The greatest danger with a study of this sort is to exaggerate the significance of the findings. The fact that 46% of all arrestees in the study tested positive for some drug might lead some to conclude that drugs are a major driver of crime in this country. While this may be true, this conclusion cannot be made on the basis of this research alone.

While some drugs are only detectable with the EMIT test within a short period after use, some linger in the system for some time. Chronic users of cannabis can excrete detectable metabolites a month or more after last use. Even methaqualone is detectable up to two weeks after being consumed. Thus, for most drugs, it is impossible to say that users were under the influence at the time of the arrest (which is generally close to the time of the offence). One notable exception to this rule is cocaine, which is often undetectable 48 hours after use. The fact that 65% of white women tested positive for this drug suggests a significant portion of this group were high at the time of committing the crime, and the implications of this fact are discussed in more detail below.

What this study does show is that drug use is common among people arrested for committing a wide range of crimes. While it cannot be concluded that drugs caused the criminal activity, it can be said with some certainty that nearly half the people arrested for crime in the areas studied paid a visit to their local dealer some time in the last month. While we cannot say that most drug users are criminals, we can say that many criminals use drugs. This convergence suggests that the drug markets are central to the lives of many involved in the criminal underworld, and that dealing with the drug markets is likely to have a strong effect on those who engage in all sorts of criminal activity.

While many of those testing positive might not fit the profile of the typical addiction driven criminal, much drug-related criminal activity is likely to evade a study of this sort if the criminals were not themselves users of the drug. The prime example of this would be Nigerian cocaine dealers, who, while not themselves users of the drug, might be compelled to commit (or, more likely, contract out) violent attacks in order to protect their markets and resolve business disputes. The short metabolic life of cocaine and the fact that crack use occurs in binges also suggests that the impact of this drug in particular could easily be underestimated.

A significant finding of this study is the high association of drugs with ethnicity, gender, and geography. Just like the white female cocaine users, the coloured male white pipe smokers of the Western Cape form a distinct group of people involved in crime.

This fact highlights the need for interventions that target the specific needs and concerns of these drug-using groups. These interventions would necessarily be locally based, and the need for local action is an important tenet of South Africa's core document of substance policy, the National Drug Master Plan (NDMP).

The National Drug Master Plan (NDMP)

The NDMP was approved by the South African Cabinet in 1999. It has the following vision: 'to build a drug free society together and to make a contribution to the global problem of substance abuse'. Various priorities identified in the Plan include: crime, youth, community health and welfare, research and information dissemination, international involvement, and communication.

The NDMP is not the first document issued by the state on the subject—it is the culmination of a series of national efforts to come to grips with the drug problem:

Finalised after an extensive consultative process, the South African NDMP recommends the establishment of several executive bodies:

A national Central Drug Authority to oversee and monitor the implementation of the Plan



A Secretariat to oversee the Plan's administration



Action Committees in the 382 magisterial districts to ensure implementation of the Plan and the uniform spread of information and policies in every part of the country



Provincial Substance Abuse Fora to strengthen member organisations in carrying out their existing functions and to keep substance abuse high on the public and political agenda.

Crime was identified as one of six priorities in the NDMP and five goals were identified under this heading:

ensure that the law is effectively enforced, especially against those involved in the supply and trafficking of illegal drugs



to reduce the incidence of drug-related crime



to reduce the harmful consequences of drug-related crime



to reduce the level of drug misuse in prisons



to reduce the level of substance abuse among road users.

While the NDMP represents considerable progress in the nation's attempt to deal with drugs, it is still a document with some serious flaws. At its core, the goal of creating a 'drug free society' is unrealistic, and reflects the failure of the drafters to come to terms with some of the most important community inputs. While it mentions harm reduction and the possibility of decriminalisation, it does not take a position on either issue, and one gets the sense that these policy approaches were tagged on at the last moment. On the other extreme, the drafting Committee failed to enlist the full participation of the Department of Safety and Security.

The NDMP is mainly a 'plan to make plans', with no clear strategies of its own and no articulated action steps. Perhaps most significantly, NDMP does not come with a budget, and is therefore very limited in the kinds of activity it can undertake. It is hoped that funds can be raised from within government to allow the CDA to undertake its work.

On the up side, the Central Drug Authority does include a greater civil society component than previous similar bodies. The CDA is required to report annually to Parliament and is to be aided by a dedicated Secretariat. Unfortunately, the Secretariat had not yet been appointed by the beginning of 2002, although a two million rand budget has been presented to the Department of Social Development. The empowerment of this Secretariat is essential, as the CDA members themselves are busy professionals with many other responsibilities.

It is too early to judge whether the CDA will emerge as a major player in national drug policy, or whether the lack of funding, clout, and dedicated capacity will ultimately result in the NDMP becoming just another hollow declaration of intent. Early meetings have resulted in the creation of an executive committee, five working groups, and the identification of a set of 20 priorities. The working groups have begun to discuss some intriguing matters, including a national media campaign, research into cannabis policy, and a review of alcohol advertising.

The present study reinforces the focus the NDMP places on the creation of local drug action teams and provincial substance abuse fora. Strategies for dealing with these issues clearly need to be based in a sophisticated understanding of local dynamics. The CDA needs to ensure that national policies do not conflict with local initiatives, and needs to dedicate a substantial amount of its energy to getting local bodies active in areas of high levels of substance abuse. Given that the most problematic drug markets are concentrated in a few limited areas, the ambitious goals of the NDMP are best served by concentrating on these problem spots.

The study also highlighted the importance of the NDMP focus on youth, since 66% of those arrestees under the age of 20 tested positive for drugs. The present facilities for diversion of addicted youthful offenders are extremely limited, and considerable attention needs to be paid that we are not jailing children who are simply in need of medical attention.

The association between drug use and previous arrest emphasises the role drugs can play in recidivism. Over half of those who tested positive had an arrest history, while only 27% of those who tested negative did. Whether drugs caused the initial descent into crime or not, drugs do reinforce a marginal lifestyle and can make it harder for those with a record to reintegrate into society. The correctional facility is intended to rehabilitate offenders, and one of the best places to start is with the issue of substance abuse. Unfortunately, much qualitative research indicates that drugs are even more readily available in prison than on the streets, and that the boredom of prison life may make substance use more attractive than it otherwise would be. This may ultimately explain the fact that a history of past arrest is a good predictor for substance use in this study. Urgent attention to this issue is needed.

Given that substance abusers of all ages need special attention, the idea of specialised drug courts has been mooted. While more expensive and subject to 'dumping' of case loads from other courts (with corresponding delays in the justice process), these courts could be staffed by those with the training and experience to evaluate the substance issues of arrestees and to make decisions based on the range of treatment options available. Of course, specialist drug courts cannot reach those accused of non-substance-related crimes where drugs are not clearly implicated.