogram seizures of meth," he added. "It doesn't make a dent to the price."

Efforts to disrupt illegal drug supplies suffered yet another major blow last year after Mexican officials repudiated drug war tactics and began blocking most interdiction efforts south of the U.S.-Mexico border.

"It's a national health threat, it's a national safety threat," Donahue told NPR.

Last year, drug overdoses hit a devastating new record of 90,000 deaths , according to preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The drug war failed to stop the opioid epidemic

Critics say the effectiveness of the drug war model has been called into question for another reason: the nation's prescription opioid epidemic.

Beginning in the late 1990s, some of the nation's largest drug companies and pharmacy chains invested heavily in the opioid business.

State and federal regulators and law enforcement failed to intervene as communities were flooded with legally manufactured painkillers, including Oxycontin.

"They were utterly failing to take into account diversion," said West Virginia Republican Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who sued the DEA for not curbing opioid production quotas sooner.

"It's as close to a criminal act as you can find," Morrisey said.

Courtney Hessler, a reporter for The (Huntington) Herald-Dispatch in West Virgina, has covered the opioid epidemic. As a child she wound up in foster care after her mother became addicted to opioids. "You know there's thousands of children that grew up the way that I did. These people want answers," Hessler told NPR. Brian Mann/NPR hide caption

Courtney Hessler, a reporter for The (Huntington) Herald-Dispatch in West Virgina, has covered the opioid epidemic. As a child she wound up in foster care after her mother became addicted to opioids. "You know there's thousands of children that grew up the way that I did. These people want answers," Hessler told NPR.

One of the epicenters of the prescription opioid epidemic was Huntington, a small city in West Virginia along the Ohio River hit hard by the loss of factory and coal jobs.

"It was pretty bad. Eighty-one million opioid pills over an eight-year period came into this area," said Courtney Hessler, a reporter with The (Huntington) Herald-Dispatch.

Public health officials say 1 in 10 residents in the area still battle addiction. Hessler herself wound up in foster care after her mother struggled with opioids.

In recent months, she has reported on a landmark opioid trial that will test who — if anyone — will be held accountable for drug policies that failed to keep families and communities safe.

"I think it's important. You know there's thousands of children that grew up the way that I did," Hessler said. "These people want answers."

A needle disposal box at the Cabell-Huntington Health Department sits in the front parking lot in 2019 in Huntington, W.Va. The city is experiencing a surge in HIV cases related to intravenous drug use following a recent opioid crisis in the state. Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post via Getty Images hide caption

A needle disposal box at the Cabell-Huntington Health Department sits in the front parking lot in 2019 in Huntington, W.Va. The city is experiencing a surge in HIV cases related to intravenous drug use following a recent opioid crisis in the state.

During dozens of interviews, community leaders told NPR that places like Huntington, W.Va., and Brownsville, N.Y., will recover from the drug war and rebuild.

They predicted many parts of the country will accelerate the shift toward a public health model for addiction: treating drug users more often like patients with a chronic illness and less often as criminals.

But ending wars is hard and stigma surrounding drug use, heightened by a half-century of punitive policies, remains deeply entrenched. Aaron Hinton, the activist in Brownsville, said it may take decades to unwind the harm done to his neighborhood.

"It's one step forward, two steps back," Hinton said. "But I remain hopeful. Why? Because what else am I going to do?"

• drug policy
• war on drugs
• public health
• opioid epidemic

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.335(7627); 2007 Nov 10

Head to Head

Should drugs be decriminalised no, joseph a califano, jr.

The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, 633 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017-6706, USA

Recent government figures suggest that the UK drug treatment programmes have had limited success in rehabilitating drug users, leading to calls for decriminalisation from some parties. Kailash Chand believes that this is the best way to reduce the harm drugs cause, but Joseph Califano thinks not

Drug misuse (usually called abuse in the United States) infects the world's criminal justice, health care, and social service systems. Although bans on the import, manufacture, sale, and possession of drugs such as marijuana, cocaine, and heroin should remain, drug policies do need a fix. Neither legalisation nor decriminalisation is the answer. Rather, more resources and energy should be devoted to research, prevention, and treatment, and each citizen and institution should take responsibility to combat all substance misuse and addiction.

Vigorous and intelligent enforcement of criminal law makes drugs harder to get and more expensive. Sensible use of courts, punishment, and prisons can encourage misusers to enter treatment and thus reduce crime. Why not treat a teenager arrested for marijuana use in the same way that the United States treats someone arrested for drink-driving when no injury occurs? See the arrest as an opportunity and require the teenager to be screened, have any needed treatment, and attend sessions to learn about the dangers of marijuana use.

The medical profession and the public health community should educate society that addiction is a complex physical, psychological, emotional, and spiritual disease, not a moral failing or easily abandoned act of self indulgence. Children should receive education and prevention programmes that take into account cultural and sex differences and are relevant to their age. We should make effective treatment available to all who need it and establish high standards of training for treatment providers. Social service programmes, such as those to help abused children and homeless people, should confront the drug and alcohol misuse and addiction commonly involved, rather than ignore or hide it because of the associated stigma.

Availability is the mother of use

What we don't need is legalisation or decriminalisation, which will make illegal drugs cheaper, easier to obtain, and more acceptable to use. The United States has some 60 million smokers, up to 20 million alcoholics and alcohol misusers, but only around six million illegal drug addicts. 1 If illegal drugs were easier to obtain, this figure would rise.

Switzerland's “needle park,” touted as a way to restrict a few hundred heroin users to a small area, turned into a grotesque tourist attraction of 20 000 addicts and had to be closed before it infected the entire city of Zurich. 2 Italy, where personal possession of a few doses of drugs like heroin has generally been exempt from criminal sanction, 2 has one of the highest rates of heroin addiction in Europe, 3 with more than 60% of AIDS cases there attributable to intravenous drug use. 4

Most legalisation advocates say they would legalise drugs only for adults. Our experience with tobacco and alcohol shows that keeping drugs legal “for adults only” is an impossible dream. Teenage smoking and drinking are widespread in the United States, United Kingdom, and Europe.

The Netherlands established “coffee shops,” where customers could select types of marijuana just as they might choose ice cream flavours. 2 Between 1984 and 1992, adolescent use nearly tripled. 2 Responding to international pressure and the outcry from its own citizens, the Dutch government reduced the number of marijuana shops and the amount that could be sold and raised the age for admission from 16 to 18. 2 5 In 2007, the Dutch government announced plans to ban the sale of hallucinogenic mushrooms. 6

Restriction

Recent events in Britain highlight the importance of curbing availability. In 2005, the government extended the hours of operation for pubs, with some allowed to serve 24 hours a day. 7 Rather than curbing binge drinking, the result has been a sharp increase in crime between 3 am and 6 am, 8 in violent crimes in certain pubs, 9 and in emergency treatment for alcohol misusers. 7

Sweden offers an example of a successful restrictive drug policy. Faced with rising drug use in the 1990s, the government tightened drug control, stepped up police action, mounted a national action plan, and created a national drug coordinator. 10 The result: “Drug use is just a third of the European average.” 11

Almost daily we learn more about marijuana's addictive and dangerous characteristics. Today's teenagers' pot is far more potent than their parents' pot. The average amount of tetrahydrocannabinol, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, in seized samples in the United States has more than doubled since 1983. 12 Antonio Maria Costa, director of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), has warned, “Today, the harmful characteristics of cannabis are no longer that different from those of other plant-based drugs such as cocaine and heroin.” 13

Evidence that cannabis use can cause serious mental illness is mounting. 13 A study published in the Lancet “found a consistent increase in incidence of psychosis outcomes in people who had used cannabis.” 14 The study prompted the journal's editors to retract their 1995 statement that, “smoking of cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health.” 15

Drugs are not dangerous because they are illegal; they are illegal because they are dangerous. A child who reaches age 21 without smoking, misusing alcohol, or using illegal drugs is virtually certain to never do so. 16 Today, most children don't use illicit drugs, but all of them, particularly the poorest, are vulnerable to misuse and addiction. Legalisation and decriminalisation—policies certain to increase illegal drug availability and use among our children—hardly qualify as public health approaches.

Competing interests: None declared.

Understanding the Demand for Illegal Drugs (2010)

Chapter: 1 introduction, 1 introduction.

A merica’s problem with illegal drugs seems to be declining, and it is certainly less in the news than it was 20 years ago. Surveys have shown a decline in the number of users dependent on expensive drugs (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2001), an aging of the population in treatment (Trunzo and Henderson, 2007), and a decline in the violence related to drug markets (Pollack et al., 2010). Still, research indicates that illegal drugs remain a concern for the majority of Americans (Caulkins and Mennefee, 2009; Gallup Poll, 2009).

There is virtually no disagreement that the trafficking in and use of cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine continue to cause great harm to the nation, particularly to vulnerable minority communities in the major cities. In contrast, there is disagreement about marijuana use, which remains a part of adolescent development for about half of the nation’s youth. The disagreement concerns the amount, source, and nature of the harms from marijuana. Some note, for example, that most of those who use marijuana use it only occasionally and neither incur nor cause harms and that marijuana dependence is a much less serious problem than dependence on alcohol or cocaine. Others emphasize the evidence of a potential for triggering psychosis (Arseneault et al., 2004) and the strengthening evidence for a gateway effect (i.e., an opening to the use of other drugs) (Fergusson et al., 2006). The uncertainty of the causal mechanism is reflected in the fact that the gateway studies cannot disentangle the effect of the drug itself from its status as an illegal good (Babor et al., 2010).

The federal government probably spends $20 billion per year on a wide array of interventions to try to reduce drug consumption in the United States, from crop eradication in Colombia to mass media prevention programs aimed at preteens and their parents. 1 State and local governments spend comparable amounts, mostly for law enforcement aimed at suppressing drug markets. 2 Yet the available evidence, reviewed in detail in this report, shows that drugs are just as cheap and available as they have ever been.

Though fewer young people are starting to use drugs than in some previous years, for each successive birth cohort that turns 21, approximately half have experimented with illegal drugs. The number of people who are dependent on cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine is probably declining modestly, 3 and drug-related violence has appears to have declined sharply. 4 At the same time, injecting drug use is still a major vector for HIV transmission, and drug markets blight parts of many U.S. cities.

The declines in drug use that have occurred in recent years are probably mostly the natural working out of old epidemics. Policy measures— whether they involve prevention, treatment, or enforcement—have met with little success at the population level (see Chapter 4 ). Moreover, research on prevention has produced little evidence of any targeted interventions that make a substantial difference in initiation to drugs when implemented on a large scale. For treatment programs, there is a large body of evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness (reviewed in Babor et al., 2010), but the supply of treatment facilities is inadequate and,

	The official estimate from the Office of National Drug Control Policy of $14.8 billion in fiscal 2009 excludes a number of major items, such as the cost of prosecuting and incarcerating those arrested by federal agencies for violations of drug laws. See Carnevale (2009) for a detailed analysis of the limits of the official estimate of the federal drug budget.
	The only estimates of drug-related expenditures by state and local governments are for 1990 and 1991 (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 1993). Given the number of people prosecuted and incarcerated each year for drug offenses, that estimate remains a plausible but unsubstantiated claim.
	The most recent published estimates only extend through 2000 (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2001).
	There are no specific indices that measure drug-related violence. The assumption of reduced violence reflects an inference from (1) the aging of the populations that are dependent on cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine as reflected in the Treatment Episode Data Set, maintained by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; (2) the declining share of arrests of drug users that are for violent crimes, as reflected in the Surveys of Prison and Jail Inmates (Pollack et al., 2010); (3) the 70 percent decline in homicides since 1991; and (4) the increasing share of drug transactions that are conducted in nonpublic settings.

perversely, not enough of those who need treatment are persuaded to seek it (see Chapter 4 ). Efforts to raise the price of drugs through interdiction and other enforcement programs have not had the intended effects: the prices of cocaine and heroin have declined for more than 25 years, with only occasional upward blips that rarely last more than 9 months (Walsh, 2009).

STUDY PROJECT AND GOALS

Given the persistence of drug demand in the face of lengthy and expensive efforts to control the markets, the National Institute of Justice asked the National Research Council (NRC) to undertake a study of current research on the demand for drugs in order to help better focus national efforts to reduce that demand. In response to that request, the NRC formed the Committee on Understanding and Controlling the Demand for Illegal Drugs. The committee convened a workshop of leading researchers in October 2007 and held two follow-up meetings to prepare this report. The statement of task for this project is as follows:

An ad hoc committee will conduct a workshop-based study that will identify and describe what is known about the nature and scope of markets for illegal drugs and the characteristics of drug users. The study will include exploration of research issues associated with drug demand and what is needed to learn more about what drives demand in the United States. The committee will specifically address the following issues:

What is known about the nature and scope of illegal drug markets and differences in various markets for popular drugs?

What is known about the characteristics of consumers in different markets and why the market remains robust despite the risks associated with buying and selling?

What issues can be identified for future research? Possibilities include the respective roles of dependence, heavy use, and recreational use in fueling the market; responses that could be developed to address different types of users; the dynamics associated with the apparent failure of policy interventions to delay or inhibit the onset of illegal drug use for a large proportion of the population; and the effects of enforcement on demand reduction.

Drawing on commissioned papers and presentations and discussions at a public workshop that it will plan and hold, the committee will prepare a report on the nature and operations of the illegal drug market in the United States and the research issues identified as having potential for informing policies to reduce the demand for illegal drugs.

The committee drew on economic models and their supporting data, as well as other research, as one part of the evidentiary base for this

report. However, the context for and content of this report were informed as well by the general discussion and the presentations in the workshop. The committee was not able to fully address task 2 because research in that area is not strong enough to give an accurate description of consumers across different markets nor to address the questions about why markets remain robust despite the risks associated with buying and selling. The discussion at the workshop underscored the point that neither the available ethnographic research nor the limited longitudinal research on drug-seeking behavior is strong enough to inform these questions related to task 2. With regard to task 3, the committee benefitted considerably from the paper by Jody Sindelar that was presented at the workshop and its discussion by workshop participants.

This study was intended to complement Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us (National Research Council, 2001) by giving more attention to the sources of demand and assessing the potential of demand-side interventions to make a substantial difference to the nation’s drug problems. This report therefore refers to supply-side considerations only to the extent necessary to understand demand.

The charge to the committee was extremely broad. It could have included reviewing the literature on such topics as characteristics of substance users, etiology of initiation of use, etiology of dependence, drug use prevention programs, and drug treatments. Two considerations led to narrowing the focus of our work. The first was substantive. Each of the topics just noted involves a very large field of well-developed research, and each has been reviewed elsewhere. Moreover, each of these areas of inquiry is currently expanding as a result of new research initiatives 5 and new technologies (e.g., neuroimaging, genetics). The second consideration was practical: given the available resources, we could not undertake a complete review of the entire field.

Thus, we decided to focus our work and this report tightly on demand models in the field of economics and to evaluate the data needs for advancing this relatively undeveloped area of investigation. That is, this area has a relatively shorter history of accumulated findings than the more clinical, biological, and epidemiological areas of drug research. Yet it is arguably better situated to inform government policy at the national level. A report on economic models and supporting data seemed to us more timely than a report on drug consumers and drug interventions.

The rest of this chapter briefly lays out some concepts that provide a basis for understanding the committee’s work and the rest of the report.

These include the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions and the Community Epidemiology Work Group of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Chapter 2 presents the economic framework that seems most useful for studying the phenomenon of drug demand. It emphasizes the importance of understanding the responsiveness of demand and supply to price, which is the intermediate variable targeted by the principal government programs in the United States, namely, drug law enforcement. Chapter 3 then examines changes in the consumption of drugs and assesses the various indicators that are available to measure that consumption. Chapter 4 turns to the program type that most focuses specifically on reducing drug demand, the treatment of dependent users. It considers how well these programs work and how the treatment system might be expanded to further reduce consumption. Finally, Chapter 5 presents our recommendations for how the data and research base might be built to improve understanding of the demand for drugs and policies to reduce it.

PROGRAM CONCEPTS

A standard approach to considering drug policy is to divide programs into supply side and demand side. This approach accepts that drugs, as commodities, albeit illegal ones, are sold in markets. Supply-side programs aim to reduce drug consumption by making it more expensive to purchase drugs through increasing costs to producers and distributors. Demand-side programs try to lower consumption by reducing the number of people who, at a given price, seek to buy drugs; the amount that the average user wishes to consume; or the nonmonetary costs of obtaining the drugs. This approach has value, but it also raises questions.

The value of this framework is that it allows systematic evaluation of programs. A successful supply-side program will raise the price of drugs, as well as reduce the quantity available, while a demand-side program will lower both the number of users and the quantity consumed, as well as eventually reducing the price. As noted above, this report is primarily focused on improving understanding of the sources of demand.

There are two basic objections to this approach. First, some programs have both demand- and supply-side effects. Since many dealers are themselves heavy users, drug treatment will reduce supply, just as incarceration of drug dealers lowers demand. Second, there is a collection of programs that do not attempt to reduce demand or supply; rather, their goal is to reduce the damage that drug use and drug markets cause society, which are generally referred to as “harm-reduction” programs (Iversen, 2005; National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2010). 6 Nonetheless, the classifi-

An expanded classification to include harm-reduction programs is common in the drug control strategies of other countries, including Australia, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

cation of interventions into demand reduction and supply reduction is a very helpful heuristic for policy purposes, as well as being written into the legislation under which the Office of National Drug Control Policy operates.

What determines the demand for drugs? Clearly, many different factors play a role: cultural, economic, and social influences are all important. At the individual level, a rich set of correlates have been explored, either in large-scale cross-sectional surveys (such as the National Survey on Drug Use and Health and the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse) or in small-scale longitudinal studies (see, e.g., Wills et al., 2005). Below we briefly summarize the complex findings of those studies.

Less has been done at the population level. It is known that rich western countries differ substantially in the extent of drug use, in ways that do not seem to reflect policy differences. For example, despite the relatively easy access to marijuana in the Netherlands, that nation has a prevalence rate that is in the middle of the pack for Europe, while Britain, despite what may be characterized as a pragmatic and relatively evidence-oriented drug policy, has Europe’s highest rates of cocaine and heroin addiction (European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 2007). There is only minimal empirical research that has attempted to explain those differences. Similarly, there is very little known about why epidemics of drug use occur at specific times. In the United States, for example, there is no known reason for the sudden spread of methamphetamine from its long-term West Coast concentration to the Midwest that began in the early 1990s. There are only the most speculative conjectures as to the proximate causes.

A DYNAMIC AND HETEROGENEOUS PROCESS

The committee’s starting point is that drug use is a dynamic phenomenon, both at the individual and community levels. In the United States there is a well-established progression of use of substances for individuals, starting with alcohol or cigarettes (or both) and proceeding through marijuana (at least until recently) possibly to more dangerous and expensive drugs (see, e.g., Golub and Johnson, 2001). Such a progression seems to be a common feature of drug use, although the exact sequence might not apply in other countries and may change over time. For example, cigarettes may lose their status as a gateway drug because of new restrictions on their use. 7 Recently, abuse of prescription drugs has emerged as a possible gateway, with high prevalence rates reported for youth aged 18-25;

In Amsterdam, people can smoke marijuana at indoor cafes but not marijuana mixed with tobacco.

however, because of limited economic research on this phenomenon, this report’s focus is on completely illegal drugs.

At the population level, there are epidemics, in which, like a fashion good, a new drug becomes popular rapidly in part because of its novelty and then, often just as rapidly, loses its appeal to those who have not tried it. For addictive substances (including marijuana but not hallucinogens, such as LSD), that leaves behind a cohort of users who experimented with the drug and then became habituated to it.

An important and underappreciated element of the demand for illegal drugs is its variation in many dimensions. For example, the demand for marijuana may be much more responsive to price changes than the demand for heroin because fewer of those who use marijuana are drug dependent (Iversen, 2005; National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2010). Users who are employed, married, and not poor may be more likely to desist than users of the same drug who are unemployed, not part of an intact household, and poor. There may be differences in the characteristics of demand associated with when the specific drug first became available in a particular community, that is, whether it is early or late in a national drug “epidemic.”

