International - The Netherlands

(Drug Use and Crime Indicators - Comparison Between The US and The Netherlands)

Basic Data

(Drug Use Prevalence) "In 2009 last year prevalence of cannabis use in the population of 15-64 years was 7.0% and last month prevalence was 4.2%. Almost one-third (30%) of the last month users had used cannabis daily or almost daily in the past month. The percentage of recent users of cocaine and ecstasy was almost the same (1.2% and 1.4%, respectively). Amphetamine remained least popular with 0.4% recent users.
"Cannabis use among pupils (12-16 years) from regular secondary schools showed a decreasing trend between 2001 and 2009. In 2009, 9% of the pupils had used cannabis in the past year against 14% in 2001. Four in ten recent users had used only once in the past year, and a minority was a frequent blower (40 times or more).
"Prevalence rates of drug use are appreciably higher in (local) studies among various subpopulations, including pubgoers and nightlifers (cannabis, ecstasy, cocaine), neighbourhood and hang-around youth (cannabis, ecstasy, cocaine) and men who have sex with men (ecstasy, cocaine, GHB). However, no higher levels but even lower levels of drug use (cannabis, ecstasy, cocaine) were found among first-year students.
"Various indicators strongly point at an increase in the (problem) use of GHB in some subpopulations both in and outside the nightlife scene. In 2009, 0.4% of the population between 15 and 64 years had used GHB and 0.2% reported use in the past month. These figures are comparable to those of amphetamine but much lower compared to ecstasy and cocaine. Higher percentages of GHB users are found among populations in the nightlife scene, although GHB is not by definition a club drug and use at home is also commonly reported."

(Prevalence of Drug Use Among Youth)
"• In general, the 2007 survey showed that prevalence rates of use of ecstasy, cocaine, amphetamine, hallucinogenic mushrooms and heroin among 12-18 year old pupils were much lower compared to cannabis, with lifetime rates around 2%, while only 0.8% of the pupils had ever tried heroin (Monshouwer et al. 2008 (see also Online Standard Table 02)). Last month prevalence rates are for all drugs below 1%.
"• As for cannabis, the use of other drugs generally peaked in 1996 and decreased or stabilised since then. Ecstasy remains the most popular ‘party’ drug throughout the years, except for the last month prevalence in 2007, which was similar for ecstasy, cocaine and amphetamine (0.8%)."

(1997, 2001, 2005, and 2009 - drug usage in The Netherlands) Prevalence of drug use in the Dutch population 15-64 years of age:

(Marijuana Use by Gender and Age)
"• The numbers of users are only sufficient for cannabis to make a breakdown by age and gender of recent users.
• Cannabis use was highest in age group 25-44 years. In 2009 last year prevalence was twice as high in this age group compared to age group 25-44 (figure 2.1.1).
• The prevalence of last year cannabis use was more than 2 times higher among men than women (9.8% as against 4.2%)."

(Frequency of Drug Use)
"• In 2009, last month prevalence of cannabis use was 4.7%; 30% of these last month users reported daily or almost daily use. This is some 1.3% of the total population aged 15 through 64 years, or 141.000 (almost) daily cannabis users in absolute numbers.
"• One quarter (25%) of the current users consumed cannabis a few times per week, 21% at least once per week and 24% less than once per week.
"• For other drugs the number of past month users is too small to allow a further breakdown in frequency category."

(Marijuana Use by Young People, by Gender and Ethnicity)
"• At age 12 only few pupils have ever used cannabis, less than 1%. At age 16, one in five girls and one in three boys had ever tried cannabis.
"• While boys have overall more ever and current experience with cannabis, gender differences are only significant for current use and only at age 16.
"• While the Dutch National School Surveys on Substance use have shown a strong increase in the age of first cannabis use between 1988 and 1996, the HBSC [Health Behavior in School-Aged Children] studies showed that lifetime prevalence among 14 year old pupils decreased from 20% in 2011 to 11% in 2009.
"• Nine percent of the pupils of 12-16 years had used cannabis in the past year. Of this group, 42% had smoked cannabis only 1 time, 49% smoked between 2 and 39 times and 10% was a relatively heavy user (40 times or more in the past year).
"Cannabis use: school level and ethnicity
"• There were no significant differences between school types in the percentages of recent and current cannabis users.
"• There were also no major differences in prevalence rates between Dutch and other ethnic groups, except for a lower rate of recent use among Moroccan pupils (4% against 10% among Dutch pupils). This difference remains significant after correcting for differences in school type and family situation between Dutch and Moroccan pupils."

