THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW

Emine Neval Yılmaz

THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW

Abstract

This article analyzes legal policies regarding substance addiction from medical, psychiatric, and legal perspectives using a comparative law methodology. In light of modern medical data defining addiction as a chronic brain disease, it examines punitive, medicalization/decriminalization, and legal regulation models through case studies of the USA, Portugal, Sweden, the Netherlands, Australia, Uruguay, and Canada. The analysis reveals that purely punitive approaches generate significant social costs, such as mass incarceration and stigmatization, whereas models focused on decriminalization and "harm reduction", as seen in the Portuguese example, yield more successful outcomes in public health indicators. Ultimately, the study suggests that the phenomenon of drugs should be defined not merely as a crime but as a chronic health condition. It recommends that the Turkish legal system establish a rational balance between punishment and treatment within the framework of "therapeutic jurisprudence" principles.

Keywords

References

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press, 2012.
Ali, Farihah, Cayley Russell, Savannah Torres-Salbach, Margret Lo, Matthew Bonn, Geoff Bardwell, Juls Budau, Elaine Hyshka, and Jürgen Rehm. “Experiences of Stigmatization among People Who Use Drugs in the Initial Year of British Columbia's Drug Decriminalization Policy: A Qualitative Study.” International Journal of Drug Policy 139 (May 2025): 104791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104791.
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed., text revision (DSM-5-TR). American Psychiatric Publishing, 2022.
Amnesty International. Death Sentences and Executions 2021. Amnesty International, 2022.
Amnesty International. Death Sentences and Executions 2023. Amnesty International, 2024.
Ashford, Robert D., et al. “The Role of Technology in the Future of Fentanyl and Other Opioid Crises: A Scoping Review and Evidence Map.” Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 117 (2020): 108080.
Australian Government, Department of Health. National Drug Strategy 2017–2026. Commonwealth of Australia, 2017.
Beccaria, Cesare. On Crimes and Punishments (Suçlar ve Cezalar Hakkında). Translated by Sami Selçuk. 13th ed. İmge Kitabevi, 2024.