There are also unexplained long-term differences in the drug patterns in cities that are close to each other. In Washington, DC, in 1987 half of all those arrested for a criminal offense (not just for drugs) tested positive for phencyclidine, while in Baltimore, 35 miles away, the drug was almost unknown. Although the Washington rate had fallen to approximately 10 percent in 2009 (District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency, 2009), it remains far higher than in other cities. More recently, the spread of methamphetamine has shown the same unevenness: in San Antonio only 2.3 percent of arrestees tested positive for methamphetamine in 2002; in Phoenix, the figure was 31.2 percent (National Institute of Justice, 2003). These differences had existed for more than 10 years.

The implication of this heterogeneity is that programs that work for a particular drug, user type, place, or period may be much less effective under other circumstances, which substantially complicates any research task. It is hard to know how general are findings on, say, the effectiveness of a prevention program aimed at methamphetamine use by adolescents in a city where the drug has no history. Will this program also be effective for trying to prevent cocaine use among young adults in cities that have long histories of that drug?

This report does not claim to provide the answers to such ambitious questions. It does intend, however, to equip policy officials and the public to understand what is known and what needs to be done to provide a more sound base for answering them.

Arseneault, L., M. Cannon, J. Witten, and R. Murray. (2004). Causal association between cannabis and psychosis: Examination of the evidence. British Journal of Psychiatry, 184 , 110-117.

Babor, T., J. Caulkins, G. Edwards, D. Foxcroft, K. Humphreys, M.M. Mora, I. Obot, J. Rehm, P. Reuter, R. Room, I. Rossow, and J. Strang. (2010). Drug Policy and the Public Good . New York: Oxford University Press.

Carnevale, J. (2009). Restoring the Integrity of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Testimony at the hearing on the Office of National Drug Control Policy’s Fiscal Year 2010 National Drug Control Budget and the Policy Priorities of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Under the New Administration. The Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. May 19, 2009. Available: http://carnevaleassociates.com/Testimony%20of%20John%20Carnevale%20May%2019%20-%20FINAL.pdf [accessed August 2010].

Caulkins, J., and R. Mennefee. (2009). Is objective risk all that matters when it comes to drugs? Journal of Drug Policy Analysis , 2 (1), Art. 1. Available: http://www.bepress.com/jdpa/vol2/iss1/art1/ [accessed August 2010].

District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency. (2009). PSA’s Electronic Reading Room—FOIA. Available: http://www.dcpsa.gov/foia/foiaERRpsa.htm [accessed May 2009].

European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Addiction. (2007). 2007 Annual Report: The State of the Drug Problem in Europe. Lisbon, Portugal. Available: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/annual-report/2007 [accessed May 2009].

Fergusson, D.M., J.M. Boden, and L.J. Horwood. (2006). Cannabis use and other illicit drug use: Testing the cannabis gateway hypothesis. Addiction, 6 (101), 556-569.

Gallup Poll. (2009). Illegal Drugs . Available: http://www.gallup.com/poll/1657/illegal-drugs.aspx [accessed April 2010].

Golub, A., and B. Johnson. (2001). Variation in youthful risks of progression from alcohol and tobacco to marijuana and to hard drugs across generations. American Journal of Public Health, 91 (2), 225-232.

Iversen, L. (2005). Long-term effects of exposure to cannabis. Current Opinion in Pharmacology, 5 (1), 69-72. Available: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/downloads/long%20term%20cannabis%20effects.pdf [accessed July 2010].

National Institute of Justice. (2003). Preliminary Data on Drug Use & Related Matters Among Adult Arrestees & Juvenile Detainees 2002 . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2010). NIDA InfoFacts: Heroin . Available: http://www.drugabuse.gov/infofacts/heroin.html [accessed August 2010].

National Research Council. (2001). Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us. Committee on Data and Research for Policy on Illegal Drugs, C.F. Manski, J.V. Pepper, and C.V. Petrie (Eds.). Committee on Law and Justice and Committee on National Statistics. Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Office of National Drug Control Policy. (1993). State and Local Spending on Drug Control Activities . NCJ publication no. 146138. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President.

Office of National Drug Control Policy. (2001). What America’s Users Spend on Illegal Drugs 1988–2000 . W. Rhodes, M. Layne, A.-M. Bruen, P. Johnston, and L. Bechetti. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President.

Pollack, H., P. Reuter., and P. Sevigny. (2010). If Drug Treatment Works So Well, Why Are So Many Drug Users in Prison? Paper presented at the meeting of the National Bureau of Economic Research on Making Crime Control Pay: Cost-Effective Alternatives to Incarceration, July, Berkeley, CA. Available: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c12098.pdf [accessed August 2010].

Trunzo, D., and L. Henderson. (2007). Older Adult Admissions to Substance Abuse Treatment: Findings from the Treatment Episode Data Set . Paper presented at the meeting of the American Public Health Association, November 6, Washington, DC. Available: http://apha.confex.com/apha/135am/techprogram/paper_160959.htm [accessed August 2010].

Walsh, J. (2009). Lowering Expectations: Supply Control and the Resilient Cocaine Market. Available: http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/graficos/pdf09/wolareportcocaine.pdf [accessed August 2010].

Wills, T., C. Walker, and J. Resko. (2005). Longitudinal studies of drug use and abuse. In Z. Slobada (Ed.), Epidemiology of Drug Abuse (pp. 177-192). New York: Springer.

This page intentionally left blank.

Despite efforts to reduce drug consumption in the United States over the past 35 years, drugs are just as cheap and available as they have ever been. Cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines continue to cause great harm in the country, particularly in minority communities in the major cities. Marijuana use remains a part of adolescent development for about half of the country's young people, although there is controversy about the extent of its harm.

Given the persistence of drug demand in the face of lengthy and expensive efforts to control the markets, the National Institute of Justice asked the National Research Council to undertake a study of current research on the demand for drugs in order to help better focus national efforts to reduce that demand.

This study complements the 2003 book, Informing America's Policy on Illegal Drugs by giving more attention to the sources of demand and assessing the potential of demand-side interventions to make a substantial difference to the nation's drug problems. Understanding the Demand for Illegal Drugs therefore focuses tightly on demand models in the field of economics and evaluates the data needs for advancing this relatively undeveloped area of investigation.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

	(1971), (1977), (1986), and numerous articles on law, philosophy, and political and moral theory. �1982 by Rowman and Littlefield. ISBN 0-8476-7525-4 (pbk.)
is available for purchase from Amazon.com please use to order.

Introduction     This book is written from the perspective of a teacher of law in the areas of constitutional and criminal law and of a moral and legal philosopher concerned with the investigation of concepts of law, justice, and human rights. Accordingly, the approach here taken is interdisciplinary: the adequate analysis of these, as of many other, legal problems requires that one be a philosopher in doing law, or, alternatively, that one do law philosophically. Indeed, the approach here is even more ambitiously interdisciplinary than a training in law and philosophy would warrant. For, in the investigation and criticism of the gross and unjust overcriminalization typical of American criminal justice, I have found it necessary not only to draw on forms of legal and philosophical argument, but to trace the links of the subjects under investigation to history, psychology, social science, and even literature. The deeper criticism of overcriminalization requires a form of empirical inquiry into the background assumptions that often uncritically underlie the common American sense of proper criminalization. Accordingly, as the argument evolves, we will explore such assumptions and other often detailed empirical arguments establishing factual premises fundamental to the rational discussion of these issues.     My intent here is to develop a new form of moral, legal, and political argument that connects the moral criticism of overcriminalization not to utilitarianism but to antiutilitarian conceptions of human rights (Chapter 1). This argument of general political theory is used to delineate deep commitments of American constitutionalism and thus to explain and justify specific forms of judicially enforceable constitutional argument, grounded on the constitutional right to privacy, and more general forms of liberal argument, which urge legislatures to replace the improper use of the criminal sanction with reasonable forms of regulation more consistent with basic respect for the rights of the person. The implications of this general argument are explored in detail in three general areas of proposed decriminalization: consensual adult sexual relations (in particular, homosexuality in Chapter 2 and commercial sex in Chapter 3), drug use in Chapter 4, and decisions on the right to die in Chapter 5. The resulting argument connects the limits of the criminal sanction to a general conception of personal responsibility for the meaning of individual human life (Chapters 5 and 6).   1. Human Rights and Public Morality under Constitutional Democracy     As an initial matter, it is important to put the moral criticism of overcriminalization in some historical context. Any coherent account of the ethical foundations of the substantive criminal law and its connections to constitutional principles must take seriously the radical vision of the rights of the person that underlies the United States Constitution and its precepts of criminal law. The idea of human rights was a major departure in civilized moral thought. When Locke, Rousseau, and Kant progressively gave that idea its most articulate and profound theoretical statement, [1] they defined a way of thinking about the moral implications of human personality that was radically new. One central critical focus of this new perspective was the criminal law. The Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States, in implementing these ideas, not only required just forms of criminal procedure, [2] but also placed limits on the substantive scope of the criminal law. These limits included not only mens rea, actus reus, legality, and proportionality requirements, [3] but also the limitations imposed by the religion and free speech clauses of the first amendment on federal and (after incorporation) state power to criminalize certain kinds of conduct. [4]     Several provisions of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens, adopted by the French National Assembly in 1789, went beyond the United States Constitution in placing express constraints on the scope of the substantive criminal law. [5] Specifically, persons were to have "the power of doing whatever does not injure another," free of the threat of criminal penalties. [6] The Napoleonic Code, whose conception of the proper scope of the substantive criminal law appears to have been inspired by the provisions, accordingly imposed no criminal sanctions on consensual adult sexual acts, such as homosexuality and prostitution. [7]     No comparable general principle then existed in the Anglo-American political and legal tradition. In the United States, the largely unexamined governing assumption, which continues to have vitality, was that the public morality, which the criminal law enforces, is simply the set of moral values at the core of the Calvinist religious conception and its derivatives. America is, after all, a nation founded by religious extremists who conceived their task as building a New Jerusalem in express contrast to European decadence. [8] The American invention of prisons and the extravagant hopes for moral reform that they embodied for groups like the Quakers [9] were of the same spirit as the later American commitment to the "noble" experiment, Prohibition. The criminalization of alcohol was one manifestation of the power of the Calvinistic purity reformers of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It was their tradition that decisively shaped America's common sense of morality and created the expectation that criminal justice could and should radically reform corrupt human nature. [10] Many Americans today, responding to felt injustices in our criminal justice system at every stage of its operation, question the assumptions underlying this conception of criminal justice. A natural means of examining the conception is to conduct a philosophical analysis of its assumptions. One available theory for such an analysis is utilitarianism, which radically questions the whole perspective on human rights implicit in American constitutionalism; another is an antiutilitarian natural rights theory, which takes seriously ideas of human rights implicit in American constitutional practice but affords a critical organon for reinterpreting their implications for criminal justice.   I. THE UTILITARIAN CRITIQUE OF OVERCRIMINALIZATION     The utilitarian argument against the Anglo-American conception of criminal justice began with the publication in 1859 of John Stuart Mill's On Liberty. [11] Mill proposed a general doctrine that may be termed the "harm principle." This principle limits the scope of the criminal law in the following ways:     1. Acts may properly be made criminal only if they inflict concrete harms on assignable persons. [12]     2. Except to protect children, incompetents, and "backward" peoples, [13] it is never proper to criminalize an act solely on the ground of preventing harm to the agent. [14]     3. It is never proper to criminalize conduct solely because the mere thought of it gives offense to others. [15]     Although Mill's harm principle places a constraint on the criminal law comparable to the one embodied in the French Declaration of Rights, Mill did not justify the constraint on the basis of the human rights paradigm, as did the French Declaration. Rather, Mill appealed to a general utilitarian argument, derived from Jeremy Bentham, [16] that failing to follow the harm principle reduces the aggregate surplus of pleasure over pain. Mill was less doctrinaire in his opposition to the language and thought of rights than Bentham, [17] and some find in On Liberty rights-based arguments of personal autonomy. [18] But although Mill did give great weight to preserving the capacity of persons to frame their own life plans independently, he appears—in accordance with his argument in Utilitarianism [19] — to have incorporated this factor into the utilitarian framework of preferring "higher" to "lower" pleasures. Thus, the argument of On Liberty is utilitarian: the greatest aggregate sum by which pleasure exceeds pain, taking into account the greater weight accorded by utilitarianism to higher pleasures, is secured by granting free speech and observing the harm principle.     The Anglo-American tradition of opposition to overcriminalization, initiated by Mill, has—following Mill—conceived of the issue in utilitarian terms. This tradition relies, when seeking the decriminalization of "victimless crimes," [20] on efficiency-based arguments deploring the pointless or counterproductive use of valuable and scarce police resources in the enforcement of these laws. The pattern of argument and litany of evils are familiar. H. L. A. Hart, for example, in his defense of the recommendation of Great Britain's Wolfenden Committee to decriminalize consensual adult homosexuality and prostitution, [21] conceded that some "victimless crimes" are immoral, and then discussed in detail the countervailing and excessive costs of preventing them. [22] In the United States, commentators have emphasized pragmatic arguments that are implicitly utilitarian, identifying tangible evils that enforcement of intangible moralism appears quixotically to cause. [23] Victimless crimes typically are consensual and private, and as a result, there is rarely either a complaining victim or a witness. In such cases, police must resort to enforcement techniques, such as entrapment, that are often unconstitutional or unethical and that tend to corrupt police morals. [24] Enforcement costs also include the cost of forgoing opportunities to enforce more "serious" crimes. [25] When the special difficulty of securing sufficient evidence for conviction and the ineffectiveness of punishment in deterring these acts are considered, the utilitarian balance sheet condemns criminalization as simply too costly.     The utilitarian cast of these arguments is understandable in a nation like Great Britain, where they must be made to a parliament that enjoys constitutional supremacy. In the United States, however, arguments of this kind are made not only to legislatures but also to countermajoritarian courts empowered with judicial supremacy in the elaboration of a charter of human rights. Since 1965, the United States Supreme Court has invoked a constitutional right of privacy to invalidate the use of criminal sanctions against the purchase or use of contraceptives by adults, married [26] and unmarried, [27] and, more recently, minors; [28] the use of pornography in the home; [29] and the use of abortion services by adults [30] and, more recently, minors. [31] In addition, state courts have elaborated a similar right under state constitutions to permit the withdrawal of life support systems from irreversibly comatose, terminally ill patients. [32] One state court has interpreted the privacy right in its state constitution to permit the use of marijuana in the home, [33] and another court has held that the use of peyote by Native Americans in religious ceremonies is a constitutionally protected form of free exercise of religion. [34]     It is difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the notion of privacy rights that these cases embody with the utilitarian policy arguments that decriminalization proponents generally use. Indeed, the status and rationale of the constitutional right of privacy are at the center of contemporary controversy over constitutional theory and practice. It is argued that the right of privacy is policy-based, legislative in character, and unneutral, and therefore may not properly be adopted by courts, whose decisions must be governed by neutral principles of justification. [35] If the deployment in these cases of the constitutional privacy right or other rights must be construed in utilitarian terms such objections may be conclusive, and decriminalization arguments would be properly directed only to legislatures, not to courts.     It is quite natural to interpret the harm principle as derivative from some more general utilitarian argument. Harm appears to be a quasiutilitarian concept at least insofar as utilitarianism seeks to avoid pain. There are several powerful objections to this interpretation, however.     First, utilitarian arguments for decriminalization proselytize the already converted and do not seriously challenge the justifications that defenders of criminalization traditionally offer. For these defenders, the consensual and private character of prohibited acts, even when coupled with the consequent higher enforcement costs, is not sufficient to justify decriminalization. They point out that many consensual acts, such as dueling, are properly made criminal and that many nonconsensual acts are also properly criminal despite comparably high enforcement costs. The prosecution of intrafamilial homicide, for example, requires intrusion into intimate family relations, and yet intrafamilial homicide is not therefore legalized. [36] Certainly, if there is a good moral reason for criminalizing certain conduct, quite extraordinary enforcement costs will justly be borne. Accordingly, efficiency-based arguments for decriminalization appear to beg the question. They have weight only if the conduct in question is not independently shown to be immoral. But the decriminalization literature concedes the immorality of such conduct, and then elaborates arguments, based on efficiency and costs, that can have no decisive weight. [37]     The absence of critical discussion of the focal issues that divide proponents and opponents of criminalization has made decriminalization arguments much less powerful than they can and should be. In practice, efficiency-based arguments have not been very successful in reducing the scope of "victimless crimes," whether by legislative penal code revision or by judicial invocation of the constitutional right to privacy. The wholesale or gradual decriminalization of contraception, abortion, consensual noncommercial sexual relations between or among adults, and decisions by the terminally ill to decline further treatment [38] has resulted from a shift in moral judgments: these acts are no longer believed to be morally wrong. [39] In contrast, where existing moral judgments have remained unchallenged—as, for example, with commercial sex [40] and many forms of drug use [41] — movement toward decriminalization has been either negligible [42] or haphazard. [43] Yet the decriminalization literature has failed to address these moral questions, perhaps because utilitarianism is presumed to be the only enlightened critical morality. [44] In order to give decriminalization arguments the full force they should have, it is necessary to supply the missing moral analysis. The absence of such analysis has prevented us from seeing the moral needs and interests that decriminalization in fact serves. To this extent, legal theory has not responsibly brought to critical self-consciousness the nature of an important and humane legal development.     A second objection may be made to the utilitarian interpretation of the harm principle. The harm principle is not a necessary corollary of utilitarian tenets. The basic desideratum of utilitarianism is to maximize the surplus of pleasure over pain. If certain plausible assumptions about human nature are made, however, utilitarianism would require the criminalization of certain conduct in violation of the harm principle. Assume, for example, that an overwhelming majority of people in a community take personal satisfaction in their way of life and that their pleasure is appreciably increased by the knowledge that conflicting ways of life are forbidden by the criminal law. Suppose, indeed, that hatred of the nonconforming minority, legitimated by the application of criminal penalties, reinforces the pleasurable feelings of social solidarity, peace of mind, self-worth, and achievement in a way that tolerance, with its invitation to self-doubt, ambivalence, and insecurity, could not. In such circumstances, the greater pleasure thus secured to the majority may not only outweigh the pain to the minority but, as compared to the toleration required by the harm principle, may result in a greater aggregate of pleasure; accordingly, utilitarianism would call for criminalization in violation of the harm principle.     Utilitarians defend the harm principle against such a plausible interpretation of utilitarianism by excluding the offense taken at the mere thought of certain conduct as a ground for criminalization. [45] Yet, how, on utilitarian grounds, can any form of pleasure or pain be thus disavowed as morally irrelevant? Mill appears to have argued that this exclusion follows from the greater weight accorded to autonomy by utilitarianism, both in and of itself (as a higher pleasure) and instrumentally as a means of encouraging innovations and experiments that may enable people to realize more pleasure in their lives. Mill did not, however, explain why autonomy should be given such decisive weight, either as a pleasure in and of itself or as an instrument whose value is so great that other pleasures should be wholly excluded from the utilitarian calculus in order to preserve it. Certainly, the exercise of the competences that accompany rational autonomy often gives pleasure, but it also yields the pain of self-doubt, ambivalence, and insecurity. In any event, why should these pleasures and pains be considered more important within the utilitarian scheme than the pleasures of security, peace of mind, and solidarity, which Mill appears to have disavowed? Although the claims for autonomy on instrumental grounds introduce consequentialist arguments to which utilitarians must give weight, it is difficult to see how these arguments can be regarded as decisive. As an empirical matter, autonomy may lead to creative innovation and experiment, but it also may lead to empty distractions, idle fantasies, and wasted lives. The potential effects weigh on both sides of the utilitarian scales, with perhaps some tilt toward protecting autonomy, but not to the degree that Mill's argument requires.     In order to place the principle of not criminalizing conduct that does not harm others on sound foundations, its moral basis must be interpreted in a non-utilitarian way. [46] Such an interpretation would be more consistent with the historical origins of the principle in the rights-based conception of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens, with the American constitutional tradition, which has based decriminalization arguments on the constitutional right to privacy, and with the texture and resonance of Mill's own intuitive spirit in On Liberty.     This alternative approach entirely abandons Mill's strategy of interpreting the role of autonomy in the defense of the harm principle as an aspect of the ultimate utilitarian good of maximizing the surplus of pleasure over pain. Instead, this chapter will show the harm principle to be a natural consequence of an ethical conception of human rights, in which autonomy is an ultimate good.   II. HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE MORAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE CRIMINAL LAW     In order to present an alternative conception of proper criminalization of acts in a constitutional democracy fundamentally committed to human rights, this chapter will first introduce an explanation of the concept of human rights. It will then show that recent deontological moral theory expresses this concept in a sharply antiutilitarian fashion, and will analyze the implications of this theory for the proper limits of the criminal law. Finally, it will show how this conception elucidates the harm principle in a way that utilitarianism cannot.   A. The Concept of Human Rights     As suggested above, when Locke, Rousseau, and Kant progressively gave the idea of human rights its most articulate and profound theoretical statement, they defined a way of thinking about the moral implications of human personality that was radically new. [47] Recent deontological moral theory, particularly as articulated by John Rawls [48] and Alan Gewirth, [49] enables us to understand and explicate these conceptions in a forceful way, as a plausible alternative to utilitarianism. It also provides us with an effective tool for rebutting familiar Benthamite criticisms of the idea of human rights. [50] Specifically, these neo-Kantian moral theorists have explicated the concept of human rights in terms of an autonomy-based interpretation of treating persons as equals.     1. AUTONOMY. Autonomy, in the sense fundamental to the idea of human rights, begins with the conception that persons have a range of capacities that enables them to develop, to want to act on, and in fact to act on higher-order plans of action that take as their object their lives and the way they are lived, and to evaluate and order their lives according to principles of conduct and canons of ethics to which they have given their rational assent. [51] The philosopher Harry Frankfurt made this point when he argued that an "essential difference between persons and other creatures is to be found in the structure of a person's will." [52] The difference between human beings and animals is not, Frankfurt argued, that the former have desires and motives, or that they make decisions based on prior thought; certain lower animals may have these characteristics as well. Rather, besides wanting, choosing, and being moved to do this or that, persons may want to have or not to have certain desires. As Frankfurt put it, persons are capable of wanting to be different, in their preferences and purposes, from what they are. Many animals appear to have the capacity for... "first-order desires" or "desires of the first order," which are simply desires to do or not to do one thing or another. No animal other than man, however, appears to have the capacity for reflective self-evaluation that is manifested in the formation of second-order desires. [53]