(Access to Cannabis and Availability of cannabis)
"• In the Netherlands, the sale of cannabis is largely regulated through coffee shops, which have to adhere to certain criteria (see later). In the population survey of 2009, 90% of the recent cannabis users of 15-64 years reported having obtained their cannabis (also) in coffee shops in the past 12 months, followed by 12% mentioning 'at someone else's house' (note that more than one answer was allowed and percentages summed up to 118%). Other categories were mentioned with frequencies of 3% or lower, except for the category 'others' (6%). However, school surveys show that for minors coffee shops are a less likely source for obtaining cannabis (see National Report 2009).
"• Figure 10.1.1 shows that the number of coffee shops gradually decreased in the past decade. In 2009, there were 666 coffee shops in 101 municipalities, which cover 23% of all 441 municipalities (Bieleman & Nijkamp, 2010). Data from Statistics Netherlands reported a slightly lower number in 2010 (659) and 2011 (640) (CBS, 2011).
"• Over half (53%) of the coffee shops is located in the six big cities with over 200 thousand inhabitants.
"• The reduction from 2008 to 2009 can be explained in part by the closure of 16 coffee shops in Rotterdam, which did not comply with the minimal distance criterion to schools, and the closure of (all) 8 coffee shops in Bergen op Zoom and Roosendaal. Moreover, coffee shops were closed because the municipality applies an 'extinction policy' or because they have violated the regulations (see later).
"• In 2010, 91% of the coffee shops were situated at a distance of 350 metres or more from a secondary school; 3.5% has a distance of 300 to 350 metres and 5.3% a distance of less than 300 metres (www.cbs.nl). The planned closure of coffee shops (to be effectuated) within 350 metres will affect 58 coffee shops (9%)."

(Drug Offense Prosecutions)
"• The Public Prosecutor reports less than 15 thousand Opium Act cases in 2010, which is a decrease compared to 2009.
"• The decrease in absolute numbers appears to be especially true for soft drug cases.
• Hard drug cases or combined cases - with hard and soft drugs – also decreased but to a lesser extent.
"• The majority of cases (49%) concerns soft drugs.
"• The majority of the Opium Act offences involved (60%) concerns production, trafficking or dealing of drugs. Forty percent concerns possession of drugs (not in table). It is not known from the figures what the quantity of drugs was in the cases of ‘possession of drugs’. The general guideline for prosecution states that, if possession concerns ‘small amounts for own use’ police dismissal or prosecution aimed at diversion to care can follow. The drugs will always be seized. But if someone possesses more of a drug than the small amount that is considered ‘for own use’ – and which might be meant for dealing - or if there is also another, more serious offence involved, arrest and prosecution are the rule. The available data do not allow a distinction between quantities.
"• In 2010, 71% of the soft drug cases concern production or trafficking and 29% possession (not in table).
"• In cases of hard drugs, the fractions are different: 49% concerns production or trafficking and almost the same fraction (51%) concerns possession of hard drugs (not in table).
"• The percentage of Opium Act cases of all cases in 2010 is 7%. This fraction did not change much in the last years, which means that trends in Opium Act cases follow the general trends in cases at the Public Prosecutor in the Netherlands."

(Problem Drug Users) "Compared to the previous national report (Van Laar et al. 2010), no new national or local estimates have become available about the number of problem drug users in the Netherlands. According to the most recent estimate for 2008 there were about 17,700 more or less problematic opiate users within a 95%-confidence interval running from 17,300 up to 18,100 opiate users.
"The majority of the opiate users also consume crack, but treatment registration and field studies also point at the existence of a group of (problem) crack users who do not consume opiates. The size of this population is not known. In the near future, estimates will become available on the total population of crack users (both with and without users of opiates) for the cities of Amsterdam, The Hague and Rotterdam."

