The third Summit of South American-Arab Countries (ASPA) commenced today in Lima, Peru. Ministers from twelve Latin American countries and 12 countries from North Africa and Middle East countries will meet for two days to discuss ways to cooperate together.

Brazilian President Dilma Rouseff called on Latin American and Arab countries to work together against poverty and inequality.

“The future of our regions depends on our ability to develop and cooperate, strongly investing in education, science, technology and expansion and innovation to guarantee the security of food and energy, important issues in the 21^st century,” President Rouseff said.

The ASPA website explains the similarities between the regions saying, “The paths of history are converging as both regions share the same interest in economic and social progress, environmental preservation and intercultural dialogue as a means to create sustainable development and build world peace for all”.

President Rouseff spoke about the situation in Syria. “Brazil is in favor of a negotiated settlement to resolve the conflict,” she said. She spoke about Iraq and Libya stating that Brazil wants to contribute to the reconstruction of those countries, but she knows it is up to those countries themselves.

In addition to the summit, there is the third ASPA Business Meeting innagurated by Peruvian President Ollanta Humala and Secretary General of the Arab League, Nabil el-Arabi.

Average life expectancy in Latin America rose from 29 years in 1900 to 74 years in 2010 according to a study released today by the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO).

The study was presented this morning at the 28^th Pan American Sanitary Conference. While Latin America has made great achievement in health care, the report remarks that there are still major inequalities.

Dr. Mirta Roses, PAHO director, said that Latin America as a whole is more healthy today than it was in 1900, but she also addressed the problems that the region faces moving forward.

“After reviewing the most recent developments in population health and its determinants in the Americas, we have to get to work urgently and energetically to make this region a more equitable and sustainable home for all its current and future inhabitants,” Roses said.

Today, 98% of children live past their first birthday while only 75% of children did so in 1900. That being said, infant mortality varies greatly by country. For example, in Cuba, there are 4.8 deaths for every 1,000 live births, while in Bolivia there are 50.

While problems still remain, the report noted that Latin America has made great progress on the global scale of health.

LATIN AMERICA- A report commissioned by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) says that climate change could cost Latin American and Caribbean countries USD$100 billion a year by 2050.

The report reflects attitudes of growing environmental awareness as Brazil prepares to host the UN’s Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in Rio de Janeiro from June 20-22.

This cost was calculated using the collectively agreed upon temperature rise of 2C from pre-industrial levels.

The reported highlighted the collapse of the coral bio dome in the Caribbean, the disappearance of glaciers in the Andes, and destruction of forest in the Amazon basin.

Despite the grave news, the report also indicates that Latin America has made progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which have decreased by 11% since the start of the century.

The IDB report urges the region to continue reducing emissions and said that it should aim for less than 2.2 tonnes of emissions per capita. In order to ensure this goal is met, the IDB said it would be necessary to invest around $110 billion a year.

As quoted in Reuters “The report concludes that a pathway that promotes land-use policies stringent enough to achieve zero net emissions … by 2030, combined with efforts to eliminate the carbon footprint in the power and transport sector by 2050 (along with other actions), would achieve the 2 tonnes per capita.”

Yesterday, the human rights organisation Amnesty International named the impunity that often surrounds violations of human rights a “norm” in Latin America.

In their annual report named “The State of the World’s Human Rights 2012”, presented yesterday in London, Amnesty International analysed human rights abuses, for example those found in the police, justice system, those against indigenous people, immigrants and women and children if Latin American countries.

The report denounced violations of human rights in Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, Honduras, Venezuela, Guatemala and Colombia.

The report noted that: “Many human rights cases made slow progress, obstructed by the
absence of meaningful access to justice,” among other factors. The organisation criticised particularly the “threats against and killings of human rights defenders, witnesses, lawyers, prosecutors” as well as the increased targeting of journalists in the above countries.

The report did, however, point out “significant advances in the investigation and prosecution of past human right violations,” naming cases in Brazil, Argentina and Bolivia, Haiti and Colombia.

However, the Amnesty International report also noted that these advances are significantly overshadowed by the current situation of serious human rights abuses that plagues many Latin American countries.

“Important though these cases were, they were the exception, and impunity for human rights violations remained the norm,” said the report.

LATIN AMERICA – Today, Standard and Poor’s Ratings Service (S&P) published a report titled, “Latin American And the Caribbean: Holding Steady So Far, But Risks Loom.”