B. Recent Neo-Kantian Theory and Human Rights

C. the moral foundations of the substantive criminal law, d. the harm principle reinterpreted, drcnet homepage | sign on to drcnet, drcnet library | search the library, schaffer library | the psychedelic library, policy menu page.

DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002, R.A.NO. 9165

Essay on Dangers Of Drugs

Students are often asked to write an essay on Dangers Of Drugs in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Dangers Of Drugs

What are drugs.

Drugs are substances that can change how your body and mind work. People use drugs for many reasons, like feeling good, relaxing, or even curing sickness. But, not all drugs are good for you. Some can harm your body and mind.

Dangers to Health

Problems with addiction.

Drugs can make you addicted. This means you can’t stop using them, even if they are hurting you. Being addicted can make it hard to do normal things, like going to school or playing with friends.

Legal Issues

Using drugs can also get you in trouble with the law. It’s illegal to have, use, or sell many drugs. If you get caught, you could go to jail, pay a fine, or both. This can ruin your future.

250 Words Essay on Dangers Of Drugs

Drugs are substances that can change the way your body and mind work. Some drugs are legal, like medicine from a doctor or caffeine in coffee. But there are also illegal drugs, like cocaine or heroin. These illegal drugs can be very harmful.

Physical Dangers of Drugs

Drugs can harm your body in many ways. They can damage your brain, heart, and other important organs. Cocaine, for instance, can cause a heart attack even if you’re young. Some drugs can also make you addicted. This means you can’t stop using them even if they’re hurting you.

Mental Dangers of Drugs

Drugs don’t just hurt your body, they can also harm your mind. They can make you feel sad, angry, or scared for no reason. Some people see or hear things that aren’t there. These mental problems can last a long time, even after you stop taking the drug.

Social Dangers of Drugs

Drugs can ruin your life in other ways too. You might start doing badly in school or work. You might fight with your family and friends. Some people even end up without a home because they spent all their money on drugs.

Drugs can hurt you in many ways. They can harm your body, your mind, and your life. It’s important to say no to drugs to stay safe and healthy. If you or someone you know is using drugs, it’s important to get help. There are many people who want to help you live a drug-free life.

500 Words Essay on Dangers Of Drugs

The meaning of drugs, types of drugs.

There are many types of drugs. Some are legal, like alcohol and tobacco. Others are illegal, like cocaine and heroin. Some drugs are prescription medicines that people use in the wrong way.

Why People Use Drugs

People use drugs for many reasons. Some people use drugs to feel good or have fun. Others use drugs to forget their problems. Some people use drugs because their friends or family members do.

Dangers of Drug Use

Using drugs can be very dangerous. Here are some of the dangers:

Health Problems

Drugs can be very addictive. This means that you need more and more of the drug to feel the same effects. This can lead to a cycle of drug use that is hard to stop.

Problems at School and Work

Legal problems.

Using illegal drugs can get you in trouble with the law. You can be arrested and go to jail. This can make it hard to get a job or go to school in the future.

Conclusion: Stay Safe

Drugs can be very dangerous. They can cause health problems, addiction, problems at school or work, and legal problems. It is important to stay safe and avoid drug use. If you or someone you know is using drugs, it is important to get help. There are many resources available to help people who are struggling with drug use.

Remember, your health and well-being are important. Stay safe, and make smart choices about drugs.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

• Cover Letters
• Jobs I've Applied To
• Saved Searches
• Subscriptions

Marine Corps

Coast guard.

• Space Force
• Military Podcasts
• Benefits Home
• Military Pay and Money
• Veteran Health Care
• VA eBenefits
• Veteran Job Search
• Military Skills Translator
• Upload Your Resume
• Veteran Employment Project
• Vet Friendly Employers
• Career Advice
• Military Life Home
• Military Trivia Game
• Veterans Day
• Spouse & Family
• Military History
• Discounts Home
• Featured Discounts
• Veterans Day Restaurant Discounts
• Electronics
• Join the Military Home
• Contact a Recruiter
• Military Fitness

Marijuana Reclassification Unlikely to Mean Any Changes for Troops and Veterans, at Least for Now

President Joe Biden's move last month to reclassify marijuana as a less risky and dangerous drug on the federal government's list of controlled substances could mark one of the most significant drug reforms in decades once finalized.

But for service members and veterans, nothing will really change. For now, marijuana use remains subject to punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and veterans are still not able to obtain the drug from Department of Veterans Affairs doctors, despite rapid and widespread legalization of cannabis at the state level. And changing that will be a long road, even after reclassification.

"Rescheduling would likely not impact members of the military any differently than those outside the military," Peter Carr, a Justice Department spokesman, told Military.com. "Marijuana will continue to be subject to criminal penalties under federal law, even if marijuana is rescheduled."

Read Next: Coasties, Marines and Sailors Awarded for Seizing Millions of Pounds of Explosive Materials in Middle East

As marijuana is currently classified as a Schedule I drug, it's deemed as dangerous as heroin or LSD and therefore seen as highly likely for abuse and offering little benefit to the user. The Biden administration's plan to push it to Schedule III -- alongside items such as ketamine, steroids and testosterone -- recognizes there's lower likelihood for dependence and possible benefits.

To get marijuana fully rescheduled will take time. The draft plan is open for public comment for nearly two months, and groups can request a hearing before an administrative law judge. Only after those comments are submitted and any potential hearings held would an administrative law judge recommend a ruling to the Drug Enforcement Administration for a final scheduling decision, Carr told Military.com.

While the benefits to rescheduling mainly affect research efforts on marijuana and certain businesses can't claim certain tax benefits due to their product being a Schedule I drug, it does signify a cultural shift at the federal level, in which officials indicate that cannabis isn't as dangerous as their policies have made it out to be since at least 1970.

"This is monumental," Biden said in a video statement last month. "Far too many lives have been upended because of a failed approach to marijuana, and I'm committed to righting those wrongs. You have my word on it."

But changing the culture around the Uniform Code of Military Justice and marijuana use within the ranks is a different story.

Many of the services have been granting marijuana waivers to recruits for years, and the military has undertaken more progressive reforms in recent years as it struggles with the toughest recruiting environment in decades.

The Air Force 's newest pilot program -- which allows otherwise perfect recruits who test positive for marijuana a chance to retest again and join the ranks -- allowed 350 people to join the service from September 2022 to May 1, 2024, according to the Air Force Recruiting Service. Earlier this year, the Navy announced it wasn't kicking out recruits who show up to boot camp and test positive for marijuana in their system.

Last month, a provision included in the House's version of the annual defense policy bill -- which could still be cut -- would stop marijuana testing altogether for recruits seeking to join the military.

But once any civilian fully becomes a service member, marijuana use is no longer tolerated.

UCMJ Article 112a details wrongful use and possession of controlled substances and lists by name: "opium, heroin, cocaine, amphetamine, lysergic acid diethylamide (acid/LSD), methamphetamine (meth/crystal meth), phencyclidine (angel dust), barbituric acid, marijuana, and any of their compounds or derivatives."

Furthermore, that same article also specifies "any substances listed on a schedule of controlled substances prescribed by the president, as well as those listed in Schedules I through V of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act." That would cover marijuana even after the planned reclassification by the Biden administration.

Rescheduling marijuana may have some positive effects for businesses and researchers in the civilian world, but nothing changes for those in uniform.

The federal government convicts very few individuals on charges of possession and use of marijuana. The vast and overwhelming number of those convictions happen at the state level.

Eric Carpenter, an associate professor of law at Florida International University who specializes in military justice, told Military.com in an interview that service members are one of the few federally governed groups who are still subject to those types of charges.

"That's the population that's subject to [UCMJ article 112a]. Where the rubber hits the road, there's not really going to be any change. So, the rest of it is pretty symbolic," Carpenter said.

But marijuana use has typically been treated differently from other drugs among the service branches and by some commanders, Carpenter added.

Under the UCMJ, which is prescribed by Congress, a service member convicted of using marijuana could receive a dishonorable discharge , forfeiture of pay and possible confinement, but Carpenter said it's not uncommon for someone to receive nonjudicial punishment instead.

"It's all stuck inside the same classification within the statute, but they have traditionally been treated differently by commanders, even without Congress taking any action," Carpenter said.

The Army , Navy and Air Force have seemingly loosend up a bit, while the Marine Corps continues to be harsher with its punishment for marijuana use, he said. "The other services have already, in some ways, kind of as a norm, sort of reclassified it a little bit. They just treated it as much less serious."

Veterans who have already turned to using medical marijuana at the state level through their primary care provider will likely not see much change either. Currently, Department of Veterans Affairs doctors can't recommend marijuana, help those former service members obtain it or prescribe it, and the VA can't pay for it.

VA Press Secretary Terrence Hayes told Military.com that, as it stands now, marijuana is still a Schedule I drug and VA clinicians still can't prescribe it to veterans. But if rescheduled, it could open the door to further research for medical purposes.

"President Biden asked the secretary of health and human services and the attorney general [to] initiate the administrative review of how marijuana is scheduled under federal law," Hayes told Military.com. "Once that process is complete, VA will consider appropriate next steps, including additional research on the use of marijuana for medical purposes."

Hayes added that "a veteran's use of marijuana does not impact their ability to access VA health care or benefits" and former service members can discuss that drug use with their VA provider.

On Tuesday, the House passed an amendment to the VA appropriations bill, which still must go through negotiations, that would allow VA doctors to recommend medical marijuana to veterans in states where the drug has been legalized. Similar efforts have been stricken from the final bill in past years.

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, a nonprofit veterans organization, joined a chorus of groups praising the rescheduling effort, saying it would ease the stigma around marijuana use for their members.

"Many veterans already use cannabis to treat their war-time wounds -- visible and invisible. They're paying out of pocket to do so, not just because it works, but because we're also the generation that grew up amidst the opioid crisis and are eager for any alternative to pills," Allison Jaslow, CEO of IAVA, said in a press release. "It's time for veterans who live in states who don't have access to legal cannabis to finally have this treatment available to them. The next step is getting the VA to pay for it."

Eventually allowing service members to use marijuana while in uniform is a tall order, especially because of long-standing norms about good order and discipline, paired with the fact that they are often utilizing heavy equipment and expensive weapons.

Carpenter said it's not likely that change will come easily within the military.

"There's the discipline part, which is just there's sort of a culture built up where it's part of the norm that you don't use marijuana," Carpenter said. "I don't think there's going to be any pressure from the inside out, like commanders saying, 'Let's go ahead and take [marijuana] off the list."

-- Rebecca Kheel contributed to this report.

Related: Marijuana Testing for Recruits Could End Under House's Must-Pass Defense Policy Bill

Thomas Novelly

You May Also Like

The aim of the Marine Corps Talent Acquisition Pilot program is to recruit critical personnel, the cyberspace warfare...

And they enjoyed a very special wedding-night party: They were invited to the state dinner at the Elysee Palace with French...

The move is certain to anger Pyongyang.

About 1.1 million pounds of humanitarian aid was delivered to Gaza through the pier on Saturday.

Military News

• Investigations and Features
• Military Opinion

Select Service

• National Guard

Most Popular Military News

Admirers of Gen. Alfred Gray, the gruff, straight-shooting Mustang who rose in the ranks to become the Marine Corps' 29th...

In the early morning hours of June 6, 1944, the paratroopers of the 101st Airborne Division tried to ease the concerns of...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a lower court's 2021 decision that the Coast Guard's use of "Career...

The Department of Veterans Affairs would not be able to send names of veterans who have had financial managers appointed for...

Between late August and early September, Marines and sailors with the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, along with Coast...

Latest Benefits Info

• 8 Keys to Understanding VA Loan Occupancy Rules
• VA Health Care Eligibility
• The Next Deadline for Backdated PACT Act Payments Is Coming Soon. Here’s What You Need to Know
• Retirees, Civilians, Want to Live in Base Housing? Yes, You Can!
• VA Home Loan: Are You Eligible?

More Military Headlines

A U.S. hostage cell provided advice and support throughout the process of locating and rescuing the hostages.

The medal was placed on the sand, close to the spot where Cpl. Waverly B. Woodson Jr. is thought to have come ashore on June...

• Aid Is Delivered to Gaza From Newly Repaired US-Built Pier, US Military Says
• Black D-Day Combat Medic's Long-Denied Medal Tenderly Laid on Omaha Beach Where He Bled, Saved Lives
• Military Services Approving Roughly 3% of Malpractice Claims from Service Members
• Air Force Missileers Get New Workplace Inspections, Health Tracking Amid Ongoing Cancer Cluster Study
• Bill to Compensate Radiation Fallout Victims of Atom Bomb Tests Allowed to Expire
• Outgoing Naval Academy Commandant Reflects on Annapolis Tenure: 'We Cannot Rest'
• 'Incredibly Emotional': Navy Veteran, 100, Recalls D-Day on USS Nevada

Military Benefits Updates

• VA Fertility Benefits for Military Veterans
• Virginia Veterans Rally the Troops, State Leaders in Support of Education Benefits
• Marine Corps Pilot Program Allows Qualified Signals, Cyber Recruits to Join Service Up to Rank of Gunny
• Famed Gen. Al Gray's Belongings, Marine Corps Memorabilia Being Auctioned Off This Month
• Coasties, Marines and Sailors Awarded for Seizing Millions of Pounds of Explosive Materials in Middle East
• Federal Appeals Court Finds Coast Guard Illegally Forced Senior Enlisted into Retirement
• The Critical Role the Coast Guard Played in the D-Day Invasion

Entertainment

• ‘World of Tanks’ Wants You to Invade Normandy During D-Day
• Idris Elba Explores the Lost Stories of World War II Service Members of Color in Nat Geo's 'Erased'
• The Real-Life D-Day Commandos Who Inspired Hollywood's 'Dirty Dozen'

• Skip to main content
• Skip to FDA Search
• Skip to in this section menu
• Skip to footer links

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

•   Search
•   Menu
• For Consumers
• Consumer Updates

FDA 101: Dietary Supplements

Dietary supplements can help improve health but can also have risks. Get the facts on supplements and how the FDA regulates them to help keep you safe.

Multivitamins, vitamin D, echinacea, and fish oil are among the many dietary supplements lining store shelves or available online. Perhaps you already take a supplement or are thinking about using one. Dietary supplements can be beneficial to your health, but they can also involve health risks. So, it’s important that you talk with a health care professional to help you decide if a supplement is right for you.

Read on to learn what dietary supplements are (and are not), what role the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has in regulating them, and how to make sure you and your family use supplements safely.

What Are Dietary Supplements?

Dietary supplements are intended to add to or supplement the diet and are different from conventional food. Generally, to the extent a product is intended to treat, diagnose, cure, or prevent diseases, it is a drug, even if it is labeled as a dietary supplement. Supplements are ingested and come in many forms, including tablets, capsules, soft gels, gel caps, powders, bars, gummies, and liquids.

Common supplements include:

• Vitamins (such as multivitamins or individual vitamins like vitamin D and biotin).
• Minerals (such as calcium, magnesium, and iron).
• Botanicals or herbs (such as echinacea and ginger).
• Botanical compounds (such as caffeine and curcumin).
• Amino acids (such as tryptophan and glutamine).
• Live microbials (commonly referred to as “probiotics”).

What Are the Benefits of Dietary Supplements?

Dietary supplements can help you improve or maintain your overall health, and supplements can also help you meet your daily requirements of essential nutrients.

For example, calcium and vitamin D can help build strong bones, and fiber can help to maintain bowel regularity. While the benefits of some supplements are well established, other supplements need more study. Also, keep in mind that supplements should not take the place of the variety of foods that are important for a healthy diet.

What Are the Risks of Dietary Supplements?

Before buying or taking a dietary supplement, talk with a health care professional—such as your doctor, nurse, registered dietician, or pharmacist—about the benefits and risks.

Many supplements contain ingredients that can have strong effects in the body. Additionally, some supplements can interact with medications, interfere with lab tests, or have dangerous effects during surgery. Your health care professional can help you decide what supplement, if any, is right for you.

When taking dietary supplements, be alert to the possibility of a bad reaction or side effect (also known as an adverse event).

Problems can occur especially if you:

• Combine supplements.
• Mix medicines and supplements .
• Take too much of some supplements.
• Take supplements instead of medications.

If you experience an adverse event while taking a dietary supplement, immediately stop using the supplement, seek medical care or advice, and report the adverse event to the FDA .

How Are Dietary Supplements Regulated?

The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) was amended in 1994 by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (often referred to as DSHEA), which defined “dietary supplement” and set out FDA’s authority regarding such products. Under existing law:

• The FDA does NOT have the authority to approve dietary supplements for safety and effectiveness, or to approve their labeling, before the supplements are sold to the public.
• Under the FD&C Act, it is the responsibility of dietary supplement companies to ensure their products meet the safety standards for dietary supplements and are not otherwise in violation of the law.
• Dietary supplement labels are required to have nutrition information in the form of a Supplement Facts label that includes the serving size, the number of servings per container, a listing of all dietary ingredients in the product, and the amount per serving of those ingredients. They also must have a statement on the front of the product identifying it as a “dietary supplement” or similar descriptive term (e.g., “herbal supplement” or “calcium supplement”). 