(Problem Opiate Users) "Compared to the previous national report (Van Laar et al. 2010), no new national or local estimates have become available about the number of problem drug users in the Netherlands. According to the most recent estimate for 2008 there were about 17,700 more or less problematic opiate users within a 95%-confidence interval running from 17,300 up to 18,100 opiate users."

(HIV and Injection Drug Use)
"• In 2010, 826 new HIV diagnoses were reported in the treatment centres. In 5 men and 0 women (0.6%) injecting drug use was the most likely route of transmission (table 6.1) (Vriend et al., 2011).
"• Up to December 2010 a cumulative total of 17,864 HIV-infected individuals were registered by the treatment centres and the HIV Monitoring Foundation (Vriend et al., 2011). The percentage of patients infected with HIV through injecting drug use is 4% (695 patients). The main route of HIV-transmission in the Netherlands is sexual: through MSM contact in 56% of cases and through heterosexual contact in 32%. 41% of all injecting drug users were diagnosed with HIV at an age between 30 and 39 years. IDUs were on average younger than MSM and heterosexuals at diagnosis (Vriend et al., 2011) (Figure 6.1).
"• Of the registered HIV positive injecting drug users, almost three quarters originated from the Netherlands and 22% from other Western European countries. This is in sharp contrast to HIV-positives infected through heterosexual contact, of whom only one third had a Dutch origin and almost half originated from Sub-Saharan Africa (table 6.1) (Vriend et al., 2011)."

(AIDS and Injection Drug Use)
"• Up to December 2010, the cumulative total of reported AIDS diagnoses was 8,345 and 5,115 HIV infected individuals had died (Vriend et al., 2011). The annual number of new AIDS diagnoses peaked in the first half of the nineties (around 500 cases per year) and then gradually dropped, to 189 cases in 2010 (Vriend et al., 2011). The observed decrease since 1996 is related to the availability of HAART, which slowed progression from HIV to AIDS.
"• Of the 189 new AIDS diagnoses in 2010, 4 (2.1%) were among injecting drug users (table 6.2). In the same year, 106 AIDS patients died, among who were 13 (12%) injecting drug users. Note that the data for 2010 are incomplete due to reporting delay (Vriend et al., 2011).
"• Up until December 2010, 700 registered AIDS patients (8.4% of the total AIDS diagnoses) belonged to the transmission risk group of injecting drug users. The number of AIDS cases related to injecting drug use peaked in 1995 (74), but remained below 20 cases per year since 1999 (see table 6.1.2).
"• Note that the percentage of IDUs among the total population of AIDS patients (8.4% over all years) is higher than the percentage of IDUs in the total population of HIV patients (4%), but that the percentage of IDUs among the AIDS deaths is even higher: 10% or over since 2005. This indicates that the disease course in injecting drug users is less favourable than in other risk groups."

(Hepatitis C and Injection Drug Use)
"• Relatively, the contribution of IDUs in the total number of notified cases of acute hepatitis C is increasing, although absolute numbers remain low. The relative increase can be partially explained by the decrease in notified cases of acute HCV among MSM, although they remain the largest transmission group.
"• In 2010, 29 cases of acute hepatitis C infection were notified. The transmission route of 25 of these 29 cases was reported; in 4 cases (16%) injecting drug use was the most likely route of transmission (see ST09). In 2009, there were 3 IDUs among the 38 cases of acute hepatitis C (8%), and in 2008 there was 1 IDU in 39 cases (3%) (source: RIVM)."

(Drug-Related Mortality) "Between 1996 and 2010, the total number of recorded drug-related deaths among residents fluctuated between a minimum of only 94 cases in 2010 and a maximum of 144 cases in 2001. After temporary increases in 2008 and 2009 the number of deaths decreased again in 2010 to the level of 2007.
"Of the 94 cases in 2010, a total of 45 cases were coded to unspecified substances, compared to 51 cases in the 2009 registration year. Although the specific substances are not known in these cases, a previous inquiry at Statistics Netherlands (CBS) revealed that these cases are mostly related to hard drugs and to polydrug use, and are therefore rightly included in the group of drug-related deaths. From 1996 up to including 2010, the number of unspecified cases ranged from 18 in 1996 to 58 in 2008.
"Despite some fluctuations over the years, the total number of drug-related deaths in the Netherlands has remained relatively low. This might be explained by a low number of socially marginalized problem drug users, successful prevention measures among the problem drug users, and protective factors, such as the nationwide availability of methadone-maintenance treatment, heroin-assisted treatment, and a low rate of injecting drug use."

