PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Abstract
It has established nowadays an international mechanism of practically universal scope that harmonizes approaches concerning the control of narcotics and is translated in national almost identical legislations lengthways and width of the world. Before the ambiguous results obtained after decades of radical application of the approach of prohibition that inspires the above mentioned international mechanism, diverse countries have chosen to experiment with different domestic policies, in search of more consistent approaches to reach the results looked as for control of narcotics. This article presents in a general way the in force mechanism and does a reflexive relation on his tensions, paralysis and alternative offers of control.
Keywords:
References
Córdoba, J. J. y Rangel, M. A. (coords. de ponentes) (2008). “Informe de ponencia al proyecto de acto legislativo 016 de 2008, Cámara, “por el cual se reforma el artículo 49 de la Constitución Política”, Congreso de la República de Colombia: Cámara de Representantes.
Eltiempo.com (2009). “Se abre debate por ‘tribunal especial’ para portadores de droga”, 3 de marzo, en https://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/politica/se-abre-debatepor-tribunal-especial-para-portadores-de-droga_4851588-1
Eltiempo.com (2009).“Consumo de droga como falta menor, con rehabilitación obligatoria al adicto, propone el Gobierno”, 25 de marzo, en http://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/politica/consumo-de-droga-como-falta-menor-con-rehabilitacion-obligatoria-al-adicto-propone-el-gobierno_4896587-1
Human Rights Watch (2000). “Punishment and Prejudice: Racial Disparities in the War on Drug”, A Human Rights Watch Report, vol. 12, 2(G).
Jelsma, M. y Metaal, P. (2004). “Cracks in the Vienna Consensus: The UN Drug Control Debate”, en Wola Drug War Monitor, January.
República de Colombia (1986). Ley 30 de 1986 por la cual se adopta el Estatuto Nacional de Estupefacientes, Bogotá: Congreso de la República.
Reuters, P. (2008). “Assessing U. S. Drug Policy”. Materials for the first debate of the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy, en http://drugsanddemocracy.org/files/2008/06/peter_reuter_ingles.pdf
Sentencia C-221 de 1994. “Declaración de inexequibilidad de los artículos 51 y 87 de la Ley 30 de 1986, e impide que revivan normas de contenido similar, que fueron derogadas por la ley en cuestión”. M. P.: Carlos Gaviria Díaz, en https://www.mamacoca.org/foro_legal/sentencia_C221_de_1994.htm
Stalenkrantz, B. (2002). “The tragic outcome of Sweden’s dream of a drug free society”, en Global Drug Policy: Building a New Framework. Senslis Council-The 2003 Lisbon International Symposium on Global Drug Policy.
The Berckley Foundation Drug Policy Program (2008). Recalibrating the Regime. The Need for a Human Rights-Based Approach to International Drug Policy, International Harm Reduction Association –ihra–, Human Rights Watch –hrw–,and the Canadian hiv/aids Legal Network –chaln–.
Thornton, M. (1991). The Economics of Prohibition, Salt Lake City: University of Utah.
Torres, Y. y Maya, J. M. (2000). Consumo de sustancias psicoactivas y otros factores asociados a delincuencia juvenil. Medellín: Instituto de Ciencias de la Salud –CES–.
UNODC (2002). Results of a Pilot Survey of Forty Selected Organized Criminal Groups in Sixteen Countries. Vienna: Center for International Crime Prevention.
UNODC (2007). Sweden’s Successful Drug Policy: A review of the Evidence, Vienna: UNODC.