The report suggests that economies in Latin America and the Caribbean are growing steadily but their high debt burden and dependency on foreign markets put them at risk.

S&P predicts growth in Latin America to average 3.6% in 2012 and 3.4% in 2013. This is over a full percentage point lower than 2011’s figure of 4.3%.

The report includes strong predictions for Mexico and a weaker outlook for Brazil, as compared to the ratings service’s last report on the region. Brazil has experienced a sharp turndown in its economic expansion since 2011 due, in part, to the global recession and competition from foreign imports.

Caribbean growth is lower still, which S&P’s report links to their dependency on foreign markets and limited flexibility. GDP here is rising on average at 1.8% in 2012 and predicted to grow at 2% in 2013.

Referring specifically to the Caribbean, S&P’s credit analyst, Kelli Bissett, was quoted in Reuters.

“Compounding the economic decline and sluggish recovery are structural weaknesses, including lower national savings rates than those of other emerging market countries, persistent current account deficits, and a high reliance on external financing.”

While S&P’s report predicts instability in markets, others are pointing to Latin America as possibly hosting, “new tigers.” Marketwatch released a special report today naming Peru and Colombia as two of the strongest emerging economies in the world.

Peru holds the world’s second-largest copper and silver production and also houses impressive gold reserves in a market where commodities are extremely valuable.

Colombia’s household earnings are growing fast and the country has received investment rankings from S&P, Moody’s, and Fitch, encouraging foreign investment especially in light of the new trade agreement with the United States.

World Press Freedom Day took place on 3rd May this year, celebrated in cities around the world. Sponsored by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Science, and Cultural Organisation), the event’s purpose is to examine the promise and challenges facing media of various forms, as well as inform citizens on violations of press freedom that continue to this day.

In Latin American countries, the press has made many important strides, often through some of the most difficult present day conflicts. In cases such as Mexico and Honduras, however, reporters are frequently intimidated and targeted for violence by members of organised crime. In other countries, such as Venezuela and, to a debatable extent, Ecuador, hostile relationships between the government and certain parts of the press have produced censorship.

In order to find out what residents of Buenos Aires think about the current state of press freedom in Argentina and throughout Latin America, we took to the streets and asked for some opinions.

Photos by Kamilo Hernández

Jorge Alberto Vajanella, 62, Caballito, Public Accountant

Here in Argentina, freedom in the press is very broad. No matter who or where you are, you can say what you want. In the newspaper, on television, on the radio, on the streets, wherever. In Mexico, of course, there is a profoundly serious problem, and in Venezuela the government has considerable control over media and communications. I think the press faces repression in Chile as well, partly because of the right-leaning government. In general, I think the press in Latin America is becoming freer every day, and young people have the resources to continue this trend in the future.

Christian Savloff, 25, Caballito, Works in Film Post-production

I think it’s important to highlight that the press has commercial interests beyond informing us, like Clarín’s role here in Argentina, as well as La Nación. While the point is to truly inform us, in many cases there is a lot of subjectivity, so the reporting is not objective. In places like Venezuela, the government can be very fanatical and tilt the press in favour of Hugo Chávez. To me, respect for the media is very important. I think that if you educate people with various points of view, they will listen and decide.

 
Sara Martínez, 25, Palermo, Works in Fashion/Design

For me, I don’t read the newspapers here as much as I see the news on television or listen to it on the radio. There are plenty of channels, with many different programs, and people can choose from a variety of perspectives to interpret what is going on. I think the trend in Venezuela, with radio stations and newspapers censored by the government, doesn’t seem very good to me because it is cutting away freedom in the press.

 
Angel Benitez, Caballito, 36, Hotels and Tourism

Throughout Latin America, each country’s situation is very different, and the image of the real community we have here gets complicated by propaganda. In Argentina, liberty in the press is very divided. Some think the press is very free, some don’t, and there are also particular situations when it is and it isn’t. Ideologies among citizens and certain outlets will influence how one sees things. I think the background problem uniting all Latin American countries has to do with education. The formation of values, the small details. Partly as a result of fear, partly because of insecurity, the values that truly unite Latin Americans have gotten lost. People are on guard. To me, the fundamental problem is educational, and it’s something that has to change not just in schools, but especially in the family.