(Availability and Use of Opiate Substitution Treatment) "There are no major changes in the substitution treatment in the Netherlands. Methadone substitution treatment is still the standard option. From 2001 to 2010, the number of methadone clients decreased with 13% from 11,597 to 10,085 clients (Ouwehand et al. 2011). However, the proportion of opiates clients receiving methadone treatment increased in this period from 69% to 82%. Buprenorphine is used in one organization of addiction care and elsewhere incidentally."

(Heroin-Assisted Treatment) "Currently (July 2011), there are 17 heroin clinics in 15 cities in the Netherlands, treating a total of about 650 patients on any given day. Amsterdam and Rotterdam each host two clinics. The maximum number of treatment slots is set by the national government. The capacity of the individual clinics varies between 20 and 75 slots.
"All clinics are part of addiction treatment services that provide a comprehensive programme for substance-use disorder treatment, including crisis intervention, abstinence-orientated interventions (residential and outpatient treatment) and harm-reduction treatments (methadone, buprenorphine, needle exchange, user rooms, social services). In many instances, the heroin clinic is located at the same location or is very close to the other addiction and mental health services of the city."

(Availability of Syringe Exchange) "Estimates from Mainline (a grassroots organisation for drug users in Amsterdam) and the Trimbos Institute suggest that there are approximately 150 needle/syringe exchange programs in the Netherlands. This is a rough estimate because for some cities it has been reported that pharmacists are also exchanging syringes. In Amsterdam and Rotterdam trend data on the numbers of syringes that were exchanged are available. In both cities, a decreasing trend in the number of exchanged syringes is observed since many years (see figure 7.2.1). The small and unexplained increase observed in 2008 was not continued in 2009 and 2010."

(Drug Consumption Rooms) "A recent inventory (mid 2010) among a network of infectious disease experts in all addiction care institutions in the Netherlands identified 37 drug consumption rooms operating in the Netherlands (Havinga and van der Poel, 2011). Though being present in smaller cities as well, most of these harm reduction facilities are concentrated in bigger cities. Not all drug consumption rooms are for injecting. Some are targeted at 'smokers', others are established exclusively for using alcohol and some are mixed and not dedicated to any special route of consumption or drug."

(Physician and Patient Attitudes Toward Medical Cannabis) "Recently, a survey performed on 200 patients who were using medicinal cannabis during the first months after its introduction in the Netherlands was published.⁴⁹ The survey showed that most of the respondents had previous experiences with cannabis use for medicinal purposes or with synthetic cannabinoids such as dronabinol, whereas a minority of 40% were “new” users. Most patients were satisfied using medicinal cannabis; only 10% of patients reported moderate to more severe transitory adverse effects. In about half of the users, the patients themselves took the initiative to suggest medicinal cannabis to their treating physicians as a therapeutic option, whereas in about 30% of users the initiative was taken by the involved general practitioner or medical specialist. In the remaining 20% of users, it was a joint initiative of both patient and clinician."

(Drugs Information and Monitoring Services) "During its nearly twenty years of existence, the Drugs Information and Monitoring System (DIMS) has monitored the chemical content of more than 100,000 samples of illicit drugs. These drugs are collected directly on the user's level and there is information exchange between the personnel at the testing facilities and the users. The anonymity of the drug user is guaranteed in order to keep DIMS trustworthy. This enables the collection of data on personal adverse effects and adverse effects experienced by friends, regional origin, date, source of purchase, price and reason for testing. The results of two studies suggest that testing drug users are broadly similar to non-testing users (Benschop, 2002; Korf, 2003). Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the DIMS target group is a reflection of all recreational drug users. While DIMS in a strict sense is only a market monitor, the data are fed back to the local organisations of its network to support their activities targeting the prevention of health threatening situations. In 2010, 8,898 drug samples were delivered to DIMS (DIMS, 2011; see § 10.3)."