In general, even if a product is labeled as a dietary supplement, a product intended to treat, prevent, cure, or alleviate the symptoms of a disease is a drug, and subject to all requirements that apply to drugs.

The FDA’s Role and Actions to Help Keep You Safe

Even though the FDA does not approve dietary supplements, there are roles for the agency in regulating them.

• Since companies can often introduce a dietary supplement to the market without notifying the FDA, the agency's role in regulating supplements primarily begins after the product enters the marketplace.
• The FDA periodically inspects dietary supplement manufacturing facilities to verify companies are meeting applicable manufacturing and labeling requirements.
• The FDA also reviews product labels and other labeling information, including websites, to ensure products are appropriately labeled and that they do not include claims that may render the products drugs (e.g., claims to treat, diagnose, cure, or prevent diseases).
• The FDA monitors adverse event reports submitted by dietary supplement companies, health care professionals, and consumers as well as other product complaints for valuable information about the safety of products once they are on the market.
• Work with the company to bring the product into compliance.
• Ask the company to voluntarily recall the product.
• Take action to remove a dangerous product from the market.

Tips to Be a Safe and Informed Consumer

Before taking a dietary supplement, talk with your health care professional. They can help you decide which supplements, if any, are right for you. You can also contact the manufacturer for information about the product.

• Take only as described on the label. Some ingredients and products can be harmful when consumed in high amounts, when taken for a long time, or when used in combination with certain drugs or foods.
• Do not substitute a dietary supplement for a prescription medicine or for the variety of foods important to a healthy diet.
• Do not assume that the term "natural" to describe a product ensures that it is safe.
• Be wary of hype. Sound health advice is generally based upon research over time, not a single study.
• Learn to spot false claims. If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Why Is It Important to Report an Adverse Event?

If you experience adverse event, also known as a side effect or bad reaction, the FDA encourages both you and your health care professional to report the adverse event to the FDA.

You can help the FDA, yourself, and other consumers by reporting an adverse event. A single adverse event report can help us identify a potentially dangerous product and possibly remove it from the market.

For a list of potential serious reactions to watch for, and to learn how to report an adverse event, please see the FDA’s webpage,  How to Report a Problem with Dietary Supplements .

Adverse events can also be reported to the product's manufacturer or distributor through the address or phone number listed on the product's label. Dietary supplement firms are required to report serious adverse events they receive about their dietary supplements to FDA within 15 days.

For a general, nonserious complaint or concern about dietary supplements, contact your local FDA Consumer Complaint Coordinator .

Additional Resources:

• Dietary Supplements , FDA
• Information for Consumers on Using Dietary Supplements , FDA
• Dietary Supplement Fact Sheets , National Institutes of Health

Get regular FDA email updates delivered on this topic to your inbox.

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Louisiana governor signs bill making two abortion drugs controlled dangerous substances

FILE - Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry addresses members of the House and Senate on opening day of a legislative special session, Feb. 19, 2024, in the House Chamber at the State Capitol in Baton Rouge, La. Landry has signed a first-of-its-kind bill Friday, May 24, classifying two abortion-inducing drugs as controlled and dangerous substances. (Hilary Scheinuk/The Advocate via AP, File)

FILE - Boxes of the drug mifepristone sit on a shelf at the West Alabama Women’s Center in Tuscaloosa, Ala., on March 16, 2022. Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry has signed a first-of-its-kind bill Friday, May 24, classifying two abortion-inducing drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol, as controlled and dangerous substances. (AP Photo/Allen G. Breed, File)

• Copy Link copied

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — First-of-its-kind legislation that classifies two abortion-inducing drugs as controlled and dangerous substances was signed into law Friday by Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry.

The Republican governor announced his signing of the bill in Baton Rouge a day after it gained final legislative passage in the state Senate.

The measure affects the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol, which are used in medication abortions, the most common method of abortion in the U.S..

Opponents of the bill included many physicians who said the drugs have other critical reproductive health care uses, and that changing the classification could make it harder to prescribe the medications.

Supporters of the bill said it would protect expectant mothers from coerced abortions, though they cited only one example of that happening, in the state of Texas.

The bill passed as abortion opponents await a final decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on an effort to restrict access to mifepristone.

The new law will take effect on Oct. 1.

The bill began as a measure to create the crime of “coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud.” An amendment adding the abortion drugs to the Schedule IV classification of Louisiana’s Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law was pushed by Sen. Thomas Pressly, a Republican from Shreveport and the main sponsor of the bill.

“Requiring an abortion inducing drug to be obtained with a prescription and criminalizing the use of an abortion drug on an unsuspecting mother is nothing short of common-sense,” Landry said in a statement.

Current Louisiana law already requires a prescription for both drugs and makes it a crime to use them to induce an abortion, in most cases. The bill would make it harder to obtain the pills. Other Schedule IV drugs include the opioid tramadol and a group of depressants known as benzodiazepines.

Knowingly possessing the drugs without a valid prescription would carry a punishment including hefty fines and jail time. Language in the bill appears to carve out protections for pregnant women who obtain the drug without a prescription for their own consumption .

The classification would require doctors to have a specific license to prescribe the drugs, and the drugs would have to be stored in certain facilities that in some cases could end up being located far from rural clinics.

In addition to inducing abortions, mifepristone and misoprostol have other common uses, such as treating miscarriages, inducing labor and stopping hemorrhaging.

More than 200 doctors in the state signed a letter to lawmakers warning that the measure could produce a “barrier to physicians’ ease of prescribing appropriate treatment” and cause unnecessary fear and confusion among both patients and doctors. The physicians warn that any delay to obtaining the drugs could lead to worsening outcomes in a state that has one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the country.

Pressly said he pushed the legislation because of what happened to his sister Catherine Herring, of Texas. In 2022, Herring’s husband slipped her seven misoprostol pills in an effort to induce an abortion without her knowledge or consent.