Laura Fraguas, 23, Belgrano, Medical Student

I think there is freedom of press in Argentina. I don’t really know the full context of other examples in Latin America, but I think that here, it is free. There exist programs like that of [Jorge] Lanata, or 6-7-8, as well as many that give a full spectrum of political views and information in Argentina. Freedom in the press exists here.

Journalists protest against rising violence during march in Mexico (Photo courtesy the Knight Foundation)

On the 3^rd of May, as the world celebrated Freedom of the Press Day, three journalists were found dead in Mexico. The mutilated bodies of photographers Gabriel Huge, Esteban Rodríguez, and Guillermo Luna were found in Veracruz state chopped up and discarded in a canal, the complete disregard for human life on full display for the world to see.

Just five days ago the body of Marco Antonio Ávila García was discovered in Ciudad Obregón, north-western Mexico. Strangled and wrapped in a plastic bag, the crime reporter was victim to an increasing trend that has been sweeping the Latin American country. His fault? Telling the truth.

Criminal Oppression

García was the fourth journalist this month to be found murdered in Mexico, a tactic being used by organised crime gangs to install fear in press who are speaking out and reporting on crime. As the intensity of the fighting between organised crime groups and government forces has increased, the tolerance of journalist’s reporting has waned. These journalists have been killed with the same brutality as the crime cartels are treating each other, showing the level of threat the gangs consider freedom of press to be.

Speaking to Carlos Martín Lauría, Senior Coordinator for the Americas at the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), he considers this violence to be one of two major issues with the freedom of press in Latin America. CPJ is a non-profit organisation that was set up in 1981, while many Latin American countries were still ruled by dictatorships, and which has ardently covered threats to, and fought for, freedom of press in the world.

A poster of Alfredo Villatoro, found dead last week

“One problem [with media freedom in Latin America] is the violence against press where organised groups have increased their pressure on journalists reporting on trafficking, corruption and crime.” Lauría states. “They are being specifically targeted.”

“Mexico right now is probably the worse case scenario,” He continues. “The country has become one of the worst places for journalists to work, not only in the hemisphere, but also around the world.” Since the Felipe Calderón government took office in 2006, and started an offensive against organised crime, levels of violence have increased at a rapid pace. This violence has also been directed at members of the press, who tirelessly work to expose gang exploits, while also acting as a watchdog for army forces – since then, 45 journalists have been murdered.

Similar attacks have occurred in Honduras and Northern Guatemala, areas that have been increasingly deteriorating due to the heightened presence of the drug trafficking gangs. In Honduras, journalists Alfredo Villatoro and Erick Martínez Avíla were both found dead in the last few weeks. Villatoro, who worked for the news station HRN, was kidnapped on the 9^th May. His body was found, with shots to the head on the 15^th. According to the International Press Institute, Villatoro was the 23^rd journalist to be killed in the Central American country since the coup d’état that overthrew President Manuel Zelaya in 2009. This year, despite the fact Honduras has 7% of Mexico’s population, the same number of journalists have been killed in both countries.

Lauría hints that part of the violence in Central America is intrinsically linked to their northern neighbour. ”The presence of Mexican cartels can be felt now in Central America, especially in northern Guatemala, where the criminal cartel organisation known as the Zetas is having a big presence. Also in Honduras, the presence of the cartels is creating a lot of problems as that is the place where there has been the most murders, per ratio, according to UN reports.”

Honduras has the additional problem of a government that is not entirely committed to bringing justice to these killings. Lauría describes a CJP report in which the NGO “are calling on the government to break the acts of impunity that surround all these investigations.”

So does this mean there is no hope for journalists while organised crime is widespread in the area? “We know there is no magic solution, but we still need to ensure freedom of expression,” says Lauría.

Journalists are ill prepared in their fight against organised crime, but will not be silenced either. (Photos courtesy of Knight Foundation)

The Pen is Sharper than the Sword

Despite the continuing violence, journalists and support networks are making a stand for themselves, and for their work. CPJ and other press support organisations continually lobby for international organisations to pressure governments for change. CPJ has travelled to Honduras and Mexico in recent years to compile reports on stifling of press and present them to the UN Council on Human Rights to demand for change. On Friday in Honduras, a march organised by the Colegio de Periodistas de Honduras will take place across the country, in a stand against the killings, and general intimidation of press.