Beletsky, Leo, Scott Burris, and Alex H. Kral. “Closing the 'Dissociative Interval': A Public Health Intervention to Improve National Policy on Syringe Access.” The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 37, no. s2 (2009): 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2009.00415.x.
Bewley-Taylor, David R. International Drug Control: Consensus and Change. Cambridge University Press, 2012. Busz, Machteld, Katrin Schiffer, Ancella Voets, and Alice Pomfret. “Reframing Dutch Drug Policies: A New Era for Harm Reduction.” Harm Reduction Journal 21, no. 163 (2024): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-024-01071-1.
Chatwin, Caroline. “Mixed Messages from Europe on Drug Policy Reform: The Cases of Sweden and the Netherlands.” Journal of Drug Policy Analysis 11, no. 1 (2016): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdpa-2015-0010.
Cohen, Aliza, Sheila P. Vakharia, Julie Netherland, and Kassandra Frederique. “How the War on Drugs Impacts Social Determinants of Health Beyond the Criminal Legal System.” Annals of Medicine 54, no. 1 (2022): 2024–2038. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2022.2100926.
Colorado Department of Revenue. “Marijuana Tax and Fee Revenue.” Colorado Department of Revenue, 2024. Drug Policy Alliance. Drug Courts Are Not the Answer: Toward a Health-Centered Approach to Drug Use. Drug Policy Alliance, 2011. https://drugpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Drug-Courts-Are-Not-the-Answer_Final2.pdf.
Delam Zade, Ahura, Seyed Salman Karimi, and Mohsen Ramezani. “A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Patients in Methadone Maintenance Treatment in Iran.” International Journal of High Risk Behaviors and Addiction 5, no. 1 (2016): e23223.
EMCDDA (European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction). The Decriminalisation of Drugs in Portugal: A Case Study. EMCDDA, 2015.
EMCDDA (European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction). Germany, Country Drug Report 2017. EMCDDA, 2017.
EMCDDA (European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction). Netherlands, Country Drug Report 2019. EMCDDA, 2019.
European Union. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Regulation (EU) 2016/679, 2016.
Félix, Sónia, Pedro Portugal, and Ana Tavares. “Going after the Addiction, Not the Addict: The Experience of Drug Decriminalization in Portugal.” IZA Discussion Paper, no. 10895 (2017): 1–45.
Germany. Narcotics Act (Betäubungsmittelgesetz – BtMG), 1981.
Greenwald, Glenn. Drug Decriminalization in Portugal: Lessons for Creating Fair and Successful Drug Policies.
Cato Institute, 2009. https://www.cato.org/white-paper/drug-decriminalization-portugal-lessons-creating-fair-successful-drug-policies.
Hari, Johann. Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs. Bloomsbury, 2015.
Harm Reduction International. “What Is Harm Reduction?” Harm Reduction International, 2022.
Health Canada. “Legislative Background: The Cannabis Act (S.C. 2018, c. 16).” Health Canada, 2018.
Health Canada. Renewed Canadian Drugs and Substances Strategy (Horizontal Initiative). Government of Canada, 2024.
Hudak, John, and Christine Stenglein. “Public Opinion and America’s Experimentation with Cannabis Reform.” In Marijuana: A Short History, by John Hudak, 1–18. Brookings Institution Press, 2020.
Hughes, Caitlin Elizabeth, and Alex Stevens. “What Can We Learn from the Portuguese Decriminalization of Illicit Drugs?” British Journal of Criminology 50, no. 6 (2010): 999–1022.
Johns Hopkins–Lancet Commission on Drug Policy and Health. “Public Health and International Drug Policy.” The Lancet 387, no. 10026 (2016): 1427–1480.
Kennedy, Mary Clare, Mohammad Karamouzian, and Thomas Kerr. “Public Health and Public Order Outcomes Associated with Supervised Drug Consumption Facilities: A Systematic Review.” Current HIV/AIDS Reports 14, no. 5 (2017): 161–183.
Kerr, Thomas, Will Small, and Evan Wood. “The Public Health and Public Order Benefits of Supervised Injection Sites.” International Journal of Drug Policy 20, no. 5 (2009): 406–410.
Kleiman, Mark A.R., Jonathan P. Caulkins, and Angela Hawken. Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press, 2011.
Laqueur, Hannah, Ariadne Rivera-Aguirre, Aaron Shev, Alvaro Castillo-Carniglia, Kara E. Rudolph, Jessica Ramirez, Silvia S. Martins, and Magdalena Cerdá. “The Impact of Cannabis Legalization in Uruguay on Adolescent Cannabis Use.” International Journal of Drug Policy 80 (2020): 102748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.102748.
Leshner, Alan I. “Addiction Is a Brain Disease, and It Matters.” Science 278, no. 5335 (1997): 45–47.
Link, Bruce G., and Jo C. Phelan. “Conceptualizing Stigma.” Annual Review of Sociology 27, no. 1 (2001): 363–385.
Lloyd, Charlie. “The Stigmatization of Problem Drug Users: A Narrative Literature Review.” Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 20, no. 2 (2013): 85–95.
Lurigio, Arthur J., Mikaela Rabinowitz, and Justyna Lenik. “A Century of Losing Battles: The Costly and Ill-Advised War on Drugs in the United States.” Justice Policy Journal 6, no. 2 (2009): 1–26.
MacCoun, Robert J. “What Can We Learn from the Dutch Cannabis Coffeeshop System?” Addiction 106, no. 11 (2011): 1899–1910.
MacCoun, Robert J., and Peter Reuter. Drug War Heresies: Learning from Other Vices, Times, and Places. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Marlowe, Douglas B. Research Update on Adult Drug Courts. National Association of Drug Court Professionals, 2010.
Morse, Stephen J. “Criminal Law and Addiction.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Substance and Behavioral Addictions, edited by Kelly D. Brownell, Mark S. Gold, and Mark E. Henry, 531–548. Cambridge University Press, 2019.
Moury, Catherine, and Mafalda Escada. “Understanding Successful Policy Innovation: The Case of Portuguese Drug Policy.” Addiction 118, no. 5 (2023): 967–978.
Musto, David F. The American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press, 1999.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids: The Current State of Evidence and Recommendations for Research. The National Academies Press, 2017.
Nguyen, Hai V., Shweta Mital, Shawn Bugden, and Emma E. McGinty. “Safer Opioid Supply, Subsequent Drug Decriminalization, and Opioid Overdoses.” JAMA Health Forum 6, no. 3 (2025): e250101. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.0101.
Ögel, Kültegin. Smoking, Alcohol, and Substance Use Disorders: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention (Sigara, alkol ve madde kullanım bozuklukları: Tanı, tedavi ve önleme). Yeniden Yayınları, 2010. OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights). The Right to Health. Fact Sheet No. 31. OHCHR, 2015.
Özgenç, İzzet. Turkish Criminal Law: General Provisions (Türk ceza hukuku genel hükümler). 21st ed. Seçkin Yayıncılık, 2025.
Seter, Jason. Uruguay Emerges as New Center of International Drug Trade. Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), 2019. https://www.occrp.org/en/investigations/uruguay-emerges-as-new-center-of-international-drug-trade.
Stevens, Alex. Drugs, Crime and Public Health: The Political Economy of Drug Policy. Routledge, 2010. Tezcan, Durmuş, Mustafa Ruhan Erdem, and Murat Önok. Theoretical and Practical Special Provisions of Criminal Law (Teorik ve pratik ceza özel hukuku). 23rd ed. Seçkin Yayıncılık, 2025.
Thakarar, Kinneret, Kyle Nenninger, and Wondwohson Agmas. “Harm Reduction Services to Prevent and Treat Infectious Diseases in People Who Use Drugs.” Infectious Diseases Clinics of North America 34, no. 3 (2020): 605–620.
Tops, Dolf, Bengt Svensson, and Gala Veldhoen. The Drug Policies of the Netherlands and Sweden: How Do They Compare? Civil Liberties Series LIBE 113 EN. European Parliament, 2001.
Trimbos Institute. Harm Reduction Services in the Netherlands: Recent Developments and Future Challenges. Trimbos Institute, 2022.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). “Use of Codeine, Oxycodone, and Other Opioids: Information for Employees.” EEOC-915-002, 2020.
Uchtenhagen, Ambros. “Heroin-Assisted Treatment in Switzerland: A Case Study in Policy Change.” Addiction 105, no. 1 (2010): 29–37.
United Nations. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961. United Nations, 1961.
United Nations. Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971. United Nations, 1971.
United Nations. United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988. United Nations, 1988.
UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime) and WHO (World Health Organization). International Standards for the Treatment of Drug Use Disorders. United Nations, 2020.
UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime). Sweden's Successful Drug Policy: A Review of the Evidence. United Nations, 2007.
UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime). Drug Policy and Results in Australia. United Nations, 2008. Volkow, Nora D., George F. Koob, and A. Thomas McLellan. “Neurobiologic Advances from the Brain Disease Model of Addiction.” New England Journal of Medicine 374, no. 4 (2016): 363–371. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1511480.
von Hoffmann, Jonas. “The International Dimension of Drug Policy Reform in Uruguay.” International Journal of Drug Policy 34 (2016): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.04.017.
Walsh, John, and Geoff Ramsey. Uruguay’s Drug Policy: Major Innovations, Major Challenges. Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), 2015.
Wexler, David B., and Bruce J. Winick. Law in a Therapeutic Key: Developments in Therapeutic Jurisprudence. Carolina Academic Press, 1996.
World Health Organization (WHO). Guidance on Prevention of Viral Hepatitis B and C among People Who Inject Drugs. WHO, 2012.
World Health Organization (WHO). The Consolidated Guidelines on HIV Prevention, Diagnosis, Treatment and Care for Key Populations. WHO, 2017.
World Health Organization (WHO). International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. 11th ed. WHO, 2022.
World Health Organization (WHO). The Selection and Use of Essential Medicines: Report of the WHO Expert Committee. WHO, 2023.
Zweigert, Konrad, and Hein Kötz. An Introduction to Comparative Law. 3rd ed. Translated by Tony Weir. Oxford University Press, 1998.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Comparative Law