President of the Senate Speaker of the House of Representatives

This Act shall be known and cited as the "Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002". – It is the policy of the State to safeguard the integrity of its territory and the well-being of its citizenry particularly the youth, from the harmful effects of dangerous drugs on their physical and mental well-being, and to defend the same against acts or omissions detrimental to their development and preservation. In view of the foregoing, the State needs to enhance further the efficacy of the law against dangerous drugs, it being one of today's more serious social ills. Toward this end, the government shall pursue an intensive and unrelenting campaign against the trafficking and use of dangerous drugs and other similar substances through an integrated system of planning, implementation and enforcement of anti-drug abuse policies, programs, and projects. The government shall however aim to achieve a balance in the national drug control program so that people with legitimate medical needs are not prevented from being treated with adequate amounts of appropriate medications, which include the use of dangerous drugs. It is further declared the policy of the State to provide effective mechanisms or measures to re-integrate into society individuals who have fallen victims to drug abuse or dangerous drug dependence through sustainable programs of treatment and rehabilitation. . As used in this Act, the following terms shall mean: (a) Administer. – Any act of introducing any dangerous drug into the body of any person, with or without his/her knowledge, by injection, inhalation, ingestion or other means, or of committing any act of indispensable assistance to a person in administering a dangerous drug to himself/herself unless administered by a duly licensed practitioner for purposes of medication. (b) Board. - Refers to the Dangerous Drugs Board under Section 77, Article IX of this Act. (c) Centers. - Any of the treatment and rehabilitation centers for drug dependents referred to in Section 34, Article VIII of this Act. (d) Chemical Diversion. – The sale, distribution, supply or transport of legitimately imported, in-transit, manufactured or procured controlled precursors and essential chemicals, in diluted, mixtures or in concentrated form, to any person or entity engaged in the manufacture of any dangerous drug, and shall include packaging, repackaging, labeling, relabeling or concealment of such transaction through fraud, destruction of documents, fraudulent use of permits, misdeclaration, use of front companies or mail fraud. (e) Clandestine Laboratory. – Any facility used for the illegal manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical. (f) Confirmatory Test. – An analytical test using a device, tool or equipment with a different chemical or physical principle that is more specific which will validate and confirm the result of the screening test. (g) Controlled Delivery. – The investigative technique of allowing an unlawful or suspect consignment of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, equipment or paraphernalia, or property believed to be derived directly or indirectly from any offense, to pass into, through or out of the country under the supervision of an authorized officer, with a view to gathering evidence to identify any person involved in any dangerous drugs related offense, or to facilitate prosecution of that offense. (h) Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. – Include those listed in Tables I and II of the 1988 UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances as enumerated in the attached annex, which is an integral part of this Act. (i) Cultivate or Culture. – Any act of knowingly planting, growing, raising, or permitting the planting, growing or raising of any plant which is the source of a dangerous drug. (j) Dangerous Drugs. – Include those listed in the Schedules annexed to the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, as amended by the 1972 Protocol, and in the Schedules annexed to the 1971 Single Convention on Psychotropic Substances as enumerated in the attached annex which is an integral part of this Act. (k) Deliver. – Any act of knowingly passing a dangerous drug to another, personally or otherwise, and by any means, with or without consideration. (l) Den, Dive or Resort. – A place where any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical is administered, delivered, stored for illegal purposes, distributed, sold or used in any form. (m) Dispense. – Any act of giving away, selling or distributing medicine or any dangerous drug with or without the use of prescription. (n) Drug Dependence. – As based on the World Health Organization definition, it is a cluster of physiological, behavioral and cognitive phenomena of variable intensity, in which the use of psychoactive drug takes on a high priority thereby involving, among others, a strong desire or a sense of compulsion to take the substance and the difficulties in controlling substance-taking behavior in terms of its onset, termination, or levels of use. (o) Drug Syndicate. – Any organized group of two (2) or more persons forming or joining together with the intention of committing any offense prescribed under this Act. (p) Employee of Den, Dive or Resort. – The caretaker, helper, watchman, lookout, and other persons working in the den, dive or resort, employed by the maintainer, owner and/or operator where any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical is administered, delivered, distributed, sold or used, with or without compensation, in connection with the operation thereof. (q) Financier. – Any person who pays for, raises or supplies money for, or underwrites any of the illegal activities prescribed under this Act. (r) Illegal Trafficking. – The illegal cultivation, culture, delivery, administration, dispensation, manufacture, sale, trading, transportation, distribution, importation, exportation and possession of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical. (s) Instrument. – Any thing that is used in or intended to be used in any manner in the commission of illegal drug trafficking or related offenses. (t) Laboratory Equipment. – The paraphernalia, apparatus, materials or appliances when used, intended for use or designed for use in the manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, such as reaction vessel, preparative/purifying equipment, fermentors, separatory funnel, flask, heating mantle, gas generator, or their substitute. (u) Manufacture. – The production, preparation, compounding or processing of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, either directly or indirectly or by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis or by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis, and shall include any packaging or repackaging of such substances, design or configuration of its form, or labeling or relabeling of its container; except that such terms do not include the preparation, compounding, packaging or labeling of a drug or other substances by a duly authorized practitioner as an incident to his/her administration or dispensation of such drug or substance in the course of his/her professional practice including research, teaching and chemical analysis of dangerous drugs or such substances that are not intended for sale or for any other purpose. (v) Cannabis or commonly known as "Marijuana" or "Indian Hemp" or by its any other name. – Embraces every kind, class, genus, or specie of the plant including, but not limited to, , and , and embraces every kind, class and character of marijuana, whether dried or fresh and flowering, flowering or fruiting tops, or any part or portion of the plant and seeds thereof, and all its geographic varieties, whether as a reefer, resin, extract, tincture or in any form whatsoever. (w) Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) or commonly known as "Ecstasy", or by its any other name. – Refers to the drug having such chemical composition, including any of its isomers or derivatives in any form. (x) Methamphetamine Hydrochloride or commonly known as "Shabu", "Ice", "Meth", or by its any other name. – Refers to the drug having such chemical composition, including any of its isomers or derivatives in any form. (y) Opium. – Refers to the coagulated juice of the opium poppy ( ) and embraces every kind, class and character of opium, whether crude or prepared; the ashes or refuse of the same; narcotic preparations thereof or therefrom; morphine or any alkaloid of opium; preparations in which opium, morphine or any alkaloid of opium enters as an ingredient; opium poppy; opium poppy straw; and leaves or wrappings of opium leaves, whether prepared for use or not. (z) Opium Poppy. – Refers to any part of the plant of the species and , which includes the seeds, straws, branches, leaves or any part thereof, or substances derived therefrom, even for floral, decorative and culinary purposes. (aa) PDEA. – Refers to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency under Section 82, Article IX of this Act. (bb) Person. – Any entity, natural or juridical, including among others, a corporation, partnership, trust or estate, joint stock company, association, syndicate, joint venture or other unincorporated organization or group capable of acquiring rights or entering into obligations. (cc) Planting of Evidence. – The willful act by any person of maliciously and surreptitiously inserting, placing, adding or attaching directly or indirectly, through any overt or covert act, whatever quantity of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical in the person, house, effects or in the immediate vicinity of an innocent individual for the purpose of implicating, incriminating or imputing the commission of any violation of this Act. (dd) Practitioner. – Any person who is a licensed physician, dentist, chemist, medical technologist, nurse, midwife, veterinarian or pharmacist in the Philippines. (ee) Protector/Coddler. – Any person who knowingly and willfully consents to the unlawful acts provided for in this Act and uses his/her influence, power or position in shielding, harboring, screening or facilitating the escape of any person he/she knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe on or suspects, has violated the provisions of this Act in order to prevent the arrest, prosecution and conviction of the violator. (ff) Pusher. – Any person who sells, trades, administers, dispenses, delivers or gives away to another, on any terms whatsoever, or distributes, dispatches in transit or transports dangerous drugs or who acts as a broker in any of such transactions, in violation of this Act. (gg) School. – Any educational institution, private or public, undertaking educational operation for pupils/students pursuing certain studies at defined levels, receiving instructions from teachers, usually located in a building or a group of buildings in a particular physical or cyber site. (hh) Screening Test. – A rapid test performed to establish potential/presumptive positive result. (ii) Sell. – Any act of giving away any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical whether for money or any other consideration. (jj) Trading. – Transactions involving the illegal trafficking of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals using electronic devices such as, but not limited to, text messages, email, mobile or landlines, two-way radios, internet, instant messengers and chat rooms or acting as a broker in any of such transactions whether for money or any other consideration in violation of this Act. (kk) Use. – Any act of injecting, intravenously or intramuscularly, of consuming, either by chewing, smoking, sniffing, eating, swallowing, drinking or otherwise introducing into the physiological system of the body, and of the dangerous drugs. The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall import or bring into the Philippines any dangerous drug, regardless of the quantity and purity involved, including any and all species of opium poppy or any part thereof or substances derived therefrom even for floral, decorative and culinary purposes. The penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall import any controlled precursor and essential chemical. The maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized under this Act, shall import or bring into the Philippines any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical through the use of a diplomatic passport, diplomatic facilities or any other means involving his/her official status intended to facilitate the unlawful entry of the same. In addition, the diplomatic passport shall be confiscated and canceled. The maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed upon any person, who organizes, manages or acts as a "financier" of any of the illegal activities prescribed in this Section. The penalty of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who acts as a "protector/coddler" of any violator of the provisions under this Section. - The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall sell, trade, administer, dispense, deliver, give away to another, distribute dispatch in transit or transport any dangerous drug, including any and all species of opium poppy regardless of the quantity and purity involved, or shall act as a broker in any of such transactions. The penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall sell, trade, administer, dispense, deliver, give away to another, distribute, dispatch in transit or transport any controlled precursor and essential chemical, or shall act as a broker in such transactions. If the sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution or transportation of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical transpires within one hundred (100) meters from the school, the maximum penalty shall be imposed in every case. For drug pushers who use minors or mentally incapacitated individuals as runners, couriers and messengers, or in any other capacity directly connected to the dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemical trade, the maximum penalty shall be imposed in every case. If the victim of the offense is a minor or a mentally incapacitated individual, or should a dangerous drug and/or a controlled precursor and essential chemical involved in any offense herein provided be the proximate cause of death of a victim thereof, the maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed. The maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed upon any person who organizes, manages or acts as a "financier" of any of the illegal activities prescribed in this Section. The penalty of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who acts as a "protector/coddler" of any violator of the provisions under this Section. - The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person or group of persons who shall maintain a den, dive or resort where any dangerous drug is used or sold in any form. The penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person or group of persons who shall maintain a den, dive, or resort where any controlled precursor and essential chemical is used or sold in any form. The maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed in every case where any dangerous drug is administered, delivered or sold to a minor who is allowed to use the same in such a place. Should any dangerous drug be the proximate cause of the death of a person using the same in such den, dive or resort, the penalty of death and a fine ranging from One million (P1,000,000.00) to Fifteen million pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed on the maintainer, owner and/or operator. If such den, dive or resort is owned by a third person, the same shall be confiscated and escheated in favor of the government: , That the criminal complaint shall specifically allege that such place is intentionally used in the furtherance of the crime: , That the prosecution shall prove such intent on the part of the owner to use the property for such purpose: , That the owner shall be included as an accused in the criminal complaint. The maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed upon any person who organizes, manages or acts as a "financier" of any of the illegal activities prescribed in this Section. The penalty twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who acts as a "protector/coddler" of any violator of the provisions under this Section. - The penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon: (b) Any person who, not being included in the provisions of the next preceding, paragraph, is aware of the nature of the place as such and shall knowingly visit the same - The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall engage in the manufacture of any dangerous drug. The penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall manufacture any controlled precursor and essential chemical. The presence of any controlled precursor and essential chemical or laboratory equipment in the clandestine laboratory is a proof of manufacture of any dangerous drug. It shall be considered an aggravating circumstance if the clandestine laboratory is undertaken or established under the following circumstances: (b) Any phase or manufacturing process was established or undertaken within one hundred (100) meters of a residential, business, church or school premises; (c) Any clandestine laboratory was secured or protected with booby traps; (d) Any clandestine laboratory was concealed with legitimate business operations; or (e) Any employment of a practitioner, chemical engineer, public official or foreigner. The maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed upon any person, who organizes, manages or acts as a "financier" of any of the illegal activities prescribed in this Section. The penalty of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who acts as a "protector/coddler" of any violator of the provisions under this Section. - The penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall illegally divert any controlled precursor and essential chemical. - The penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person who shall deliver, possess with intent to deliver, or manufacture with intent to deliver equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs, knowing, or under circumstances where one reasonably should know, that it will be used to plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture, compound, convert, produce, process, prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain or conceal any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical in violation of this Act. The penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4) years and a fine ranging from Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) to Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) shall be imposed if it will be used to inject, ingest, inhale or otherwise introduce into the human body a dangerous drug in violation of this Act. The maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed upon any person, who uses a minor or a mentally incapacitated individual to deliver such equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs. - The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall possess any dangerous drug in the following quantities, regardless of the degree of purity thereof: (2) 10 grams or more of morphine; (3) 10 grams or more of heroin; (4) 10 grams or more of cocaine or cocaine hydrochloride; (5) 50 grams or more of methamphetamine hydrochloride or "shabu"; (6) 10 grams or more of marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil; (7) 500 grams or more of marijuana; and (8) 10 grams or more of other dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to, methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDA) or "ecstasy", paramethoxyamphetamine (PMA), trimethoxyamphetamine (TMA), lysergic acid diethylamine (LSD), gamma hydroxyamphetamine (GHB), and those similarly designed or newly introduced drugs and their derivatives, without having any therapeutic value or if the quantity possessed is far beyond therapeutic requirements, as determined and promulgated by the Board in accordance to Section 93, Article XI of this Act. Otherwise, if the quantity involved is less than the foregoing quantities, the penalties shall be graduated as follows: (2) Imprisonment of twenty (20) years and one (1) day to life imprisonment and a fine ranging from Four hundred thousand pesos (P400,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00), if the quantities of dangerous drugs are five (5) grams or more but less than ten (10) grams of opium, morphine, heroin, cocaine or cocaine hydrochloride, marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil, methamphetamine hydrochloride or "shabu", or other dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to, MDMA or "ecstasy", PMA, TMA, LSD, GHB, and those similarly designed or newly introduced drugs and their derivatives, without having any therapeutic value or if the quantity possessed is far beyond therapeutic requirements; or three hundred (300) grams or more but less than five (hundred) 500) grams of marijuana; and (3) Imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from Three hundred thousand pesos (P300,000.00) to Four hundred thousand pesos (P400,000.00), if the quantities of dangerous drugs are less than five (5) grams of opium, morphine, heroin, cocaine or cocaine hydrochloride, marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil, methamphetamine hydrochloride or "shabu", or other dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to, MDMA or "ecstasy", PMA, TMA, LSD, GHB, and those similarly designed or newly introduced drugs and their derivatives, without having any therapeutic value or if the quantity possessed is far beyond therapeutic requirements; or less than three hundred (300) grams of marijuana. The penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4) years and a fine ranging from Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) to Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall possess or have under his/her control any equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia fit or intended for smoking, consuming, administering, injecting, ingesting, or introducing any dangerous drug into the body: , That in the case of medical practitioners and various professionals who are required to carry such equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia in the practice of their profession, the Board shall prescribe the necessary implementing guidelines thereof. The possession of such equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia fit or intended for any of the purposes enumerated in the preceding paragraph shall be evidence that the possessor has smoked, consumed, administered to himself/herself, injected, ingested or used a dangerous drug and shall be presumed to have violated Section 15 of this Act. Any person found possessing any dangerous drug during a party, or at a social gathering or meeting, or in the proximate company of at least two (2) persons, shall suffer the maximum penalties provided for in Section 11 of this Act, regardless of the quantity and purity of such dangerous drugs. - The maximum penalty provided for in Section 12 of this Act shall be imposed upon any person, who shall possess or have under his/her control any equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia fit or intended for smoking, consuming, administering, injecting, ingesting, or introducing any dangerous drug into the body, during parties, social gatherings or meetings, or in the proximate company of at least two (2) persons. – A person apprehended or arrested, who is found to be positive for use of any dangerous drug, after a confirmatory test, shall be imposed a penalty of a minimum of six (6) months rehabilitation in a government center for the first offense, subject to the provisions of Article VIII of this Act. If apprehended using any dangerous drug for the second time, he/she shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years and a fine ranging from Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) to Two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00): That this Section shall not be applicable where the person tested is also found to have in his/her possession such quantity of any dangerous drug provided for under Section 11 of this Act, in which case the provisions stated therein shall apply. The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who shall plant, cultivate or culture marijuana, opium poppy or any other plant regardless of quantity, which is or may hereafter be classified as a dangerous drug or as a source from which any dangerous drug may be manufactured or derived: , That in the case of medical laboratories and medical research centers which cultivate or culture marijuana, opium poppy and other plants, or materials of such dangerous drugs for medical experiments and research purposes, or for the creation of new types of medicine, the Board shall prescribe the necessary implementing guidelines for the proper cultivation, culture, handling, experimentation and disposal of such plants and materials. The land or portions thereof and/or greenhouses on which any of said plants is cultivated or cultured shall be confiscated and escheated in favor of the State, unless the owner thereof can prove lack of knowledge of such cultivation or culture despite the exercise of due diligence on his/her part. If the land involved is part of the public domain, the maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed upon the offender. The maximum penalty provided for under this Section shall be imposed upon any person, who organizes, manages or acts as a "financier" of any of the illegal activities prescribed in this Section. The penalty of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who acts as a "protector/coddler" of any violator of the provisions under this Section. The penalty of imprisonment ranging from one (1) year and one (1) day to six (6) years and a fine ranging from Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) to Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) shall be imposed upon any practitioner, manufacturer, wholesaler, importer, distributor, dealer or retailer who violates or fails to comply with the maintenance and keeping of the original records of transactions on any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical in accordance with Section 40 of this Act. An additional penalty shall be imposed through the revocation of the license to practice his/her profession, in case of a practitioner, or of the business, in case of a manufacturer, seller, importer, distributor, dealer or retailer. . – The penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) and the additional penalty of the revocation of his/her license to practice shall be imposed upon the practitioner, who shall prescribe any dangerous drug to any person whose physical or physiological condition does not require the use or in the dosage prescribed therein, as determined by the Board in consultation with recognized competent experts who are authorized representatives of professional organizations of practitioners, particularly those who are involved in the care of persons with severe pain. – The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall make or issue a prescription or any other writing purporting to be a prescription for any dangerous drug. – Every penalty imposed for the unlawful importation, sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution, transportation or manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, the cultivation or culture of plants which are sources of dangerous drugs, and the possession of any equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs including other laboratory equipment, shall carry with it the confiscation and forfeiture, in favor of the government, of all the proceeds and properties derived from the unlawful act, including, but not limited to, money and other assets obtained thereby, and the instruments or tools with which the particular unlawful act was committed, unless they are the property of a third person not liable for the unlawful act, but those which are not of lawful commerce shall be ordered destroyed without delay pursuant to the provisions of Section 21 of this Act. After conviction in the Regional Trial Court in the appropriate criminal case filed, the Court shall immediately schedule a hearing for the confiscation and forfeiture of all the proceeds of the offense and all the assets and properties of the accused either owned or held by him or in the name of some other persons if the same shall be found to be manifestly out of proportion to his/her lawful income: , That if the forfeited property is a vehicle, the same shall be auctioned off not later than five (5) days upon order of confiscation or forfeiture. During the pendency of the case in the Regional Trial Court, no property, or income derived therefrom, which may be confiscated and forfeited, shall be disposed, alienated or transferred and the same shall be in and no bond shall be admitted for the release of the same. The proceeds of any sale or disposition of any property confiscated or forfeited under this Section shall be used to pay all proper expenses incurred in the proceedings for the confiscation, forfeiture, custody and maintenance of the property pending disposition, as well as expenses for publication and court costs. The proceeds in excess of the above expenses shall accrue to the Board to be used in its campaign against illegal drugs. – The PDEA shall take charge and have custody of all dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment so confiscated, seized and/or surrendered, for proper disposition in the following manner: (2) Within twenty-four (24) hours upon confiscation/seizure of dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment, the same shall be submitted to the PDEA Forensic Laboratory for a qualitative and quantitative examination; (3) A certification of the forensic laboratory examination results, which shall be done under oath by the forensic laboratory examiner, shall be issued within twenty-four (24) hours after the receipt of the subject item/s: , That when the volume of the dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and essential chemicals does not allow the completion of testing within the time frame, a partial laboratory examination report shall be provisionally issued stating therein the quantities of dangerous drugs still to be examined by the forensic laboratory: , That a final certification shall be issued on the completed forensic laboratory examination on the same within the next twenty-four (24) hours; (4) After the filing of the criminal case, the Court shall, within seventy-two (72) hours, conduct an ocular inspection of the confiscated, seized and/or surrendered dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and essential chemicals, including the instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment, and through the PDEA shall within twenty-four (24) hours thereafter proceed with the destruction or burning of the same, in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from the media and the DOJ, civil society groups and any elected public official. The Board shall draw up the guidelines on the manner of proper disposition and destruction of such item/s which shall be borne by the offender: , That those item/s of lawful commerce, as determined by the Board, shall be donated, used or recycled for legitimate purposes: , That a representative sample, duly weighed and recorded is retained; (5) The Board shall then issue a sworn certification as to the fact of destruction or burning of the subject item/s which, together with the representative sample/s in the custody of the PDEA, shall be submitted to the court having jurisdiction over the case. In all instances, the representative sample/s shall be kept to a minimum quantity as determined by the Board; (6) The alleged offender or his/her representative or counsel shall be allowed to personally observe all of the above proceedings and his/her presence shall not constitute an admission of guilt. In case the said offender or accused refuses or fails to appoint a representative after due notice in writing to the accused or his/her counsel within seventy-two (72) hours before the actual burning or destruction of the evidence in question, the Secretary of Justice shall appoint a member of the public attorney's office to represent the former; (7) After the promulgation and judgment in the criminal case wherein the representative sample/s was presented as evidence in court, the trial prosecutor shall inform the Board of the final termination of the case and, in turn, shall request the court for leave to turn over the said representative sample/s to the PDEA for proper disposition and destruction within twenty-four (24) hours from receipt of the same; and (8) Transitory Provision: a) Within twenty-four (24) hours from the effectivity of this Act, dangerous drugs defined herein which are presently in possession of law enforcement agencies shall, with leave of court, be burned or destroyed, in the presence of representatives of the Court, DOJ, Department of Health (DOH) and the accused/and or his/her counsel, and, b) Pending the organization of the PDEA, the custody, disposition, and burning or destruction of seized/surrendered dangerous drugs provided under this Section shall be implemented by the DOH. – The Board shall recommend to the concerned government agency the grant of compensation, reward and award to any person providing information and to law enforcers participating in the operation, which results in the successful confiscation, seizure or surrender of dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and essential chemicals. – Any person charged under any provision of this Act regardless of the imposable penalty shall not be allowed to avail of the provision on plea-bargaining. . – Any person convicted for drug trafficking or pushing under this Act, regardless of the penalty imposed by the Court, cannot avail of the privilege granted by the Probation Law or Presidential Decree No. 968, as amended. – Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to the contrary, a positive finding for the use of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating circumstance in the commission of a crime by an offender, and the application of the penalty provided for in the Revised Penal Code shall be applicable. Any attempt or conspiracy to commit the following unlawful acts shall be penalized by the same penalty prescribed for the commission of the same as provided under this Act: (b) Sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution and transportation of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical; (c) Maintenance of a den, dive or resort where any dangerous drug is used in any form; (d) Manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical; and (e) Cultivation or culture of plants which are sources of dangerous drugs. The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00), in addition to absolute perpetual disqualification from any public office, shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee who misappropriates, misapplies or fails to account for confiscated, seized or surrendered dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment including the proceeds or properties obtained from the unlawful acts as provided for in this Act. Any elective local or national official found to have benefited from the proceeds of the trafficking of dangerous drugs as prescribed in this Act, or have received any financial or material contributions or donations from natural or juridical persons found guilty of trafficking dangerous drugs as prescribed in this Act, shall be removed from office and perpetually disqualified from holding any elective or appointive positions in the government, its divisions, subdivisions, and intermediaries, including government-owned or –controlled corporations. – The maximum penalties of the unlawful acts provided for in this Act shall be imposed, in addition to absolute perpetual disqualification from any public office, if those found guilty of such unlawful acts are government officials and employees. – Any person who is found guilty of "planting" any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, regardless of quantity and purity, shall suffer the penalty of death. – In case any violation of this Act is committed by a partnership, corporation, association or any juridical entity, the partner, president, director, manager, trustee, estate administrator, or officer who consents to or knowingly tolerates such violation shall be held criminally liable as a co-principal. The penalty provided for the offense under this Act shall be imposed upon the partner, president, director, manager, trustee, estate administrator, or officer who knowingly authorizes, tolerates or consents to the use of a vehicle, vessel, aircraft, equipment or other facility, as an instrument in the importation, sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution, transportation or manufacture of dangerous drugs, or chemical diversion, if such vehicle, vessel, aircraft, equipment or other instrument is owned by or under the control or supervision of the partnership, corporation, association or juridical entity to which they are affiliated. – In addition to the penalties prescribed in the unlawful act committed, any alien who violates such provisions of this Act shall, after service of sentence, be deported immediately without further proceedings, unless the penalty is death. – The penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4) years and a fine ranging from Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) to Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person found violating any regulation duly issued by the Board pursuant to this Act, in addition to the administrative sanctions imposed by the Board. – Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 17, Rule 119 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure and the provisions of Republic Act No. 6981 or the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act of 1991, any person who has violated Sections 7, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 19, Article II of this Act, who voluntarily gives information about any violation of Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, and 16, Article II of this Act as well as any