A recent study by Reporters Without Borders asked if journalists are best prepared against organised crime, with an answer a resounding ‘no’.

“It is clear from this report that the media are not united against organised crime, their correspondents are isolated and lack resources, and their capacity for investigative reporting is eclipsed by the race for breaking news,” the report claims.

Reporters Without Borders, another NGO which monitors and advocates for global press freedom, released the report claiming that they believe the way for journalists to combat this violence is for them to strategically work together, especially in countries where the governments might not be reliable enough.

Journalists should be “pooling information and sources,” while calling “for the creation of journalists’ associations that can help to guarantee the independence of their media and prevent murky financial interests from influencing editorial choices.”

Both Sides of the Law

But it is not just the extremity of the violence that is stifling freedom of press in Latin America. Below the headline grabbing aggressive tactics of the cartels, there is a culture of soft censorship that is threatening the freedom of press in a less explicit way.

“The second problem [with freedom of press] is the fact that some democratically elected leaders in Latin America are practising unconstitutional methods in an attempt to stifle press,” Lauría warns. “Venezuela is perhaps the most stark example of this, followed by Ecuador and Nicaragua.”

In the case of Ecuador, back in February, the high court decided to uphold a criminal libel conviction brought against newspaper El Universo by President Rafael Correa. The leader of the South American country filed a lawsuit against the paper after they published a column by journalist Emilio Palacio, criticising Correa and his treatment of the police uprising in March 2011. In a column titled ‘No to Lies’, Palacio referred to the president as a ‘dictator’ and blamed the action of the army troops, who killed three police officers during protests, on Correa. The court decided the paper had to pay US$40 million in damages and sentenced Palacio and the three owners of the paper to prison for three years. Palacio has since filed for political asylum in the United States.

Journalists Protest against rising violence during March in Mexico (Photos courtesy of Knight Foundation)

“This demonstrates that you can prosecute not only the clowns, but also the owner of the circus,” said Correa in response to the decision. He argues that the press organisations in Ecuador are corrupt and run by biased opposition parties, who funded El Universo, and who should not be allowed to “buy a printing press.”

After the case Lauría released a statement saying that “this short-sighted ruling will only keep Ecuadoran journalists from investigating powerful politicians; it represents a serious setback for democracy in Ecuador.” In reference to this case, he says that although Correa has since pardoned Palacio and El Universo, it was only due to international pressure. “It’s for the international community to be aware that this censorship has been going on.”

In Ecuador, the conflict between the press and the government has been intensifying in the lead up to the 2013 presidential election. Standing by his previous assertion that the press are too powerful and corrupt, the president has stood by his decision to change an electoral law, which will limit press coverage of the event. Critics of the press in Ecuador argue that their influence is too politically motivated and that they have unleashed a self-serving campaign against the government in order to suit their own economic interests.

In the case of violent attacks on journalists, the government has a role, however effective it may be, which is to stand up for the press. When it is the government itself threatening the freedom, NGOs such as CPJ, Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, and many others make it their job to bring these cases to media attention.

Lauría argues that a constant spotlight on exploitation of the outlets of speech is the key to ensuring a more open flow of information. “It is up to inter-governmental institutions like to Organisation of American States (OAS) to protect freedom of expression.”

The UN declaration for Freedom of Press Day clearly states, that “freedom of information is a fundamental human right.”

Across Latin America the free state of the press has improved significantly within the last decades. But while acts of aggression, be they legal or physical, are exercised on journalists, the level of threat remains unacceptable.

As Carlos Lauría so conclusively puts it, “what is being affected is more than the right for journalists to report the news, but also the rights of freedom of expression and access to information.”

To find out what Argentines think about the state of freedom of the press in Latin America, click here.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (CIDH) has presented an overview of the current regional prison situation in “Report on Human Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas,” in which it voices concerns over unsatisfactory prison conditions and overcrowding.

The paper denounced the structural deficiencies of the prison and state negligence toward elements that conspire against the rehabilitation of people living in prison.

The organisational body of the OAS Human Rights also highlighted the lack of protection of vulnerable groups, lack of employment and educational programmes and lack of transparency in prison management.

According to data published in the report, Uruguay, Mexico, and Venezuela are the countries that invest the least in their prisons, while the Bahamas is the largest contributor.

Moreover, the commission expressed that in various countries in the region, the inmates spend long periods in detention before being charged and brought to trial.