(Law Enforcement Spending) "A study into the criminal justice costs estimated that in 2006 the prevention of drug offences by the police and justice was publicly financed by about 114 million euro (Moolenaar 2009). And preliminary figures reported by Nauta, Moolenaar & van Tulder (2011) show that in 2009 expenditures for Opium Act offences are estimated at € 692,2 x million, of which the majority goes to hard drugs (€ 524,3 x million) (see § 9.1)."

(Spending on Addiction Treatment) "From this table it can be estimated that the annual expenditures of the main regular institutes for addiction care, together with the institutes for integrated addiction care and mental health care, in 2009 amounted to 1,466,851,235 euro, which increased with 3.2% to a total of 1,513,392,474 euro in 2010. Given a general inflation of 1.3% in 2010, this implies a real increase of the expenditures by 1.9%. Unfortunately, it is not directly clear which part of the amounts is spent on treating addiction, let alone drug addiction, and which amount is still missing from the non-merged mental health care."

Laws and Policies

(Netherlands Drug Policy Objectives) "Since 1995, the Dutch national drug policy has had four major objectives
"• To prevent drug use and to treat and rehabilitate drug users.
"• To reduce harm to users.
"• To diminish public nuisance by drug users (the disturbance of public order and safety in the neighbourhood).
"• To combat the production and trafficking of drugs.
"Although in the new policy letter these four objectives were not explicitly denounced, it was stated that the Dutch drug policy has two cornerstones: to protect public health and to combat public nuisance and drug-related crime (TK 24007-259). In the new Opium Act Directive the objective of the drug policy is described as: 'The [new] Dutch drugs policy is aimed to discourage and reduce drug use, certainly in so far as it causes damage to health and to society, and to prevent and reduce the damage associated with drug use, drug production and the drugs trade' (Stc 2001, 11134)."

(Drug Law Offenses) "The most important law with regards to drug law offences is the Opium Act, in which trafficking, production, cultivation, dealing and possession of drugs are explicitly defined as criminal acts. According to a verdict of the Council of State of July 13, 2011, the use of drugs is also a criminal act, because it implies the possession of drugs (201009884/1/H3).
"Other laws like the Abuse of Chemical Substances Prevention Act are also of importance for the combat of drug-related crimes, for instance for the combat of supply of precursors for synthetic drugs. See Chapter 1 for an overview of the national legislative framework of drug law offences.
"Not all Opium Act offences that are traced by the police result in custody or prosecution. The Opium Act Directives of the Public Prosecutor state that, if the offence concerns possession of small amounts for own use or use of a hard drug, the drugs will be seized, but normally there will be no custody or prosecution, and in the event of prosecution, this should only aim at diversion to care. Small amounts of a hard drug are defined as one tablet, ample, wrapple or ball of the drug and in any case an amount of no more than 0,5 grams (Openbaar Ministerie, 2011). If the offence concerns small amounts of cannabis (no more than 5 grams, no professional cultivation of cannabis plants), the drugs will be seized, but a dismissal by the police is the normal reaction; there will be no custody and no prosecution (Opium Act Directives, 2011; LJN:BO4015, Hoge Raad, 09/01099)."

(Coffee Shop Regulation) "In the Opium Act Directives the coffee shop policy is regulated by the so-called AHOJG criteria, which stand for: no advertising, no sale of hard drugs, not selling to persons under the age of 18, not causing public nuisance and not selling more than 5 grams per transaction. In the policy letter the Ministers of Security & Justice and Health announces that the changes in the coffee shop policy will be realized by adding criteria – such as the distance criterion - to the existing AHOJG criteria. The enforcement of these criteria remains primarily the responsibility of the mayor (TK 24077-259)."