violation of the offenses mentioned if committed by a drug syndicate, or any information leading to the whereabouts, identities and arrest of all or any of the members thereof; and who willingly testifies against such persons as described above, shall be exempted from prosecution or punishment for the offense with reference to which his/her information of testimony were given, and may plead or prove the giving of such information and testimony in bar of such prosecution: That the following conditions concur: (2) Such information and testimony are not yet in the possession of the State; (3) Such information and testimony can be corroborated on its material points; (4) the informant or witness has not been previously convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, except when there is no other direct evidence available for the State other than the information and testimony of said informant or witness; and (5) The informant or witness shall strictly and faithfully comply without delay, any condition or undertaking, reduced into writing, lawfully imposed by the State as further consideration for the grant of immunity from prosecution and punishment. , That this immunity may be enjoyed by such informant or witness who does not appear to be most guilty for the offense with reference to which his/her information or testimony were given: , That there is no direct evidence available for the State except for the information and testimony of the said informant or witness. – The immunity granted to the informant or witness, as prescribed in Section 33 of this Act, shall not attach should it turn out subsequently that the information and/or testimony is false, malicious or made only for the purpose of harassing, molesting or in any way prejudicing the persons described in the preceding Section against whom such information or testimony is directed against. In such case, the informant or witness shall be subject to prosecution and the enjoyment of all rights and benefits previously accorded him under this Act or any other law, decree or order shall be deemed terminated. In case an informant or witness under this Act fails or refuses to testify without just cause, and when lawfully obliged to do so, or should he/she violate any condition accompanying such immunity as provided above, his/her immunity shall be removed and he/she shall likewise be subject to contempt and/or criminal prosecution, as the case may be, and the enjoyment of all rights and benefits previously accorded him under this Act or in any other law, decree or order shall be deemed terminated. In case the informant or witness referred to under this Act falls under the applicability of this Section hereof, such individual cannot avail of the provisions under Article VIII of this Act. – A person convicted under this Act shall be disqualified to exercise his/her civil rights such as but not limited to, the rights of parental authority or guardianship, either as to the person or property of any ward, the rights to dispose of such property by any act or any conveyance , and political rights such as but not limited to, the right to vote and be voted for. Such rights shall also be suspended during the pendency of an appeal from such conviction. – Authorized drug testing shall be done by any government forensic laboratories or by any of the drug testing laboratories accredited and monitored by the DOH to safeguard the quality of test results. The DOH shall take steps in setting the price of the drug test with DOH accredited drug testing centers to further reduce the cost of such drug test. The drug testing shall employ, among others, two (2) testing methods, the screening test which will determine the positive result as well as the type of the drug used and the confirmatory test which will confirm a positive screening test. Drug test certificates issued by accredited drug testing centers shall be valid for a one-year period from the date of issue which may be used for other purposes. The following shall be subjected to undergo drug testing: (b) Applicants for firearm's license and for permit to carry firearms outside of residence. – All applicants for firearm's license and permit to carry firearms outside of residence shall undergo a mandatory drug test to ensure that they are free from the use of dangerous drugs: , That all persons who by the nature of their profession carry firearms shall undergo drug testing; (c) Students of secondary and tertiary schools. – Students of secondary and tertiary schools shall, pursuant to the related rules and regulations as contained in the school's student handbook and with notice to the parents, undergo a random drug testing: , That all drug testing expenses whether in public or private schools under this Section will be borne by the government; (d) Officers and employees of public and private offices. – Officers and employees of public and private offices, whether domestic or overseas, shall be subjected to undergo a random drug test as contained in the company's work rules and regulations, which shall be borne by the employer, for purposes of reducing the risk in the workplace. Any officer or employee found positive for use of dangerous drugs shall be dealt with administratively which shall be a ground for suspension or termination, subject to the provisions of Article 282 of the Labor Code and pertinent provisions of the Civil Service Law; (e) Officers and members of the military, police and other law enforcement agencies. – Officers and members of the military, police and other law enforcement agencies shall undergo an annual mandatory drug test; (f) All persons charged before the prosecutor's office with a criminal offense having an imposable penalty of imprisonment of not less than six (6) years and one (1) day shall have to undergo a mandatory drug test; and (g) All candidates for public office whether appointed or elected both in the national or local government shall undergo a mandatory drug test. In addition to the above stated penalties in this Section, those found to be positive for dangerous drugs use shall be subject to the provisions of Section 15 of this Act. – Any person authorized, licensed or accredited under this Act and its implementing rules to conduct drug examination or test, who issues false or fraudulent drug test results knowingly, willfully or through gross negligence, shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years and a fine ranging from One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00). An additional penalty shall be imposed through the revocation of the license to practice his/her profession in case of a practitioner, and the closure of the drug testing center. – Subject to Section 15 of this Act, any person apprehended or arrested for violating the provisions of this Act shall be subjected to screening laboratory examination or test within twenty-four (24) hours, if the apprehending or arresting officer has reasonable ground to believe that the person apprehended or arrested, on account of physical signs or symptoms or other visible or outward manifestation, is under the influence of dangerous drugs. If found to be positive, the results of the screening laboratory examination or test shall be challenged within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the result through a confirmatory test conducted in any accredited analytical laboratory equipment with a gas chromatograph/mass spectrometry equipment or some such modern and accepted method, if confirmed the same shall be evidence that such person has used dangerous drugs, which is without prejudice for the prosecution for other violations of the provisions of this Act: , That a positive screening laboratory test must be confirmed for it to be valid in a court of law. – The DOH shall be tasked to license and accredit drug testing centers in each province and city in order to assure their capacity, competence, integrity and stability to conduct the laboratory examinations and tests provided in this Article, and appoint such technical and other personnel as may be necessary for the effective implementation of this provision. The DOH shall also accredit physicians who shall conduct the drug dependency examination of a drug dependent as well as the after-care and follow-up program for the said drug dependent. There shall be a control regulations, licensing and accreditation division under the supervision of the DOH for this purpose. For this purpose, the DOH shall establish, operate and maintain drug testing centers in government hospitals, which must be provided at least with basic technologically advanced equipment and materials, in order to conduct the laboratory examination and tests herein provided, and appoint such qualified and duly trained technical and other personnel as may be necessary for the effective implementation of this provision. a) Every pharmacist dealing in dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals shall maintain and keep an original record of sales, purchases, acquisitions and deliveries of dangerous drugs, indicating therein the following information: (2) Name, address and license of the manufacturer, importer or wholesaler from whom the dangerous drugs have been purchased; (3) Quantity and name of the dangerous drugs purchased or acquired; (4) Date of acquisition or purchase; (5) Name, address and community tax certificate number of the buyer; (6) Serial number of the prescription and the name of the physician, dentist, veterinarian or practitioner issuing the same; (7) Quantity and name of the dangerous drugs sold or delivered; and (8) Date of sale or delivery. A certified true copy of such record covering a period of six (6) months, duly signed by the pharmacist or the owner of the drugstore, pharmacy or chemical establishment, shall be forwarded to the Board within fifteen (15) days following the last day of June and December of each year, with a copy thereof furnished the city or municipal health officer concerned. (b) A physician, dentist, veterinarian or practitioner authorized to prescribe any dangerous drug shall issue the prescription therefor in one (1) original and two (2) duplicate copies. The original, after the prescription has been filled, shall be retained by the pharmacist for a period of one (1) year from the date of sale or delivery of such drug. One (1) copy shall be retained by the buyer or by the person to whom the drug is delivered until such drug is consumed, while the second copy shall be retained by the person issuing the prescription. For purposes of this Act, all prescriptions issued by physicians, dentists, veterinarians or practitioners shall be written on forms exclusively issued by and obtainable from the DOH. Such forms shall be made of a special kind of paper and shall be distributed in such quantities and contain such information and other data as the DOH may, by rules and regulations, require. Such forms shall only be issued by the DOH through its authorized employees to licensed physicians, dentists, veterinarians and practitioners in such quantities as the Board may authorize. In emergency cases, however, as the Board may specify in the public interest, a prescription need not be accomplished on such forms. The prescribing physician, dentist, veterinarian or practitioner shall, within three (3) days after issuing such prescription, inform the DOH of the same in writing. No prescription once served by the drugstore or pharmacy be reused nor any prescription once issued be refilled. (c) All manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, importers, dealers and retailers of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals shall keep a record of all inventories, sales, purchases, acquisitions and deliveries of the same as well as the names, addresses and licenses of the persons from whom such items were purchased or acquired or to whom such items were sold or delivered, the name and quantity of the same and the date of the transactions. Such records may be subjected anytime for review by the Board. – The family being the basic unit of the Filipino society shall be primarily responsible for the education and awareness of the members of the family on the ill effects of dangerous drugs and close monitoring of family members who may be susceptible to drug abuse. – All elementary, secondary and tertiary schools' student councils and campus organizations shall include in their activities a program for the prevention of and deterrence in the use of dangerous drugs, and referral for treatment and rehabilitation of students for drug dependence. – Instruction on drug abuse prevention and control shall be integrated in the elementary, secondary and tertiary curricula of all public and private schools, whether general, technical, vocational or agro-industrial as well as in non-formal, informal and indigenous learning systems. Such instructions shall include: (2) Preventive measures against drug abuse; (3) Health, socio-cultural, psychological, legal and economic dimensions and implications of the drug problem; (4) Steps to take when intervention on behalf of a drug dependent is needed, as well as the services available for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug dependents; and (5) Misconceptions about the use of dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to, the importance and safety of dangerous drugs for medical and therapeutic use as well as the differentiation between medical patients and drug dependents in order to avoid confusion and accidental stigmatization in the consciousness of the students. – For the purpose of enforcing the provisions of Article II of this Act, all school heads, supervisors and teachers shall be deemed persons in authority and, as such, are hereby empowered to apprehend, arrest or cause the apprehension or arrest of any person who shall violate any of the said provisions, pursuant to Section 5, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court. They shall be deemed persons in authority if they are in the school or within its immediate vicinity, or even beyond such immediate vicinity if they are in attendance at any school or class function in their official capacity as school heads, supervisors, and teachers. Any teacher or school employee, who discovers or finds that any person in the school or within its immediate vicinity is liable for violating any of said provisions, shall have the duty to report the same to the school head or immediate superior who shall, in turn, report the matter to the proper authorities. Failure to do so in either case, within a reasonable period from the time of discovery of the violation shall, after due hearing, constitute sufficient cause for disciplinary action by the school authorities. – With the assistance of the Board, the Secretary of the Department of Education (DepEd), the Chairman of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and the Director-General of the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) shall cause the development, publication and distribution of information and support educational materials on dangerous drugs to the students, the faculty, the parents, and the community. – With the assistance of the Board, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), the National Youth Commission (NYC), and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) shall establish in each of its provincial office a special education drug center for out-of-school youth and street children. Such Center which shall be headed by the Provincial Social. Welfare Development Officer shall sponsor drug prevention programs and activities and information campaigns with the end in view of educating the out-of-school youth and street children regarding the pernicious effects of drug abuse. The programs initiated by the Center shall likewise be adopted in all public and private orphanage and existing special centers for street children. – It is deemed a policy of the State to promote drug-free workplaces using a tripartite approach. With the assistance of the Board, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) shall develop, promote and implement a national drug abuse prevention program in the workplace to be adopted by private companies with ten (10) or more employees. Such program shall include the mandatory drafting and adoption of company policies against drug use in the workplace in close consultation and coordination with the DOLE, labor and employer organizations, human resource development managers and other such private sector organizations. – The Board and the DOLE shall formulate the necessary guidelines for the implementation of the national drug-free workplace program. The amount necessary for the implementation of which shall be included in the annual General Appropriations Act. – All labor unions, federations, associations, or organizations in cooperation with the respective private sector partners shall include in their collective bargaining or any similar agreements, joint continuing programs and information campaigns for the laborers similar to the programs provided under Section 47 of this Act with the end in view of achieving a drug free workplace. – The labor sector and the respective partners may, in pursuit of the programs mentioned in the preceding Section, secure the technical assistance, such as but not limited to, seminars and information dissemination campaigns of the appropriate government and law enforcement agencies. – Local government units shall appropriate a substantial portion of their respective annual budgets to assist in or enhance the enforcement of this Act giving priority to preventive or educational programs and the rehabilitation or treatment of drug dependents. – Any place or premises which have been used on two or more occasions as the site of the unlawful sale or delivery of dangerous drugs may be declared to be a public nuisance, and such nuisance may be abated, pursuant to the following procedures: (2) any employee, officer, or resident of the city or municipality may bring a complaint before the Board after giving not less than three (3) days written notice of such complaint to the owner of the place or premises at his/her last known address; and (3) After hearing in which the Board may consider any evidence, including evidence of the general reputation of the place or premises, and at which the owner of the premises shall have an opportunity to present evidence in his/her defense, the Board may declare the place or premises to be a public nuisance. – If the Board declares a place or premises to be a public nuisance, it may declare an order immediately prohibiting the conduct, operation, or maintenance of any business or activity on the premises which is conducive to such nuisance. An order entered under this Section shall expire after one (1) year or at such earlier time as stated in the order. The Board may bring a complaint seeking a permanent injunction against any nuisance described under this Section. This Article does not restrict the right of any person to proceed under the Civil Code against any public nuisance. – A drug dependent or any person who violates Section 15 of this Act may, by himself/herself or through his/her parent, spouse, guardian or relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity, apply to the Board or its duly recognized representative, for treatment and rehabilitation of the drug dependency. Upon such application, the Board shall bring forth the matter to the Court which shall order that the applicant be examined for drug dependency. If the examination by a DOH-accredited physician results in the issuance of a certification that the applicant is a drug dependent, he/she shall be ordered by the Court to undergo treatment and rehabilitation in a Center designated by the Board for a period of not less than six (6) months: , That a drug dependent may be placed under the care of a DOH-accredited physician where there is no Center near or accessible to the residence of the drug dependent or where said drug dependent is below eighteen (18) years of age and is a first-time offender and non-confinement in a Center will not pose a serious danger to his/her family or the community. Confinement in a Center for treatment and rehabilitation shall not exceed one (1) year, after which time the Court, as well as the Board, shall be apprised by the head of the treatment and rehabilitation center of the status of said drug dependent and determine whether further confinement will be for the welfare of the drug dependent and his/her family or the community. A drug dependent under the voluntary submission program, who is finally discharged from confinement, shall be exempt from the criminal liability under Section 15 of this act subject to the following conditions: , That capability-building of local government social workers shall be undertaken by the DSWD; (2) He/she has never been charged or convicted of any offense punishable under this Act, the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 or Republic Act No. 6425, as amended; the Revised Penal Code, as amended; or any special penal laws; (3) He/she has no record of escape from a Center: , That had he/she escaped, he/she surrendered by himself/herself or through his/her parent, spouse, guardian or relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity, within one (1) week from the date of the said escape; and (4) He/she poses no serious danger to himself/herself, his/her family or the community by his/her exemption from criminal liability. – Upon certification of the Center that the drug dependent within the voluntary submission program may be temporarily released, the Court shall order his/her release on condition that said drug dependent shall report to the DOH for after-care and follow-up treatment, including urine testing, for a period not exceeding eighteen (18) months under such terms and conditions that the Court may impose. If during the period of after-care and follow-up, the drug dependent is certified to be rehabilitated, he/she may be discharged by the Court, subject to the provisions of Section 55 of this Act, without prejudice to the outcome of any pending case filed in court. However, should the DOH find that during the initial after-care and follow-up program of eighteen (18) months, the drug dependent requires further treatment and rehabilitation in the Center, he/she shall be recommitted to the Center for confinement. Thereafter, he/she may again be certified for temporary release and ordered released for another after-care and follow-up program pursuant to this Section. – A drug dependent who is discharged as rehabilitated by the DOH-accredited Center through the voluntary submission program, but does not qualify for exemption from criminal liability under Section 55 of this Act, may be charged under the provisions of this Act, but shall be placed on probation and undergo a community service in lieu of imprisonment and/or fine in the discretion of the court, without prejudice to the outcome of any pending case filed in court. Such drug dependent shall undergo community service as part of his/her after-care and follow-up program, which may be done in coordination with nongovernmental civil organizations accredited by the DSWD, with the recommendation of the Board. – A drug dependent, who is not rehabilitated after the second commitment to the Center under the voluntary submission program, shall, upon recommendation of the Board, be charged for violation of Section 15 of this Act and prosecuted like any other offender. If convicted, he/she shall be credited for the period of confinement and rehabilitation in the Center in the service of his/her sentence. – Should a drug dependent under the voluntary submission program escape from the Center, he/she may submit himself/herself for recommitment within one (1) week therefrom, or his/her parent, spouse, guardian or relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity may, within said period, surrender him for recommitment, in which case the corresponding order shall be issued by the Board. Should the escapee fail to submit himself/herself or be surrendered after one (1) week, the Board shall apply to the court for a recommitment order upon proof of previous commitment or his/her voluntary submission by the Board, the court may issue an order for recommitment within one (1) week. If, subsequent to a recommitment, the dependent once again escapes from confinement, he/she shall be charged for violation of Section 15 of this Act and he subjected under section 61 of this Act, either upon order of the Board or upon order of the court, as the case may be. – Judicial and medical records of drug dependents under the voluntary submission program shall be confidential and shall not be used against him for any purpose, except to determine how many times, by himself/herself or through his/her parent, spouse, guardian or relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity, he/she voluntarily submitted himself/herself for confinement, treatment and rehabilitation or has been committed to a Center under this program. – Notwithstanding any law, rule and regulation to the contrary, any person determined and found to be dependent on dangerous drugs shall, upon petition by the Board or any of its authorized representative, be confined for treatment and rehabilitation in any Center duly designated or accredited for the purpose. A petition for the confinement of a person alleged to be dependent on dangerous drugs to a Center may be filed by any person authorized by the Board with the Regional Trial Court of the province or city where such person is found. After the petition is filed, the court, by an order, shall immediately fix a date for the hearing, and a copy of such order shall be served on the person alleged to be dependent on dangerous drugs, and to the one having charge of him. If after such hearing and the facts so warrant, the court shall order the drug dependent to be examined by two (2) physicians accredited by the Board. If both physicians conclude that the respondent is not a drug dependent, the court shall order his/her discharge. If either physician finds him to be a dependent, the court shall conduct a hearing and consider all relevant evidence which may be offered. If the court finds him a drug dependent, it shall issue an order for his/her commitment to a treatment and rehabilitation center under the supervision of the DOH. In any event, the order of discharge or order of confinement or commitment shall be issued not later than fifteen (15) days from the filing of the appropriate petition. – If a person charged with an offense where the imposable penalty is imprisonment of less than six (6) years and one (1) day, and is found by the prosecutor or by the court, at any stage of the proceedings, to be a drug dependent, the prosecutor or the court as the case may be, shall suspend all further proceedings and transmit copies of the record of the case to the Board. In the event he Board determines, after medical examination, that public interest requires that such drug dependent be committed to a center for treatment and rehabilitation, it shall file a petition for his/her commitment with the regional trial court of the province or city where he/she is being investigated or tried: , That where a criminal case is pending in court, such petition shall be filed in the said court. The court shall take judicial notice of the prior proceedings in the case and shall proceed to hear the petition. If the court finds him to be a drug dependent, it shall order his/her commitment to a Center for treatment and rehabilitation. The head of said Center shall submit to the court every four (4) months, or as often as the court may require, a written report on the progress of the treatment. If the dependent is rehabilitated, as certified by the center and the Board, he/she shall be returned to the court, which committed him, for his/her discharge therefrom. Thereafter, his/her prosecution for any offense punishable by law shall be instituted or shall continue, as the case may be. In case of conviction, the judgment shall, if the accused is certified by the treatment and rehabilitation center to have maintained good behavior, indicate that he/she shall be given full credit for the period he/she was confined in the Center: , That when the offense is for violation of Section 15 of this Act and the accused is not a recidivist, the penalty thereof shall be deemed to have been served in the Center upon his/her release therefrom after certification by the Center and the Board that he/she is rehabilitated. – The period of prescription of the offense charged against a drug dependent under the compulsory submission program shall not run during the time that the drug dependent is under confinement in a Center or otherwise under the treatment and rehabilitation program approved by the Board. Upon certification of the Center that he/she may temporarily be discharged from the said Center, the court shall order his/her release on condition that he/she shall report to the Board through the DOH for after-care and follow-up treatment for a period not exceeding eighteen (18) months under such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Board. If at anytime during the after-care and follow-up period, the Board certifies to his/her complete rehabilitation, the court shall order his/her final discharge from confinement and order for the immediate resumption of the trial of the case for which he/she is originally charged. Should the Board through the DOH find at anytime during the after-care and follow-up period that he/she requires further treatment and rehabilitation, it shall report to the court, which shall order his/her recommitment to the Center. Should the drug dependent, having been committed to a Center upon petition by the Board escape therefrom, he/she may resubmit himself/herself for confinement within one (1) week from the date of his/her escape; or his/her parent, spouse, guardian or relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity may, within the same period, surrender him for recommitment. If, however, the drug dependent does not resubmit himself/herself for confinement or he/she is not surrendered for recommitment, the Board may apply with the court for the issuance of the recommitment order. Upon proof of previous commitment, the court shall issue an order for recommitment. If, subsequent to such recommitment, he/she should escape again, he/she shall no longer be exempt from criminal liability for use of any dangerous drug. A drug dependent committed under this particular Section who is finally discharged from confinement shall be exempt from criminal liability under Section 15 of this Act, without prejudice to the outcome of any pending case filed in court. On the other hand, a drug dependent who is not rehabilitated after a second commitment to the Center shall, upon conviction by the appropriate court, suffer the same penalties provided for under Section 15 of this Act again without prejudice to the outcome of any pending case filed in court. – The records of a drug dependent who was rehabilitated and discharged from the Center under the compulsory submission program, or who was charged for violation of Section 15 of this Act, shall be covered by Section 60 of this Act. However, the records of a drug dependent who was not rehabilitated, or who escaped but did not surrender himself/herself within the prescribed period, shall be forwarded to the court and their use shall be determined by the court, taking into consideration public interest and the welfare of the drug dependent. – It shall be the duty of the provincial or the city prosecutor or their assistants or state prosecutors to prepare the appropriate petition in all proceedings arising from this Act. – An accused who is over fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the commission of the offense mentioned in Section 11 of this Act, but not more than eighteen (18) years of age at the time when judgment should have been promulgated after having been found guilty of said offense, may be given the benefits of a suspended sentence, subject to the following conditions: (b) He/she has not been previously committed to a Center or to the care of a DOH-accredited physician; and (c) The Board favorably recommends that his/her sentence be suspended. While under suspended sentence, he/she shall be under the supervision and rehabilitative surveillance of the Board, under such conditions that the court may impose for a period ranging from six (6) months to eighteen (18) months. Upon recommendation of the Board, the court may commit the accused under suspended sentence to a Center, or to the care of a DOH-accredited physician for at least six (6) months, with after-care and follow-up program for not more than eighteen (18) months. In the case of minors under fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the commission of any offense penalized under this Act, Article 192 of Presidential Decree No. 603, otherwise known as the Child and Youth Welfare Code, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1179 shall apply, without prejudice to the application of the provisions of this Section. – If the accused first time minor offender under suspended sentence complies with the applicable rules and regulations of the Board, including confinement in a Center, the court, upon a favorable recommendation of the Board for the final discharge of the accused, shall discharge the accused and dismiss all proceedings. Upon the dismissal of the proceedings against the accused, the court shall enter an order to expunge all official records, other than the confidential record to be retained by the DOJ relating to the case. Such an order, which shall be kept confidential, shall restore the accused to his/her status prior to the case. He/she shall not be held thereafter to be guilty of perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation by reason of his/her failure to acknowledge the case or recite any fact related thereto in response to any inquiry made of him for any purpose. – The privilege of suspended sentence shall be availed of only once by an accused drug dependent who is a first-time offender over fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the commission of the violation of Section 15 of this Act but not more than eighteen (18) years of age at the time when judgment should have been promulgated. – If the accused first-time minor offender violates any of the conditions of his/her suspended sentence, the applicable rules and regulations of the Board exercising supervision and rehabilitative surveillance over him, including the rules and regulations of the Center should confinement be required, the court shall pronounce judgment of conviction and he/she shall serve sentence as any other convicted person. – Upon promulgation of the sentence, the court may, in its discretion, place the accused under probation, even if the sentence provided under this Act is higher than that provided under existing law on probation, or impose community service in lieu of imprisonment. In case of probation, the supervision and rehabilitative surveillance shall be undertaken by the Board through the DOH in coordination with the Board of Pardons and Parole and the Probation Administration. Upon compliance with the conditions of the probation, the Board shall submit a written report to the court recommending termination of probation and a final discharge of the probationer, whereupon the court shall issue such an order. The community service shall be complied with under conditions, time and place as may be determined by the court in its discretion and upon the recommendation of the Board and shall apply only to violators of Section 15 of this Act. The completion of the community service shall be under the supervision and rehabilitative surveillance of the Board during the period required by the court. Thereafter, the Board shall render a report on the manner of compliance of said community service. The court in its discretion may require extension of the community service or order a final discharge. In both cases, the judicial records shall be covered by the provisions of Sections 60 and 64 of this Act. If the sentence promulgated by the court requires imprisonment, the period spent in the Center by the accused during the suspended sentence period shall be deducted from the sentence to be served. – The DOJ shall keep a confidential record of the proceedings on suspension of sentence and shall not be used for any purpose other than to determine whether or not a person accused under this Act is a first-time minor offender. – The penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) months and one (1) day to six (6) years and a fine ranging from One thousand pesos (P1,000.00) to Six thousand pesos (P6,000.00), shall be imposed upon any person who, having official custody of or access to the confidential records of any drug dependent under voluntary submission programs, or anyone who, having gained possession of said records, whether lawfully or not, reveals their content to any person other than those charged with the prosecution of the offenses under this Act and its implementation. The maximum penalty shall be imposed, in addition to absolute perpetual disqualification from any public office, when the offender is a government official or employee. Should the records be used for unlawful purposes, such as blackmail of the drug dependent or the members of his/her family, the penalty imposed for the crime of violation of confidentiality shall be in addition to whatever crime he/she may be convicted of. – Any parent, spouse or guardian who, without valid reason, refuses to cooperate with the Board or any concerned agency in the treatment and rehabilitation of a drug dependent who is a minor, or in any manner, prevents or delays the after-care, follow-up or other programs for the welfare of the accused drug dependent, whether under voluntary submission program or compulsory submission program, may be cited for contempt by the court. – The parent, spouse, guardian or any relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity of any person who is confined under the voluntary submission program or compulsory submission program shall be charged a certain percentage of the cost of his/her treatment and rehabilitation, the guidelines of which shall be formulated by the DSWD taking into consideration the economic status of the family of the person confined. The guidelines therein formulated shall be implemented by a social worker of the local government unit. – The existing treatment and rehabilitation centers for drug dependents operated and