The document also reports the use “of torture for purposes of criminal investigation,” and the “use of excessive force” as well as preventative detention.

Finally the organisation calls on the regional states to guarantee the rights of persons deprived of their liberty and to ensure decent conditions of detention.

Translated from Pulsar

Arguably one of the most important announcements to come out of the recent Summit of the Americas, next week on 15^th May the United States and Colombia will officially enter into a free trade agreement.

Colombian politicians have named the move a “win-win situation” and a “unique opportunity” for the country. The new agreement aims to bring economic prosperity to Colombia, getting national products into the international market and increasing foreign investment, as well as producing an estimated 500,000 new jobs.

The agreement between the countries has generated controversy, however. At the centre of the debate lies the complaint that union violence, which is rife in Colombia and which was supposed to be eradicated before the agreement came into place, has not yet been dealt with.

How do Argentines feel about free trade with countries like the US? What are the pros and cons of free trade in the Latin American region? Should Argentina relax its own import restrictions and follow Colombia’s footsteps? The Argentina Independent hit the streets of Buenos Aires to find out.

Photos by Natasha Ali

Marcelo Cerdi, 44, Teacher, San Isidro

Simply put, I’m in favour of the economic policy that we have in place currently here in Argentina. I think it’s good that we have more restrictions on goods that we import, and with a bigger emphasis on national products. I pretty much agree with what they’re doing in that respect. I think that the methods they are using suit the country that we’re living in. This is a country that has a lot of pending issues. More than anything, I believe in politics that integrate the whole of Latin America; by that I mean that certain countries should complement each other economically. I think this is the direction we should be going in. The development of this country has been stunted because of economic and political policies that weren’t necessarily the most favourable option for growth and I think that’s the direction in which our policies should be heading.

Maria del Carmen Diambrosis, 52, Teacher, Vicente Lopez

It seems to me that every country in the whole of Latin America needs to be more unified economically; there should be one Latin American economy and trade. We need to now be more careful about what enters the country in terms of imports, because after the Menem years in the 90s, we saw that the economic policies essentially closed up industries. Nowadays, we have been left with normal jobs, teaching, driving taxis, and we can’t compete with big economies like China and what comes in to our country from those countries. There needs to be a common Latin American market, with all the Latin American countries working together, and not with the US. If there was a common market, it would generate competition. It seems to me that it would mean that we could compete economically with the big players, the imperialists.

Jose Bengler, 37, Artisan Worker, Palermo

I’m not an expert on this, but there are some things that I can see anyway. I know that, for example, Argentina and the Argentine state have produced certain restrictions on products that are imported. For me, it seems like a good idea that governments are regulating the economy, that not everything is free or open in the market. It seems like a good idea, a good decision, to have some amount of restriction. In terms of something like Colombia agreeing to free trade, it seems to me, while they can open their doors to trade without restrictions with other countries, there should still be some measures to protect the country’s own products, to protect the work that is done by the people. To me that’s very important.

Vincent Nilesi, 42, Engineer, Palermo

I don’t know a whole load about the issue of free trade but I’m aware that certain agreements like this one between the US and Colombia exist. I work in [the production] industry, so I’m aware of difficulties caused by the economic policies this country has adopted. I am faced with certain problems that exist because of tighter restrictions in terms of trade, with material that we import, and use to make products for example. These tougher import restrictions generate a lot of problems. Because of this, I think we should be much more open in terms of trade between countries. Being more open to the idea of free trade is a good idea: these harsh restrictions are nationalist, not in the way we may know it, but it’s a nationalism that affects local companies through its taxes.

Yanet Capalbo, 19, Cadet, Villa Lugano

I don’t know much about the subject specifically in terms of the trade agreement between Colombia and the US. Free trade is almost like neo-liberalism, it’s a really liberal economic idea. But apart from what it could do economically for any country, for me the concept of free trade doesn’t seem like a good idea because of what it can do to the people, how it could affect them. I feel that free trade is especially bad for workers. In the context of big companies and free trade, workers are always left with less.

With the attention of the world focused on the Americas for this month’s Summit of the Americas, the war on drugs that has cost so many lives was high up on the agenda. For the first time, leaders from both continents were speaking openly about the prospect of changing tactics in the fight against the narcotrafficking trade. The Argentina Independent took to the streets of Buenos Aires to gauge the public’s opinion: is the war on drugs working, and is it even a war worth fighting?