(Timeline for New Coffee Shop Regulations) "In his letter to the House of Commons of 26 October 2011, the Minister of Security and Justice elaborates the announced accentuation of the cannabis policy and formulates his reaction to the judgement of the Council of States on the subject of barring non residents from Dutch coffee shops (T.K. 24077-265). The following subjects will be discussed in Parliament.
"The coffee shop policy will be changed by adding three criteria to the existing five AHOJG-criteria in the Opium Act Directives, by which the sale of cannabis is regulated. From 1 January 2012 onwards the Closed club criterion and the Resident criterion will be added to the Directives and enforced in the three southern provinces Limburg, North Brabant and Zeeland. The Minister of Security and Justice will make agreements with the municipalities with coffee shops about the enforcement of these added criteria. From 1 January 2013 onwards these new criteria will be introduced in the other regions of the country. Coffee shops will become closed clubs only accessible for Dutch adult residents with at most 2000 members. The new rule in the directives will be evaluated in research (www.wodc.nl). From 1 January 2014 the minimum distance of a coffee shop to a school for secondary education must be 350 metres. This Distance criterion will also be added to the existing AHOJG-criteria of the Opium Act Directives."

(Prescribed Cannabis in The Netherlands) "On 6 October 2009, a private member’s bill to make medicinal cannabis more accessible for patients was presented to the Lower House and the Minister of Health (TK 32159-2). In his bill, Member of Parliament (MP) Van der Ham analysed practical problems with the legal medicinal cannabis (for more details see our National Report 2010).
"Data currently available shows that medicinal cannabis can help relieve¹:
"• pain and muscle spasms/cramps associated with (MS) or spinal cord damage;
"• nausea, reduced appetite, weight loss and debilitation associated with cancer and AIDS;
"• nausea and vomiting caused by medication or radiotherapy for cancer and HIV/AIDS;
"• long-term neurogenic pain (i.e. originating in the nervous system) caused by, for example, nerve damage, phantom limb pain, facial neuralgia or chronic pain following an attack of shingles;
"• tics associated with Tourette Syndrome."

(Netherlands' Proposed Drugged Driving Law) "The Ministers of Security and Justice and Transport are preparing an amendment to the Road Traffic Act in order to make driving under the influence of drugs punishable. Police investigators are given the authority to use an oral fluid screener as pre-selection method to detect drug use of traffic participants. The legal evidence will remain a blood test. The use of GHB is only detectable with a blood test. Just as certain blood concentrations of alcohol are forbidden when driving a vehicle, the Road Traffic Act will be adjusted to prohibit driving if blood concentrations exceed certain limits (e.g. 50 microgram per litre for amphetamine and cocaine and 3 microgram per litre for THC). A special commission has proposed limiting blood values per drug in accordance with international practices (T.K. 29398-236; T.K. 32859-3)."

(Diminishing Drug Tourism) "During the past ten years, there were experiments in some Dutch (border) towns to diminish drug tourism: in Venlo coffee shops were relocated to the outskirt of the town; in Rotterdam, Roosendaal/Bergen-op-Zoom and Terneuzen all or some coffee shops were closed; in Roosendaal/Bergen-op-Zoom, Terneuzen and Rotterdam the opening hours of the coffee shops were reduced; in Rotterdam, Venlo and Heerlen some long term projects dealt with the illegal hard drug market of dealing in premises, drugs runners and street dealers.
"On 1 June 2009 16 coffee shops were closed in Rotterdam, because they were located too close to secondary schools and schools for vocational training. Research showed that in areas where coffee shops were closed, there was a decrease both in the occurrence of nuisance (from 58 per cent to 42 per cent) and in the experienced public nuisance (for example: experienced traffic nuisance decreased in areas with closed coffee shops from 51% to 36 % and remained the same in areas were coffee shop had stayed). The respondents had the impression that the supply of cannabis from illegal selling points had also decreased since the closure of the 16 coffee shops. A possible explanation for this development is that more police force was brought on the street after the closures. After the closures, most of the young cannabis users still got their cannabis through friends who buy it at coffee shops, so the measures did not seem to have much effect on the availability of cannabis. Vulnerable young people value the health risks and possible addictive effects of cannabis lower than their more 'healthier' peers (Bieleman et al, 2010).
"After the closure of all the coffee shops in Roosendaal/Bergen-op-Zoom the number of foreign drug tourists diminished with 90 per cent. The reported coffee shop related public nuisance diminished with more than 20 per cent. However, part of the illegal drugs market remained and is still dealing with foreigners. Another possible side effect is the huge rise in housebreaking in Roosendaal en Bergen-op-Zoom since the closure of the coffee shops (Beke & Van de Torre, 2011). Where did the 1.3 million foreign drugs tourists, who used to buy cannabis in both towns, go to after the closures? Researched showed that a small part of them is still visiting both towns and buys on the illegal market. About 30 per cent went to the eight coffee shops of the neighbouring city of Breda. An unknown part possibly goes to other Dutch towns with coffee shops. If that is the case, it apparently did not result in a rise of reported drug-related nuisance in Breda or those other towns. Also, part of the cannabis sales moved to Belgium (Van der Torre et al 2010; Gemeente Breda 2010)."