maintained by the NBI and the PNP shall be operated, maintained and managed by the DOH in coordination with other concerned agencies. For the purpose of enlarging the network of centers, the Board through the DOH shall encourage, promote or whenever feasible, assist or support in the establishment, operations and maintenance of private centers which shall be eligible to receive grants, donations or subsidy from either government or private sources. It shall also support the establishment of government-operated regional treatment and rehabilitation centers depending upon the availability of funds. The national government, through its appropriate agencies shall give priority funding for the increase of subsidy to existing government drug rehabilitation centers, and shall establish at least one (1) drug rehabilitation center in each province, depending on the availability of funds. The DOH shall: (2) License, accredit, establish and maintain drug test network and laboratory, initiate, conduct and support scientific research on drugs and drug control; (3) Encourage, assist and accredit private centers, promulgate rules and regulations setting minimum standards for their accreditation to assure their competence, integrity and stability; (4) Prescribe and promulgate rules and regulations governing the establishment of such Centers as it may deem necessary after conducting a feasibility study thereof; (5) The DOH shall, without prejudice to the criminal prosecution of those found guilty of violating this Act, order the closure of a Center for treatment and rehabilitation of drug dependency when, after investigation it is found guilty of violating the provisions of this Act or regulations issued by the Board; and (6) Charge reasonable fees for drug dependency examinations, other medical and legal services provided to the public, which shall accrue to the Board. All income derived from these sources shall be part of the funds constituted as special funds for the implementation of this Act under Section 87. – The Board shall be the policy-making and strategy-formulating body in the planning and formulation of policies and programs on drug prevention and control. It shall develop and adopt a comprehensive, integrated, unified and balanced national drug abuse prevention and control strategy. It shall be under the Office of the President. – The Board shall be composed of seventeen (17) members wherein three (3) of which are permanent members, the other twelve (12) members shall be in an capacity and the two (2) shall be regular members. The three (3) permanent members, who shall possess at least seven-year training and experience in the field of dangerous drugs and in any of the following fields: in law, medicine, criminology, psychology or social work, shall be appointed by the President of the Philippines. The President shall designate a Chairman, who shall have the rank of a secretary from among the three (3) permanent members who shall serve for six (6) years. Of the two (2) other members, who shall both have the rank of undersecretary, one (1) shall serve for four (4) years and the other for two (2) years. Thereafter, the persons appointed to succeed such members shall hold office for a term of six (6) years and until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified. The other twelve (12) members who shall be members of the Board are the following: (2) Secretary of the Department of Health or his/her representative; (3) Secretary of the Department of National Defense or his/her representative; (4) Secretary of the Department of Finance or his/her representative; (5) Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment or his/her representative; (6) Secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government or his/her representative; (7) Secretary of the Department of Social Welfare and Development or his/her representative; (8) Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs or his/her representative; (9) Secretary of the Department of Education or his/her representative; (10) Chairman of the Commission on Higher Education or his/her representative; (11) Chairman of the National Youth Commission; (12) Director General of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency. Cabinet secretaries who are members of the Board may designate their duly authorized and permanent representatives whose ranks shall in no case be lower than undersecretary. The two (2) regular members shall be as follows: (b) The chairman or president of a non-government organization involved in dangerous drug campaign to be appointed by the President of the Philippines. The Director of the NBI and the Chief of the PNP shall be the permanent consultants of the Board, and shall attend all the meetings of the Board. All members of the Board as well as its permanent consultants shall receive a per diem for every meeting actually attended subject to the pertinent budgetary laws, rules and regulations on compensation, honoraria and allowances: That where the representative of an member or of the permanent consultant of the Board attends a meeting in behalf of the latter, such representative shall be entitled to receive the per diem. – The Board shall meet once a week or as often as necessary at the discretion of the Chairman or at the call of any four (4) other members. The presence of nine (9) members shall constitute a quorum. – The Board shall recommend to the President of the Philippines the appointment of an Executive Director, with the rank of an undersecretary, who shall be the Secretary of the Board and administrative officer of its secretariat, and shall perform such other duties that may be assigned to him/her. He/she must possess adequate knowledge, training and experience in the field of dangerous drugs, and in any of the following fields: law enforcement, law, medicine, criminology, psychology or social work. Two deputies executive director, for administration and operations, with the ranks of assistant secretary, shall be appointed by the President upon recommendation of the Board. They shall possess the same qualifications as those of the executive director. They shall receive a salary corresponding to their position as prescribed by the Salary Standardization Law as a Career Service Officer. The existing secretariat of the Board shall be under the administrative control and supervision of the Executive Director. It shall be composed of the following divisions, namely: Policy Studies, Research and Statistics; Preventive Education, Training and Information; Legal Affairs; and the Administrative and Financial Management. – The Board shall: (b) Promulgate such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act, including the manner of safekeeping, disposition, burning or condemnation of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical under its charge and custody, and prescribe administrative remedies or sanctions for the violations of such rules and regulations; (c) Conduct policy studies, program monitoring and evaluations and other researches on drug prevention, control and enforcement; (d) Initiate, conduct and support scientific, clinical, social, psychological, physical and biological researches on dangerous drugs and dangerous drugs prevention and control measures; (e) Develop an educational program and information drive on the hazards and prevention of illegal use of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical based on factual data, and disseminate the same to the general public, for which purpose the Board shall endeavor to make the general public aware of the hazards of any dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical by providing among others, literature, films, displays or advertisements and by coordinating with all institutions of learning as well as with all national and local enforcement agencies in planning and conducting its educational campaign programs to be implemented by the appropriate government agencies; (f) Conduct continuing seminars for, and consultations with, and provide information materials to judges and prosecutors in coordination with the Office of the Court Administrator, in the case of judges, and the DOJ, in the case of prosecutors, which aim to provide them with the current developments and programs of the Board pertinent to its campaign against dangerous drugs and its scientific researches on dangerous drugs, its prevention and control measures; (g) Design special trainings in order to provide law enforcement officers, members of the judiciary, and prosecutors, school authorities and personnel of centers with knowledge and know-how in dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals control in coordination with the Supreme Court to meet the objectives of the national drug control programs; (h) Design and develop, in consultation and coordination with the DOH, DSWD and other agencies involved in drugs control, treatment and rehabilitation, both public and private, a national treatment and rehabilitation program for drug dependents including a standard aftercare and community service program for recovering drug dependents; (i) Design and develop, jointly with the DOLE and in consultation with labor and employer groups as well as nongovernment organizations a drug abuse prevention program in the workplace that would include a provision for employee assistance programs for emotionally-stressed employees; (j) Initiate and authorize closure proceedings against non-accredited and/or substandard rehabilitation centers based on verified reports of human rights violations, subhuman conditions, inadequate medical training and assistance and excessive fees for implementation by the PDEA; (k) Prescribe and promulgate rules and regulations governing the establishment of such centers, networks and laboratories as deemed necessary after conducting a feasibility study in coordination with the DOH and other government agencies; (l) Receive, gather, collect and evaluate all information on the importation, exportation, production, manufacture, sale, stocks, seizures of and the estimated need for any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, for which purpose the Board may require from any official, instrumentality or agency of the government or any private person or enterprise dealing in, or engaged in activities having to do with any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals such data or information as it may need to implement this Act; (m) Gather and prepare detailed statistics on the importation, exportation, manufacture, stocks, seizures of and estimates need for any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals and such other statistical data on said drugs as may be periodically required by the United Nations Narcotics Drug Commission, the World Health Organization and other international organizations in consonance with the country's international commitments; (n) Develop and maintain international networking coordination with international drug control agencies and organizations, and implement the provisions of international conventions and agreements thereon which have been adopted and approved by the Congress of the Philippines; (o) Require all government and private hospitals, clinics, doctors, dentists and other practitioners to submit a report to it, in coordination with the PDEA, about all dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals-related cases to which they have attended for statistics and research purposes; (p) Receive in trust legacies, gifts and donations of real and personal properties of all kinds, to administer and dispose the same when necessary for the benefit of government and private rehabilitation centers subject to limitations, directions and instructions from the donors, if any; (q) Issue guidelines as to the approval or disapproval of applications for voluntary treatment, rehabilitation or confinement, wherein it shall issue the necessary guidelines, rules and regulations pertaining to the application and its enforcement; (r) Formulate guidelines, in coordination with other government agencies, the importation, distribution, production, manufacture, compounding, prescription, dispensing and sale of, and other lawful acts in connection with any dangerous drug, controlled precursors and essential chemicals and other similar or analogous substances of such kind and in such quantity as it may deem necessary according to the medical and research needs or requirements of the country including diet pills containing ephedrine and other addictive chemicals and determine the quantity and/or quality of dangerous drugs and controlled precursors and essential chemicals to be imported, manufactured and held in stock at any given time by authorized importer, manufacturer or distributor of such drugs; (s) Develop the utilization of a controlled delivery scheme in addressing the transshipment of dangerous drugs into and out of the country to neutralize transnational crime syndicates involved in illegal trafficking of any dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals; (t) Recommend the revocation of the professional license of any practitioner who is an owner, co-owner, lessee, or in the employ of the drug establishment, or manager of a partnership, corporation, association, or any juridical entity owning and/or controlling such drug establishment, and who knowingly participates in, or consents to, tolerates, or abets the commission of the act of violations as indicated in the preceding paragraph, all without prejudice to the criminal prosecution of the person responsible for the said violation; (u) Appoint such technical, administrative and other personnel as may be necessary for the effective implementation of this Act, subject to the Civil Service Law and its rules and regulations; (v) Establish a regular and continuing consultation with concerned government agencies and medical professional organizations to determine if balance exists in policies, procedures, rules and regulations on dangerous drugs and to provide recommendations on how the lawful use of dangerous drugs can be improved and facilitated; and (w) Submit an annual and periodic reports to the President, the Congress of the Philippines and the Senate and House of Representatives committees concerned as may be required from time to time, and perform such other functions as may be authorized or required under existing laws and as directed by the President himself/herself or as recommended by the congressional committees concerned. – To carry out the provisions of this Act, the PDEA, which serves as the implementing arm of the Board, and shall be responsible for the efficient and effective law enforcement of all the provisions on any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical as provided in this Act. The PDEA shall be headed by a Director General with the rank of Undersecretary, who shall be responsible for the general administration and management of the Agency. The Director General of the PDEA shall be appointed by the President of the Philippines and shall perform such other duties that may be assigned to him/her. He/she must possess adequate knowledge, training and experience in the field of dangerous drugs, and in any of the following fields: law enforcement, law, medicine, criminology, psychology or social work. The Director General of the PDEA shall be assisted in the performance of his/her duties and responsibilities by two (2) deputies director general with the rank of Assistant Secretary; one for Operations and the other one for Administration. The two (2) deputies director general shall likewise be appointed by the President of the Philippines upon recommendation of the Board. The two (2) deputies director general shall possess the same qualifications as those of the Director General of the PDEA. The Director General and the two (2) deputies director general shall receive the compensation and salaries as prescribed by law. – The present Secretariat of the National Drug Law Enforcement and Prevention Coordinating Center as created by Executive Order No. 61 shall be accordingly modified and absorbed by the PDEA. The Director General of the PDEA shall be responsible for the necessary changes in the organizational set-up which shall be submitted to the Board for approval. For purposes of carrying out its duties and powers as provided for in the succeeding Section of this Act, the PDEA shall have the following Services, namely: Intelligence and Investigation; International Cooperation and Foreign Affairs; Preventive Education and Community Involvement; Plans and Operations; Compliance; Legal and Prosecution; Administrative and Human Resource; Financial Management; Logistics Management; and Internal Affairs. The PDEA shall establish and maintain regional offices in the different regions of the country which shall be responsible for the implementation of this Act and the policies, programs, and projects of said agency in their respective regions. – The PDEA shall: (b) Undertake the enforcement of the provisions of Article II of this Act relative to the unlawful acts and penalties involving any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical and investigate all violators and other matters involved in the commission of any crime relative to the use, abuse or trafficking of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical as provided for in this Act and the provisions of Presidential Decree No. 1619; (c) Administer oath, issue and relative to the conduct of investigation involving the violations of this Act; (d) Arrest and apprehend as well as search all violators and seize or confiscate, the effects or proceeds of the crimes as provided by law and take custody thereof, for this purpose the prosecutors and enforcement agents are authorized to possess firearms, in accordance with existing laws; (e) Take charge and have custody of all dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals seized, confiscated or surrendered to any national, provincial or local law enforcement agency, if no longer needed for purposes of evidence in court; (f) Establish forensic laboratories in each PNP office in every province and city in order to facilitate action on seize or confiscated drugs, thereby hastening its destruction without delay; (g) Recommend to the DOJ the forfeiture of properties and other assets of persons and/or corporations found to be violating the provisions of this Act and in accordance with the pertinent provisions of the Anti-Money-Laundering Act of 2001; (h) Prepare for prosecution or cause the filing of appropriate criminal and civil cases for violation of all laws on dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, and other similar controlled substances, and assist, support and coordinate with other government agencies for the proper and effective prosecution of the same; (i) Monitor and if warranted by circumstances, in coordination with the Philippine Postal Office and the Bureau of Customs, inspect all air cargo packages, parcels and mails in the central post office, which appear from the package and address itself to be a possible importation of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals, through on-line or cyber shops via the internet or cyberspace; (j) Conduct eradication programs to destroy wild or illegal growth of plants from which dangerous drugs may be extracted; (k) Initiate and undertake the formation of a nationwide organization which shall coordinate and supervise all activities against drug abuse in every province, city, municipality and barangay with the active and direct participation of all such local government units and nongovernmental organizations, including the citizenry, subject to the provisions of previously formulated programs of action against dangerous drugs; (l) Establish and maintain a national drug intelligence system in cooperation with law enforcement agencies, other government agencies/offices and local government units that will assist in its apprehension of big-time drug lords; (m) Establish and maintain close coordination, cooperation and linkages with international drug control and administration agencies and organizations, and implement the applicable provisions of international conventions and agreements related to dangerous drugs to which the Philippines is a signatory; (n) Create and maintain an efficient special enforcement unit to conduct an investigation, file charges and transmit evidence to the proper court, wherein members of the said unit shall possess suitable and adequate firearms for their protection in connection with the performance of their duties: , That no previous special permit for such possession shall be required; (o) Require all government and private hospitals, clinics, doctors, dentists and other practitioners to submit a report to it, in coordination with the Board, about all dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals which they have attended to for data and information purposes; (p) Coordinate with the Board for the facilitation of the issuance of necessary guidelines, rules and regulations for the proper implementation of this Act; (q) Initiate and undertake a national campaign for drug prevention and drug control programs, where it may enlist the assistance of any department, bureau, office, agency or instrumentality of the government, including government-owned and or –controlled corporations, in the anti-illegal drugs drive, which may include the use of their respective personnel, facilities, and resources for a more resolute detection and investigation of drug-related crimes and prosecution of the drug traffickers; and (r) Submit an annual and periodic reports to the Board as may be required from time to time, and perform such other functions as may be authorized or required under existing laws and as directed by the President himself/herself or as recommended by the congressional committees concerned. – Upon the approval of the Board, the PDEA Academy shall be established either in Baguio or Tagaytay City, and in such other places as may be necessary. The PDEA Academy shall be responsible in the recruitment and training of all PDEA agents and personnel. The Board shall provide for the qualifications and requirements of its recruits who must be at least twenty-one (21) years old, of proven integrity and honesty and a Baccalaureate degree holder. The graduates of the Academy shall later comprise the operating units of the PDEA after the termination of the transition period of five (5) years during which all the intelligence network and standard operating procedures of the PDEA has been set up and operationalized. The Academy shall be headed by a Superintendent, with the rank of Director. He/she shall be appointed by the PDEA Director General. – The Narcotics Group of the PNP, the Narcotics Division of the NBI and the Customs Narcotics Interdiction Unit are hereby abolished; however they shall continue with the performance of their task as detail service with the PDEA, subject to screening, until such time that the organizational structure of the Agency is fully operational and the number of graduates of the PDEA Academy is sufficient to do the task themselves: , That such personnel who are affected shall have the option of either being integrated into the PDEA or remain with their original mother agencies and shall, thereafter, be immediately reassigned to other units therein by the head of such agencies. Such personnel who are transferred, absorbed and integrated in the PDEA shall be extended appointments to positions similar in rank, salary, and other emoluments and privileges granted to their respective positions in their original mother agencies. The transfer, absorption and integration of the different offices and units provided for in this Section shall take effect within eighteen (18) months from the effectivity of this Act: , That personnel absorbed and on detail service shall be given until five (5) years to finally decide to join the PDEA. Nothing in this Act shall mean a diminution of the investigative powers of the NBI and the PNP on all other crimes as provided for in their respective organic laws: , That when the investigation being conducted by the NBI, PNP or any anti-drug task force is found to be a violation of any of the provisions of this Act, the PDEA shall be the lead agency. The NBI, PNP or any of the task force shall immediately transfer the same to the PDEA: , That the NBI, PNP and the Bureau of Customs shall maintain close coordination with the PDEA on all drug related matters. – The amount necessary for the operation of the Board and the PDEA shall be charged against the current year's appropriations of the Board, the National Drug Law Enforcement and Prevention Coordinating Center, the Narcotics Group of the PNP, the Narcotics Division of the NBI and other drug abuse units of the different law enforcement agencies integrated into the PDEA in order to carry out the provisions of this Act. Thereafter, such sums as may be necessary for the continued implementation of this Act shall be included in the annual General Appropriations Act. All receipts derived from fines, fees and other income authorized and imposed in this Act, including ten percent (10%) of all unclaimed and forfeited sweepstakes and lotto prizes but not less than twelve million pesos (P12,000,000.00) per year from the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO), are hereby constituted as a special account in the general fund for the implementation of this Act: , That no amount shall be disbursed to cover the operating expenses of the Board and other concerned agencies: , That at least fifty percent (50%) of all the funds shall be reserved for assistance to government-owned and/or operated rehabilitation centers. The fines shall be remitted to the Board by the court imposing such fines within thirty (30) days from the finality of its decisions or orders. The unclaimed and forfeited prizes shall be turned over to the Board by the PCSO within thirty (30) days after these are collected and declared forfeited. A portion of the funds generated by the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) in the amount of Five million pesos (P5,000,000.00) a month shall be set aside for the purpose of establishing adequate drug rehabilitation centers in the country and also for the maintenance and operations of such centers: , That the said amount shall be taken from the fifty percent (50%) share of the National Government in the income of PAGCOR: , , That the said amount shall automatically be remitted by PAGCOR to the Board. The amount shall, in turn, be disbursed by the Dangerous Drugs Board, subject to the rules and regulations of the Commission on Audit (COA). The fund may be augmented by grants, donations, and endowment from various sources, domestic or foreign, for purposes related to their functions, subject to the existing guidelines set by the government. – The Board shall manage the funds as it may deem proper for the attainment of the objectives of this Act. In addition to the periodic reports as may be required under this Act, the Chairman of the Board shall submit to the President of the Philippines and to the presiding officers of both houses of Congress, within fifteen (15) days from the opening of the regular session, an annual report on the dangerous drugs situation in the country which shall include detailed account of the programs and projects undertaken, statistics on crimes related to dangerous drugs, expenses incurred pursuant to the provisions of this Act, recommended remedial legislation, if needed, and such other relevant facts as it may deem proper to cite. – All accounts and expenses of the Board and the PDEA shall be audited by the COA or its duly authorized representative. – The Supreme Court shall designate special courts from among the existing Regional Trial Courts in each judicial region to exclusively try and hear cases involving violations of this Act. The number of courts designated in each judicial region shall be based on the population and the number of cases pending in their respective jurisdiction. The DOJ shall designate special prosecutors to exclusively handle cases involving violations of this Act. The preliminary investigation of cases filed under this Act shall be terminated within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of their filing. When the preliminary investigation is conducted by a public prosecutor and a probable cause is established, the corresponding information shall be filed in court within twenty-four (24) hours from the termination of the investigation. If the preliminary investigation is conducted by a judge and a probable cause is found to exist, the corresponding information shall be filed by the proper prosecutor within forty-eight (48) hours from the date of receipt of the records of the case. Trial of the case under this Section shall be finished by the court not later than sixty (60) days from the date of the filing of the information. Decision on said cases shall be rendered within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of submission of the case for resolution. – Any member of law enforcement agencies or any other government official and employee who, after due notice, fails or refuses intentionally or negligently, to appear as a witness for the prosecution in any proceedings, involving violations of this Act, without any valid reason, shall be punished with imprisonment of not less than twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00), in addition to the administrative liability he/she may be meted out by his/her immediate superior and/or appropriate body. The immediate superior of the member of the law enforcement agency or any other government employee mentioned in the preceding paragraph shall be penalized with imprisonment of not less than two (2) months and one (1) day but not more than six (6) years and a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) but not more than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) and in addition, perpetual absolute disqualification from public office if despite due notice to them and to the witness concerned, the former does not exert reasonable effort to present the latter to the court. The member of the law enforcement agency or any other government employee mentioned in the preceding paragraphs shall not be transferred or re-assigned to any other government office located in another territorial jurisdiction during the pendency of the case in court. However, the concerned member of the law enforcement agency or government employee may be transferred or re-assigned for compelling reasons: , That his/her immediate superior shall notify the court where the case is pending of the order to transfer or re-assign, within twenty-four (24) hours from its approval; That his/her immediate superior shall be penalized with imprisonment of not less than two (2) months and one (1) day but not more than six (6) years and a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) but not more than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) and in addition, perpetual absolute disqualification from public office, should he/she fail to notify the court of such order to transfer or re-assign. Prosecution and punishment under this Section shall be without prejudice to any liability for violation of any existing law. – Any government officer or employee tasked with the prosecution of drug-related cases under this act, who, through patent laxity, inexcusable neglect, unreasonable delay or deliberately causes the unsuccessful prosecution and/or dismissal of the said drug cases, shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment ranging from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years without prejudice to his/her prosecution under the pertinent provisions of the Revised Penal Code. – The Board shall have the power to reclassify, add to or remove from the list of dangerous drugs. Proceedings to reclassify, add, or remove a drug or other substance may be initiated by the PDEA, the DOH, or by petition from any interested party, including the manufacturer of a drug, a medical society or association, a pharmacy association, a public interest group concerned with drug abuse, a national or local government agency, or an individual citizen. When a petition is received by the Board, it shall immediately begin its own investigation of the drug. The PDEA also may begin an investigation of a drug at any time based upon the information received from law enforcement laboratories, national and local law enforcement and regulatory agencies, or other sources of information. The Board after notice and hearing shall consider the following factors with respect to each substance proposed to be reclassified, added or removed from control: (b) Scientific evidence of its pharmacological effect if known; (c) The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the drug or other substance; (d) Its history and current pattern of abuse; (e) The scope, duration, and significance of abuse; (f) Risk to public health; and (g) Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled under this Act. The Board shall also take into accord the obligations and commitments to international treaties, conventions and agreements to which the Philippines is a signatory. The Dangerous Drugs Board shall give notice to the general public of the public hearing of the reclassification, addition to or removal from the list of any drug by publishing such notice in any newspaper of general circulation once a week for two (2) weeks. The effect of such reclassification, addition or removal shall be as follows: (b) In case a precursors and essential chemicals is reclassified as dangerous drug, the penalties for violations of the Act involving precursors and essential chemicals shall, in case of conviction, be imposed in all pending criminal prosecutions; (c) In case of the addition of a new drug to the list of dangerous drugs and precursors and essential chemicals, no criminal liability involving the same under this Act shall arise until after the lapse of fifteen (15) days from the last publication of such notice; (d) In case of removal of a drug from the list of dangerous drugs and precursors and essential chemicals, all persons convicted and/or detained for the use and/or possession of such a drug shall be automatically released and all pending criminal prosecution involving such a drug under this Act shall forthwith be dismissed; and (e) The Board shall, within five (5) days from the date of its promulgation submit to Congress a detailed reclassification, addition, or removal of any drug from the list of dangerous drugs. – The present Board in consultation with the DOH, DILG, DOJ, DepEd, DSWD, DOLE, PNP, NBI, PAGCOR and the PCSO and all other concerned government agencies shall promulgate within sixty (60) days the Implementing Rules and Regulations that shall be necessary to implement the provisions of this Act. – There is hereby created a Congressional Oversight Committee composed of seven (7) Members from the Senate and seven (7) Members from the House of Representatives. The Members from the Senate shall be appointed by the Senate President based on the proportional representation of the parties or coalitions therein with at least two (2) Senators representing the Minority. The Members from the House of Representatives shall be appointed by the Speaker, also based on proportional representation of the parties or coalitions therein with at least two (2) Members representing the Minority. The Committee shall be headed by the respective Chairpersons of the Senate Committee on Public Order and Illegal Drugs and the House of Representatives Committee on Dangerous Drugs. – The Oversight Committee on Dangerous Drugs shall, in aid of legislation, perform the following functions, among others: (b) To ensure transparency and require the submission of reports from government agencies concerned on the conduct of programs, projects and policies relating to the implementation of this act; (c) To approve the budget for the programs of the Oversight Committee on Dangerous Drugs and all disbursements therefrom, including compensation of all personnel; (d) To submit periodic reports to the President of the Philippines and Congress on the implementation of the provisions of this Act; (e) To determine inherent weaknesses in the law and recommend the necessary remedial legislation or executive measures; and (f) To perform such other duties, functions and responsibilities as may be necessary to effectively attain the objectives of this Act. – The Oversight Committee on Dangerous Drugs shall adopt its internal rules of procedure, conduct hearings and receive testimonies, reports, and technical advice, invite or summon by any public official, private citizen, or any other person to testify before it, or require any person by documents or other materials as it may require consistent with the provisions of this Act. The Oversight Committee on Dangerous Drugs shall be assisted by a secretariat to be composed by personnel who may be seconded from the Senate and the House of Representatives and may retain consultants. To carry out the powers and functions of the Oversight Committee on Dangerous Drugs, the initial sum of Twenty-five million pesos (P25,000,000.00) shall be charged against the current appropriations of the Senate. Thereafter, such amount necessary for its continued operations shall be included in the annual General Appropriations Act. The Oversight Committee on Dangerous Drugs shall exist for a period of ten (10) years from the effectivity of this Act and may be extended by a joint concurrent resolution. – Notwithstanding any law, rule or regulation to the contrary, the provisions of the Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3814), as amended, shall not apply to the provisions of this Act, except in the case of minor offenders. Where the offender is a minor, the penalty for acts punishable by life imprisonment to death provided herein shall be to death. – If for any reason any section or provision of this Act, or any portion thereof, or the application of such section, provision or portion thereof to any person, group or circumstance is declared invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act shall not be affected by such declaration and shall remain in force and effect. – Republic Act No. 6425, as amended, is hereby repealed and all other laws, administrative orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. – Republic Act No. 7659 is hereby amended accordingly. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days upon its publication in at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation.