Photos by Lillo Montalto Monella

Luis Fernando, 36, musician, Bogotá (Colombia)

They are never going to win [the war on drugs] – just by prohibiting something doesn’t mean that people are going to stop doing it.

I believe that if it becomes legalised, there’s a high chance that the consumption and the sale will calm down a lot. Because the war, with force, won’t be won, ever. No one ever wins with repression whether it is with prison or fines  or what have you, it’ll never be won that way.

It’ll be very difficult to legalise it even now but I see it more possible than before. Before it seemed impossible, now – even though it’s very difficult – it appears to be possible, let’s hope so. Politicians, even presidents have come out and said that it could be a good idea; before, that was impossible.

If one country legalises, maybe a second, third etc will follow. It’s the same as with same sex marriages – in the beginning it was unthinkable but now that the first has started, the second and third will come. I don’t think there will be a union where all the countries legalise it at once – we’re all South Americans but we’re all different, each country has its own very particular culture.

Adriana Nancy Papandrea, 27, craftswoman, Mataderos 

My idea is that everything should be legal, everything. Then you have to teach people and make them conscious of the fact that ‘if you consume this, such and such will happen, it’ll do this to you’. At the most, try and teach people, educate them they should take care of their body, nothing else. Everyone should be able to do what he wants with their body and their lives as long as they don’t hurt others.

If someone tells you that this will do X to you, that certain drugs will… actually I don’t know, in reality I don’t believe that certain drugs make you do bad things, I think that’s in each person whether or not you do harm to others.

Are drugs bad for your health? Yes but so is drinking and smoking two packets of cigarettes a day, but I don’t think they’re necessarily bad for society.

For me, the reason it’s not legal is that it’s a business for people who don’t want it to change. As for what would happen to the drug traffickers, I don’t know – I imagine that they don’t want it legalised.

I think marihuana, sooner or later, will be legalised here. For personal consumption it’s pretty much legal already.

Néstor Herrera, 40, leather worker, San Antonio de Padua (Buenos Aires Province) 

The governments can win [the war on drugs]; there must be a way. Legalising drugs, for me, represents crossing a limit which later will be very difficult to go back on, and that’s a very big problem. It will create other problems and it will break through certain limits – I get the impression that psychologically limits create a certain level of control in the society. If we break through that, we lose our boundaries.

The best way to combat the drug black-market is to provide a strong education; that’s all you need at the start. If the people have a very good education, they would be able to overcome them [the drugs], for their own sake they would be able to do it. As long as there is ignorance, poverty and marginalisation, there will always be a pathway to hard drugs. A good education is very important and it’s a possible solution.

José Cifuentes, 73, craftsman, Ramos Mejía (Buenos Aires Province)

I am completely against drugs, absolutely, I am a drug virgin. It is something that is very harmful, it’s not the same as a glass of wine or a cigarette – which are harmful too, but they don’t have the same cancer, the same contagion.

You have to cut the narcotrafficking here and in anywhere else in the world at its roots. If they had the balls to do it they would, but it doesn’t suit them because there is so much money behind it. It needs to be fought with force.

There are people who are possessed who think that in one way or another, there should continue being drugs, misery and ignorant people because they are necessary evils.

There should be a war against drugs, but this isn’t a war. When you hear people talking on the radio, on television, read them in the newspaper and they all think they’ve got the solution to the world’s problems with what they say, and they can’t even find a solution to this.

Pablo Soane, 52, Shop worker, San Telmo 

The war can’t be won because there is too much money involved and money buys weapons, power, minds, politicians and the police. With money you can buy anything. It is an unfair fight. Who sells the best drugs? The police – so it doesn’t make sense. Narcotraffickers are very powerful and they can keep buying their power, whether from the right or the left, it’s the same.

Clandestine or legal, it will go on the same. It’s like prohibition in the United States, the people who sold the booze, sold it the same afterwards. They just sold it at twice the price.

You should legalise drugs and maintain control over how they are sold so you don’t find them at the school gates. Like in the Netherlands, where they have a permissive attitude. The difference will be that there are less people in prison and the police don’t get as much business. It’s a way of taking work away from the police.

If drugs are legalised, the consumption will go down. They should be legal with strict rules: not in schools, not for minors. etc… and that way you can maintain sales standard and it can be done.