In June 2018, the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) published the European drug report 2018: trends and developments.¹ This report provides a snapshot of the latest drug trends across the 28 European Union (EU) member states, Norway and Turkey. Across Europe (EU 28, Turkey and Norway), drug availability is high and in some areas appears to be increasing. Latest figures show more than one million seizures of illicit drugs in 2016. Over 92 million adults in the EU (15–64 years) have tried an illicit drug in their lifetime and an estimated 1.3 million people received treatment for illicit drug use in 2016.²

In Ireland, the number of people aged 15–64 years reporting that they used illicit drugs in their lifetime has risen from 2  in 10 in 2002/3 to 3 in 10 in 2014/15. Cannabis remains the most commonly used illicit drug among this group, followed by MDMA and cocaine. A total of 9,227 cases presented for treatment in 2016.

Community organisations working in disadvantaged areas contribute to the democratic process by giving a voice to the most marginalised and by building the capacity of citizens to organise and participate in decision-making around the issues that affect them.

On 26 March 2018, Clondalkin Drug and Alcohol Task Force (CDATF) held a conference on ‘Reclaiming community development as an effective response to drug harms, policy harms, poverty and inequality’.^1,2 The conference marked the launch of the CDATF 2018–2025 strategic plan of the same title. Minister Catherine Byrne TD launched the strategy and welcomed the approach taken, noting that it reflects ‘many of the themes’ running through the national strategy.

.

Increased interest in penal reform and sentencing in Ireland has resulted in the publication of several reports.^1,2,3,4 An updated report, which re-examined this subject, was published by the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality in May 2018.⁵ The report brings together existing evidence and the views of key stakeholder groups, such as the Irish Penal Reform Trust (IPRT), Victims’ Rights Alliance, Probation Service, Irish Prison Service, Jesuit Centre for Faith and Justice, Prison Officers’ Association, and Simon Communities of Ireland. The overall aim was to determine what the main issues were and to identify ‘specific actions’ to overcome them. The themes that emerged from the engagement with stakeholders resulted in several recommendations by the committee.

A central view of justice in democratic societies is that people are regarded equally and respectfully and are not exposed to discrimination, directly or indirectly (p. 1).¹ An area of concern worldwide is the occurrence of discrimination centred on ethnic, cultural or social groups within the criminal justice system.² Historically, Ireland has been associated with ‘mass emigration’ (p. 1).³ However, since the nineties and noughties, due to the economic downturn, this trend has been reversed and Ireland has become a multicultural society that is now home to many EU citizens.³ The change in Ireland’s population has similarly been reflected within the Irish criminal justice system. Hence, the study described here by Brandon and O’Connell is timely and aimed at determining whether racial bias was present in Irish sentencing practices between Irish and non-Irish nationals.⁴

With the aim of decreasing the dependence by criminal justice systems on imprisonment, numerous reports have encouraged drawing on a wider array of alternatives to prison, for example, pre-sentence reports (PSRs). PSRs are requested by judges from probation officers after a defendant is found guilty and before sentencing. They contain in-depth information about the defendant, such as personal circumstances, background, ability to engage in rehabilitation, risk of reoffending, and may also provide guidance on sentencing and rehabilitation, which may or may not inform sentencing. Primarily, research has highlighted the importance of PSRs; however, although they are regularly used in Ireland, despite no statutory requirement to do so, the process involved is not clearly understood.

Both nationally and internationally there is ongoing debate about the medical use of cannabis for a range of conditions. The attitudes to medicinal cannabis of a sample of Irish patients experiencing chronic pain are the subject of a new study.¹ In a 2017 review on the topic by the Health Products Regulatory Authority (HPRA), the medical use of cannabis is defined as ‘a situation where a doctor prescribes or recommends the use of cannabis for treatment of a medical condition in a patient under his/her care’ (p. 9).² The review found three medical conditions for which there was ‘some scientific evidence to support the use of cannabis or cannabinoids as a medical treatment in patients who have failed available treatments’ (p. 16).²

Our life, our voice, our say is a report published in March 2018 by the Community Action Network (CAN).¹ It highlights a range of challenges faced by service users of opioid treatment in Ireland, framing them in the context of users’ human rights and service providers’ obligations under the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Act 2014 (IHRECA 2014). Since the introduction of the Act, public bodies have been required to take proactive steps to promote equality, protect human rights, and fight discrimination in relation to their functions and powers.

In the last decade there has been a substantial increase in research relating to alcohol’s harm to others; and international research indicates that a significant proportion of the population has experienced harm from other people’s drinking. On 16 April 2018, the Health Service Executive (HSE) launched the results of the first dedicated Irish survey on alcohol’s harm to others.¹ The survey was undertaken in 2015 using CATI (computer assisted telephone interviewing) and employed a probability sample. The total completed sample was 2,005 and the response rate was 37.2%. The survey comprised three main parts:

• Harm from others’ drinking (including strangers, co-workers and known drinkers); harm to children from others’ drinking; and alcohol-related domestic problems due to others’ drinking.
• The burden on those around the drinker, for example, caring for the drinker; the burden of specific harms from drinkers with a cost impact; and having to seek help due to the drinking of others.
• The financial burden of harms from others’ drinking, including the estimated cost of caring for the drinker; having to seek public services due to others’ drinking; out-of-pocket expenses; and estimated workplace costs related to co-workers’ drinking.

In the last decade there has been a substantial increase in research relating to alcohol’s harm to others; and international research indicates that a significant proportion of the population has experienced harm from other people’s drinking. On 16 April 2018, the Health Service Executive (HSE) launched the results of the first dedicated Irish survey on alcohol’s harm to others.¹ The survey was undertaken in 2015 using CATI (computer assisted telephone interviewing) and employed a probability sample. The total completed sample was 2,005 and the response rate was 37.2%. The survey comprised three main parts:

• Harm from others’ drinking (including strangers, co-workers and known drinkers); harm to children from others’ drinking; and alcohol-related domestic problems due to others’ drinking.
• The burden on those around the drinker, for example, caring for the drinker; the burden of specific harms from drinkers with a cost impact; and having to seek help due to the drinking of others.
• The financial burden of harms from others’ drinking, including the estimated cost of caring for the drinker; having to seek public services due to others’ drinking; out-of-pocket expenses; and estimated workplace costs related to co-workers’ drinking.

A recent report from the World Health Organization (WHO) demonstrated that almost one-half of Irish drinkers engage in heavy drinking on a regular basis, placing Ireland’s binge drinking rates at the second highest of 174 countries studied.¹ In addition, per capita alcohol consumption in Ireland has trebled over the past four decades,² an increase that has been associated with an earlier age at commencing drinking, with research indicating a rise in alcohol use among students in Ireland and increasing levels of high-risk drinking.³ Policymakers have attempted to combat this problem, as tailoring effective public health policy is crucial in tackling this burgeoning issue. Nevertheless, successive legislation has so far been largely ineffective in addressing the alcohol crisis in Ireland.

Intentional drug overdose (IDO) is the most common form of hospital-treated self-harm, involved in 65–85% of presentations in Ireland, as reported by National Self-Harm Registry Ireland.¹ However, no national study has systematically classified the range of drugs involved using a validated system in Ireland. The Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) system is a World Health Organization-recommended classification system designed to measure drug utilisation at an internationally comparable level.² Recently conducted research aimed to examine drugs taken in IDO according to the ATC classification.³

A report published in December 2017 by Europol provided an overview of how illegal drugs sustain organised crime within the European Union (EU).¹