This Act which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 1858 and House Bill No. 4433 was finally passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on May 30, 2002 and May 29, 2002, respectively.

Secretary of the Senate Secretary General
House of Representatives
President of the Philippines

THE SALTS OF THE SUBSTANCES LISTED IN THIS TABLE WHENEVER THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH SALTS IS POSSIBLE.

THE SALTS OF THE SUBSTANCES LISTED IN THIS TABLE WHENEVER THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH SALTS IS POSSIBLE (THE SALTS OF HYDROCHLORIC ACID AND SULPHURIC ACID ARE SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED)

-methylfentanyl
3. Acetylmethadol
4. Alfentanil
5. Allylprodine
6. Alphacetylmethadol
7. Alphameprodine
8. Alphamethadol
9. -methylfentanyl
10. -methylthiofentanyl
11. Alphaprodine
12. Anileridine
13. Benzethidine
14. Benzylmorphine
15. Betacetylmethadol
16. hydroxyfentanyl
17. hydroxy-3-methylfentanyl
18. Betameprodine
19. Betamethadol
20. Betaprodine
21. Bezitramide
22. Cannabis and Cannabis resin and extracts and tinctures of cannabis
23. Clonitazene
24. Coca leaf
25. Cocaine
26. Codoxime
27. Concentrate of poppy straw
28. Desomorphine
29. Dextromoramide
30. Diampromide
31. Diethylthiambutene
32. Difenoxin
33. Dihydroetorphine
34. Dihydromorphine
35. Dihydromorphine
36. Dimenoxadol
37. Dimepheptanol
38. Dimethylthiambutene
39. Dioxaphetyl butyrate
40. Diphenoxylate
41. Dipipanone
42. Drotebanol
43. Ecgonine
44. Ethylmethylthiambutene
45. Etonitazene
46. Etorphine
47. Etoxeridine
48. Fentanyl
49. Furethidine
50. Heroin
51. Hydrocodone
52. Hydromorphinol
53. Hydromorphone
54. Hydroxypethidine
55. Isomethadone
56. Ketobemidone
57. Levomethorphan
58. Levomoramide
59. Levophenacylmorphan
60. Levorphanol
61. Metazocine
62. Methadone
63. Methadone Intermediate
64. Methyldesorphine
65. Methyldihydromorphine
66. 3-methylfentanyl
67. 3-methylthiofentanyl
68. Metopon
69. Moramide intermediate
70. Morpheridine
71. Morphine
72. Morphine methobromide
73. Morphine- -oxide
74. MPPP
75. Myrophine
76. Nicomorphine
77. Noracymethadol
78. Norlevorphanol
79. Normethadone
80. Normorphine
81. Norpipanone
82. Opium
83. Oxycodone
84. Oxymorphone
85. -fluorofentanyl
86. PEPAP
87. Pethidine
88. Pethidine intermediate A
89. Pethidine intermediate B
90. Pethidine intermediate C
91. Phenadoxone
92. Phenampromide
93. Phenazocine
94. Phenomorphan
95. Phenoperidine
96. Piminodine
97. Piritramide
98. Proheptazine
99. Properidine
100. Racemethorphan
101. Racemoramide
102. Racemorphan
103. Remifentanil
104. Sufentanil
105. Thebacon
106. Thebaine
107. Thiofentanyl
108. Tilidine
109. Trimeperidine

-----

Dextromethorphan (+)-3-methoxy-N-methylmorphinan and dextrorphan (+)-3-hydroxy-N-methylmorphinan are isomers specifically excluded from this Schedule.

AND the isomers, unless specifically excepted, of the drugs in this Schedule whenever the existence of such isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation;

The esters and ethers, unless appearing in another Schedule, of the drugs in this Schedule whenever the existence of such esters or ethers is possible;

The salts of the drugs listed in this Schedule, including the salts of esters, ethers and isomers as provided above whenever the existence of such salts is possible.

And the isomers, unless specifically excepted, of the drugs in this Schedule whenever the existence of such isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation.

The salts of the drugs listed in this Schedule, including the salts of the isomers as provided above whenever the existence of such salts is possible.

Preparations of:

Opium or morphine containing not more than 0.2 per cent of morphine calculated as anhydrous morphine base and compounded with one or more other ingredients and in such a way that the drug cannot be recovered by readily applicable means or in a yield that would constitute a risk to public health.

10 per cent opium in powder
10 per cent ipecacuanha root, in powder well mixed with
80 per cent of any other powdered ingredient containing no drug.

-methylfentanyl
3. methylfentanyl
4. methylthiofentanyl
5. hydroxy-3-methylfentanyl
6. hydroxyfentanyl
7. Cannabis and Cannabis resin
8. Desomorphine
9. Etorphine
10. Heroin
11. Ketobemidone
12. 3-methylfentanyl
13. 3-methylthiofentanyl
14. MPPP
15. -fluorofentanyl
16. PEPAP
17. Thiofentanyl

AND the salts of the drugs listed in this Schedule whenever the formation of such salts is possible

±)-4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxy-

Dimethoxybromoamphetamine -methylphenethylamine

2,5 Dimethoxyamphetamine dibenzo[ ]pyran-1-ol -phorethylamine

2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine -Ethyl-1-phenylcyclohexylamine -diethyl-6-methylergoline-8b- carboxamide , a-Dimethyl-3,4-(methylene-dioxy)phenethylamine

3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine -2-Amino-4-methyl-5-phenyl-2-oxazoline -methyl-4,5-(methylenedioxy)phenethylamine

5-Methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine methyl-3,4(methylenedioxy)phenethylamine

3-4-Methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine -Methyl-3,4-(methylenedioxy)phenethyl]-hydroxylamine -dibenzo[ ]pyran-1-ol -Methoxy-a-methylphenethylamine

Paramethoxyamphetamine

dihydrogen phosphate ,4-dimethylphenethylamine -Methyl-3,4-(methylenedioxy)phenethylamine

Methylenedioxyamphetamine -dibenzo[ ]

(9 10aR)-8,9,10,10a-Tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl- -dibenzo[ ]pyran-1-ol

(6 ,9 ,10a )-6a,9,10,10a-Tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl- -dibenzo[ ]pyran-1-ol

(6a ,10a )-6a,7,10,10a-Tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl- -dibenzo[ ]pyran-1-ol

(6a,7,8,9-Tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl- -dibenzo[ ]pyran-1-ol

(6a ,10a ) 6a,7,8,9,10,10a-Hexahydro-6,6,dimethyl-9-methylene-3-pentyl- -Dibenzo[ ]pyran-1-ol – methylphenethylamine

3,4,5-Trimethoxyamphetamine

4-MIA-( -methyl-4-methylthiophenethylamine)

The stereoisomers, unless specifically excepted, of substances in this Schedule, whenever the existence of such stereou\isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation.

1. AMFETAMINE (AMPHETAMINE)
2. DEXAMFETAMINE (DEXAMPHETAMINE)
3. FENETYLLINE
4. LEVAMFETAMINE (LEVAMPHETAMINE)
5. LEVOMETHAMPHETAMINE
6. MECLOQUALONE
7. METAMFETAMINE (METHAMPHETAMINE)
8. METHAMPHETAMINE RACEMATE
9. METHAQUALONE
10. METHYLPHENIDATE
11. PHENCYCLIDINE (PCP)
12. PHENMETRAZINE
13. SECOBARBITAL
14. DRONABINOL ( -9-tetrahydro-cannabinol and its stereochemical variants)
15. ZIPEPROL
16. 2C-B(4-bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine)

4. (benzphetamine)
7.
8. Butobarbital
9. (N-ethylampetamine)
24. (SPA)
32.

Louisiana governor signs bill making abortion drugs controlled dangerous substances

Get the Reddit app

A subreddit for those who enjoy learning about flags, their place in society past and present, and their design characteristics

Flag of Elektrostal, Moscow Oblast, Russia

• Games & Quizzes
• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

Elektrostal

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Elektrostal , city, Moscow oblast (province), western Russia . It lies 36 miles (58 km) east of Moscow city. The name, meaning “electric steel,” derives from the high-quality-steel industry established there soon after the October Revolution in 1917. During World War II , parts of the heavy-machine-building industry were relocated there from Ukraine, and Elektrostal is now a centre for the production of metallurgical equipment. Pop. (2006 est.) 146,189.

• Share full article

For more audio journalism and storytelling, download New York Times Audio , a new iOS app available for news subscribers.

• Apple Podcasts
• Google Podcasts

Real Teenagers, Fake Nudes: The Rise of Deepfakes in American Schools

Students are using artificial intelligence to create sexually explicit images of their classmates..

Hosted by Sabrina Tavernise

Featuring Natasha Singer

Produced by Sydney Harper and Shannon M. Lin

Edited by Marc Georges

Original music by Marion Lozano ,  Elisheba Ittoop and Dan Powell

Engineered by Chris Wood

Listen and follow The Daily Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube

Warning: this episode contains strong language, descriptions of explicit content and sexual harassment

A disturbing new problem is sweeping American schools: Students are using artificial intelligence to create sexually explicit images of their classmates and then share them without the person depicted even knowing.

Natasha Singer, who covers technology, business and society for The Times, discusses the rise of deepfake nudes and one girl’s fight to stop them.

On today’s episode

Natasha Singer , a reporter covering technology, business and society for The New York Times.

Background reading

Using artificial intelligence, middle and high school students have fabricated explicit images of female classmates and shared the doctored pictures.

Spurred by teenage girls, states have moved to ban deepfake nudes .

There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.

We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.

The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Mike Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, John Ketchum, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Summer Thomad, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.

Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson, Nina Lassam and Nick Pitman.

Natasha Singer writes about technology, business and society. She is currently reporting on the far-reaching ways that tech companies and their tools are reshaping public schools, higher education and job opportunities. More about Natasha Singer

Advertisement

• Bahasa Indonesia
• Eastern Europe
• Moscow Oblast

Elektrostal

Elektrostal Localisation : Country Russia , Oblast Moscow Oblast . Available Information : Geographical coordinates , Population, Altitude, Area, Weather and Hotel . Nearby cities and villages : Noginsk , Pavlovsky Posad and Staraya Kupavna .

Information

Find all the information of Elektrostal or click on the section of your choice in the left menu.

• Update data

Country
Oblast

Elektrostal Demography

Information on the people and the population of Elektrostal.

Elektrostal Population	157,409 inhabitants
Elektrostal Population Density	3,179.3 /km² (8,234.4 /sq mi)

Elektrostal Geography

Geographic Information regarding City of Elektrostal .

Elektrostal Geographical coordinates	Latitude: , Longitude: 55° 48′ 0″ North, 38° 27′ 0″ East
Elektrostal Area	4,951 hectares 49.51 km² (19.12 sq mi)
Elektrostal Altitude	164 m (538 ft)
Elektrostal Climate	Humid continental climate (Köppen climate classification: Dfb)

Elektrostal Distance

Distance (in kilometers) between Elektrostal and the biggest cities of Russia.

Elektrostal Map

Locate simply the city of Elektrostal through the card, map and satellite image of the city.

Elektrostal Nearby cities and villages

Elektrostal Weather

Weather forecast for the next coming days and current time of Elektrostal.

Elektrostal Sunrise and sunset

Find below the times of sunrise and sunset calculated 7 days to Elektrostal.

Day	Sunrise and sunset	Twilight	Nautical twilight	Astronomical twilight
8 June	02:43 - 11:25 - 20:07	01:43 - 21:07	01:00 - 01:00	01:00 - 01:00
9 June	02:42 - 11:25 - 20:08	01:42 - 21:08	01:00 - 01:00	01:00 - 01:00
10 June	02:42 - 11:25 - 20:09	01:41 - 21:09	01:00 - 01:00	01:00 - 01:00
11 June	02:41 - 11:25 - 20:10	01:41 - 21:10	01:00 - 01:00	01:00 - 01:00
12 June	02:41 - 11:26 - 20:11	01:40 - 21:11	01:00 - 01:00	01:00 - 01:00
13 June	02:40 - 11:26 - 20:11	01:40 - 21:12	01:00 - 01:00	01:00 - 01:00
14 June	02:40 - 11:26 - 20:12	01:39 - 21:13	01:00 - 01:00	01:00 - 01:00

Elektrostal Hotel

Our team has selected for you a list of hotel in Elektrostal classified by value for money. Book your hotel room at the best price.

	Located next to Noginskoye Highway in Electrostal, Apelsin Hotel offers comfortable rooms with free Wi-Fi. Free parking is available. The elegant rooms are air conditioned and feature a flat-screen satellite TV and fridge...	from
	Located in the green area Yamskiye Woods, 5 km from Elektrostal city centre, this hotel features a sauna and a restaurant. It offers rooms with a kitchen...	from
	Ekotel Bogorodsk Hotel is located in a picturesque park near Chernogolovsky Pond. It features an indoor swimming pool and a wellness centre. Free Wi-Fi and private parking are provided...	from
	Surrounded by 420,000 m² of parkland and overlooking Kovershi Lake, this hotel outside Moscow offers spa and fitness facilities, and a private beach area with volleyball court and loungers...	from
	Surrounded by green parklands, this hotel in the Moscow region features 2 restaurants, a bowling alley with bar, and several spa and fitness facilities. Moscow Ring Road is 17 km away...	from

Elektrostal Nearby

Below is a list of activities and point of interest in Elektrostal and its surroundings.

Elektrostal Page

Direct link
DB-City.com	Elektrostal /5 (2021-10-07 13:22:50)

• Information /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#info
• Demography /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#demo
• Geography /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#geo
• Distance /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#dist1
• Map /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#map
• Nearby cities and villages /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#dist2
• Weather /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#weather
• Sunrise and sunset /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#sun
• Hotel /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#hotel
• Nearby /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#around
• Page /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#page
• Terms of Use
• Copyright © 2024 DB-City - All rights reserved
• Change Ad Consent Do not sell my data