Drug Court 'should remove rigid abstinence conditions'

The Dublin Drug Treatment Court was set up in 2001, as an 18-month pilot. It can receive referrals of people who have pleaded guilty to a non-violent drug-related offence, or have been sentenced, for consideration. Picture: iStock

The Dublin Drug Treatment Court should scrap its “rigid abstinence” conditions for drug users to graduate from the programme, according to an external evaluation.

The review also urges that the court focus on individuals who are at high risk of re-offending and most likely to otherwise receive prison sentences — and exclude people charged with possession or other minor drug-related offences.

In addition, evaluators recommend the practice of excluding people who have committed violent drug-related offences be reconsidered — citing research from abroad indicating that they may achieve the “most significant benefits”.

The evaluation, commissioned by the Department of Justice, was carried out by the Centre for Justice Innovation, a Scottish criminal justice research charity.

The Dublin Drug Treatment Court (DTC) was set up in 2001, as an 18-month pilot. It can receive referrals of people who have pleaded guilty to a non-violent drug-related offence, or have been sentenced, for consideration.

If they are assessed as suitable, and they voluntarily agree to take part, their charges/sentencing is paused and if they engage satisfactorily, their charges are struck out.

The evaluation said that despite undergoing three previous evaluations — in 2002, 2005, and 2010 — “low referral numbers” to the court and questions about its effectiveness had persisted.

The report said graduations from the court were “relatively rare”, with just 105 people making that stage since 2001.

“Low graduation rates were almost unanimously viewed as a byproduct of the abstinence-focused model,” the evaluation stated.

Figures gathered for the review show:

*Referrals remained steady at around 56 between 2010 and 2014, jumping to 170 in 2016 and falling to 117 in 2024;

*Admissions were broadly similar in trend, at around 30 between 2010 and 2014, rising to 104 in 2016 and falling thereafter, reaching 34 in 2024;

*In terms of percentages, there was a relatively high admission rate between 2010 and 2016 — generally between 40% to 60% of referrals - falling to just 29% in 2024;

*Graduation levels were higher between 2010 and 2014 — peaking at 40% in 2012, with eight people graduating — falling to just 5% in 2016, rising to 15% (five people) in 2024;

Practitioners told the evaluation team that low referral numbers reflected a “lack of awareness” of the court among judges. Practitioners also said some judges viewed the court as “ineffective”.

To progress, participants have to demonstrate commitment to the “demanding expectations” of the court, including attendance and participation in an “intensive” education programme.

The report recommended the graduation criteria be changed to include “meaningful reductions” in drug use, along with stabilisation and improvements in well-being, rather than “rigid abstinence”.

• Cormac O’Keeffe, Security Correspondent