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Emine Neval Yılmaz ^*
0000-0003-2310-0269
Türkiye

Publication Date

May 14, 2026

Submission Date

February 23, 2026

Acceptance Date

March 23, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 2 Number: 1

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA36CJ86BC

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Yılmaz, E. N. (2026). THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW. Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law, 2(1), 91-140. https://izlik.org/JA36CJ86BC

AMA

1.Yılmaz EN. THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW. Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law. 2026;2(1):91-140. https://izlik.org/JA36CJ86BC

Chicago

Yılmaz, Emine Neval. 2026. “THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW”. Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law 2 (1): 91-140. https://izlik.org/JA36CJ86BC.

EndNote

Yılmaz EN (May 1, 2026) THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW. Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law 2 1 91–140.

IEEE

[1]E. N. Yılmaz, “THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW”, Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 91–140, May 2026, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA36CJ86BC

ISNAD

Yılmaz, Emine Neval. “THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW”. Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law 2/1 (May 1, 2026): 91-140. https://izlik.org/JA36CJ86BC.

JAMA

1.Yılmaz EN. THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW. Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law. 2026;2:91–140.

MLA

Yılmaz, Emine Neval. “THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW”. Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law, vol. 2, no. 1, May 2026, pp. 91-140, https://izlik.org/JA36CJ86BC.

Vancouver

1.Emine Neval Yılmaz. THE LONG-TERM RESULTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SUBSTANCE USE AND ADDICTION IN COMPARATIVE LAW. Eurasian Journal of Comparative Law [Internet]. 2026 May 1;2(1):91-140. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA36CJ86BC