The logic behind making recreational drugs illegal can appear, at first glance, to be simple enough: drugs are bad for one’s health, and legal sanctions prevent people from harming themselves through their use.

But it is clear that tough legislation across the world has done little to deter people from using illegal drugs, and calls for an overhaul of drug policies are becoming increasingly vocal in recent years.

As a result, it is perhaps unsurprising to see Maltese politicians enter the fray, as Prime Minister Joseph Muscat did last week when he addressed the media during a New Year reception organised by his Labour Party.

Dr Muscat is actually far from being the first Maltese politician to argue that drug laws are in need of reform. Over 20 years ago, former Prime Minister Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, then leader of the opposition, had even suggested that drugs should be legalised across the board. If anything, however, this proposal only spurred the government of the day to toughen up its anti-drugs stance.

At present, the only Maltese political party openly calling for the liberalisation of drug legislation is Alternattiva Demokratika, which argues that Malta should decriminalise the personal use of drugs.

What Dr Muscat’s declaration will tangibly lead to is presently unclear, but other national and regional governments have already reformed their own drug laws, suggesting possible courses of action.

Malta’s drug laws are among the harshest in Europe, with possible life sentences and no distinction between hard and soft drugs. Beyond addressing such issues, however, there are two main choices for liberalising drug laws – decriminalisation and legalisation.

Decriminalisation is far more popular: so far, legalisation has only taken place in one country and two US states, and only covers cannabis.

Decriminalisation

Decriminalisation does not make possession of drugs legal, but reduces it to an administrative offence. Criminal penalties, however, are still applicable for drug traffickers.

Perhaps the most notable example – the one cited by AD as the example to follow – is Portugal, which decriminalised possession of all drugs in 2001 in a desperate bid to address a spiralling drug problem. Addiction was skyrocketing, and the country registered the highest rate of HIV infections among injecting drug users in the EU.

Following decriminalisation, those in possession of small amounts of drugs are summoned to an interview by a “Commission for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction,” made up of a social worker, a psychiatrist and a lawyer.

Offenders who are not deemed to be drug addicts typically receive fines of up to €150, but the commission can impose a wide variety of sanctions, depending on the circumstances of the case, to encourage problem drug users to seek treatment. They are empowered to suspend these sanctions should offenders voluntarily seek treatment.

As one might expect, the move had been quite controversial, and critics were predicting nightmare scenarios including spiralling drug use and countless drug tourists.

But these scenarios have not materialised: there is no drug tourism of any significant scale and no apparent adverse affect on drug usage rates, which are, in a number of categories, among the lowest in the EU. At the same time, there has been a dramatic decrease in drug-related health issues, including sexually-transmitted diseases and deaths from overdoses.

In recent years, simple drug possession has also been decriminalised in several other countries, mainly in Europe and in Latin America.

In a number of others, drug possession has been effectively but unofficially decriminalised through a policy of non-tolerance. One notable example is the Netherlands: the selling of cannabis or any other drugs remains illegal, but the law is not enforced against its famous “coffee shops,” provided they follow regulations, including a ban on advertising and on selling more than 5g of cannabis per customer.

Legalisation

As the name suggests, legalisation goes one step further, treating previously-illegal recreational drugs in a similar way to the two popular legal ones: cigarettes and alcohol.

So far, however, no country has taken up Dr Mifsud Bonnici’s suggestion to legalise drugs across the board, but Uruguay – which had never criminalised drug possession for personal use – became the first country only last month to legalise the production, distribution, sale and consumption of cannabis. The US states of Colorado and Washington have followed suit this year, in the wake of referenda approved in November 2012

Colorado, which had already approved the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes, already has the necessary infrastructure up and running, with existing dispensaries now selling the drug to the public.

Uruguay – which had never criminalised the possession of drugs for personal use – is still finalising its own system: an April deadline has been set to determine how the drug will be grown and sold. In the meantime, however, individuals and registered “smoking clubs” are allowed to cultivate a limited number of plants.

The stated aim of the Uruguayan law is to reduce drug trafficking profits for organised crime, and to reduce drug-related violence and social problems.

The Uruguayan government is set to be the sole legal seller of cannabis and will also be responsible for commercial cultivation and quality, even though private cultivators may be licensed. Cannabis may only be sold to Uruguayan residents, as the country is seeking to avoid drug tourists and the problems they may cause.

Proponents of drug legalisation often draw parallels to the prohibition of alcohol in the US between 1920 and 1933. That law proved to be an abject failure, leading to a significant rise in criminal activity as organised crime took control of the distribution of alcohol, while cases of alcohol poisoning spiralled due to improperly distilled alcoholic beverages and a controversial programme to poison industrial alcohol to prevent its abuse and deter drinkers.

Legalising drugs also provides the government with a source of revenue, as they would be taxed similarly to cigarettes and alcohol, and controlling the production of recreational drugs would also make them safer – by ensuring, among other things, that the drug sold has not been adulterated. This is often not the case: for instance, what are sold as ecstasy pills often contain other drugs instead, ranging from relatively harmless substances such as caffeine to potentially more dangerous ones.

On the other hand, however, there are no case studies countries taking the bold step towards legalisation can follow. As a result, for instance, there is no evidence for or against the claim that legalising drugs would increase their use.

Uruguayan President José Mujica has described legalisation as an experiment, pledging to backtrack if the experiment goes awry. Should it be deemed successful, presumably, legalisation may well spread to other countries – and cover other drugs.