(Proposed Coffee Shop Regulations in Detail) "In May 2011, the new government announced its objectives for the near future in a special drugs policy letter (TK 24077-259). The main advices of the Advisory Committee on Drugs Policy from 2009 are endorsed (Adviescommissie Drugsbeleid, 2009):
"• Use of drugs and alcohol by minors must be tackled far more rigorously.
"• Coffee shops need to return to their original purpose: small scale points of sale for local users
"• Reinforcing the combat against organized crime
"The agreements on a new drug policy of the Coalition Agreement are specified in the policy letter. Most of the measures are concerned with cannabis.
"1. The government intends to make coffee shops closed clubs only accessible for adult Dutch residents with a special club card. Every coffee shop will have a maximum number of members which will be determined by the mayors.
"2. The government intends to bar non-residents from the Dutch coffee shops. Whether this is juridical attainable was uncertain until the judgment of the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Dutch Council of State, the highest general administrative court in the Netherlands, on 29 June 2011. The judgment rules that the residence criterion does infringe European law on the freedom to provide services, but according to a judgment by the European Court of Justice on 16 December 2010, this infringement is permissible in the interest of combating drug tourism and the nuisance associated with it. The residence criterion is also compatible with the Dutch Constitution's ban on discrimination, because in this case there are objective and reasonable grounds for 'indirect discrimination based on nationality'. The mayor [of Maastricht] has demonstrated that public order in the city was being disrupted by the rising influx of drug tourists and that the residence criterion could offer a solution to this problem. On the other hand, the Council of State states that Maastricht's byelaw contravenes the Opium Act. Given the Act's absolute ban on the sale of soft drugs, the municipality may not regulate the sale of soft drugs by means of a municipal byelaw and decisions based on it without reference to the Opium Act. So, the closure of the coffee shop was unlawful. This judgment does not mean the mayor has no further statutory scope for taking measure against coffee shops. Under the Opium Act itself, the mayor may impose enforcement orders against coffee shops selling narcotics (Raad van State, 2011; nr. 200803357/1/H3-A)
"3. The distance criterion between coffee shops and secondary schools will be enlarged from 250 to 350 meters. The use of drugs will be discouraged on schools (TK 24077-259)
"4. The government will propose a bill to compel schools to register safety incidents, including incidents with drugs.
"5. The Public Administration Probity Screening Act (Wet BIBOB) will be used more intensely to screen owners of coffee shops in order to detect connections with criminal organizations."

(The Netherlands and Depenalization of Cannabis Use) "There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976 policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent government efforts to close down coffee shops and more aggressively enforce the regulations."

(US Perception of Dutch Drug Policy) "Illegal Drug Use. The Dutch Opium Act distinguishes between 'hard' drugs that have 'unacceptable' risks (e.g., heroin, cocaine, ecstasy), and 'soft' drugs (cannabis products). Sales of small amounts of cannabis products (under five grams) are 'tolerated' (i.e., not prosecuted, even though technically illegal) in 'coffeeshops' operating under regulated conditions (no minors on premises, no alcohol sales, no hard drug sales, no advertising, and no creating a public nuisance).
"The Health Ministry coordinates drug policy, while the Ministry of Security and Justice is responsible for law enforcement, including the police. Matters relating to local government are the responsibility of the Ministry of Interior. At the municipal level, policy is coordinated in tripartite consultations among the mayor, the chief public prosecutor, and the police."