Introduction

• Pages: 5-9
• Author: Rodrigo Uprimny Yepes,Diana Esther Guzmán,Jorge Parra Norato

5

!"#$%&'(')*+,-.'/0*1)2"-*3

In Latin America, tracking cocaine so it can be sold to someone who

wants to use it is more serious than raping a woman or deliberately killing

your neighbor. W hile it may seem incredible, that is the conclusion of a

rigorous study of the evolution of criminal legislation in the region, which

shows that countries’ judicial systems mete out harsher penalties for traf-

cking even modest amounts of drugs than for acts as heinous as sexual

assault or murder.1

How have we reached such an unjust and irrational point? In recent

decades, especially the 1980s, Latin American countries, in#uenced by an

international prohibitionist model, fell – ironically – into what we might

metaphorically call an addiction to punishment.

Addiction2 creates the need to consume more and more drugs, which

have less and less eect; ultimately, the problematic user simply consumes

drugs to avoid withdrawal. Drug legislation in Latin America seems to have

followed a similar path. Countries have an ever-growing need to add crimes

and increase the penalties for drug tracking , supposedly to control an ex-

panding illegal market, while this increasingly punitive approach has less and

less eect on decreasing the supply and use of illegal drugs.

*1* 4,*('&"*#$%&*)*5"6*"7)829"%:*'/*;,9'<')*&="*8)7'8$8*2"/)9&>*'%*?@*>")-%*5,-*

drug trafcing and  years for murder, which means penalties are harshA

er for trafcing drugs than for illing another person. n Colombia, the

maximum penalty is  years for trafcing and  years for rape, which

means that under Colombian law, it is more serious to trafc psychoactie

%$B%&)/("%*5,-*%,8",/"*6=,* 2$-(=)%"%*&="8*<,9$/&)-'9>*&=)/* &,*%$B#"(&*

)*6,8)/* &,*<',9"/("* )/C*-)2"* ="-D*E'8'9)-* (,/(9$%',/%*6"-"* -")(="C*'/*

/")-9>*)99*&="*F)&'/*G8"-'()/*(,$/&-'"%*6"*%&$C'"CD*

*2 There is signicant academic debate about the terms addict and addicA

tion, because they hae acuired a negatie political and moral connotaA

&',/D*G9&=,$0=*6"* $%"*&="8*="-"* &,*-"'/5,-("*&="*8"&)2=,-:*6"* 0"/"-)99>*

beliee that the term problematic drug user is more appropriate.

Dejusticia Working Paper 1

G!!HI4J!*4K*1LMHENOJM4P

4="*C'%2-,2,-&',/)9'&>*,5*C-$0*9)6%*'/*F)&'/*G8"-'()

4='%*'/<"%&'0)&',/*6)%*8)C"*2,%%'B9"*B>*&="*K2"/*%,('"&>*Q,$/C)&',/%D

HE;MP*RSTAR@TA@SUUTATAV

W*I"/&-,*C"*J%&$C',%*C"*!"-"(=,:*X$%&'(')*>*E,('"C)C:*!"#$%&'(')

I)--"-)*?Y*MZ*UYAV3:*;,0,&[:*!DID

Telephone: ( )  

JA8)'9P*'/5,\C"#$%&'(')D,-0

=&&2P]]666DC"#$%&'(')D,-0

4='%*C,($8"/&*'%*)<)'9)B9"*)&*=&&2P]]666DC"#$%&'(')D,-0

*

4='%*-"2,-&*6)%*&-)/%9)&"C*5-,8*E2)/'%=*B>*;)-B)-)*Q-)%"-D

F)>,$&P*O)-&)*^,#)%

I,<"-*2=,&,%P**1-'%,/"-%:*X"%_%*GB)C*I,9,-)C,*W`*N)/C($55%:*O)-&)*^,#)%*

1-'/&"C*B>*JC'(',/"%*G/&-,2,%

ogot, anuary 