Insights and Prevention Efforts
By Natalie Gal | News | February 7, 2025
Cover Illustration: Psychologist taking notes, 2025. DC Studio / Freepik
Reporter Natalie Gal interviews Floor van Bakkum, manager of the country’s biggest addiction centre, who provides expert insights into the implications of the new drug-related laws in the Netherlands.
On Monday, 21st October 2024, a law proposal was made in Dutch parliament to raise prison sentences for drug crimes in the Netherlands. Minister Van Weel, Minister of Justice and Security, proposed the law. It builds on the Opium Act, published in 1910, which was later updated in 1976 (famously decriminalising small possessions of marijuana). The bill is currently under review by the Council of State. Once this evaluation is complete, it will proceed to the House of Representatives for consideration before becoming public.
The existing act maintains the maximum prison sentence for possession of hard drugs at 6 years, which would now be raised to 8 under the proposed law. The sentence for international trade and production would also be raised from 8 to 12 years. Finally, the penalty for import and export will be raised from 12 to 16 years.
Under the new proposal, even preparatory acts, such as purchasing large amounts of chemicals and equipment needed for manufacturing, could result in an 8-year sentence.
According to the Central Government report, the reason for strengthening the rules is that the number of judges giving maximum sentences in individual cases relating to drug crimes has significantly grown. The parliament intends to answer the prosecution’s demand by allowing more extensive sentences.
Van Weel explained that the bill is part of the fight against domestic organised crime: “Drug trafficking is the business model of organized crime. (…) By increasing the statutory maximum sentences for serious hard drug offences and bringing them more into line with neighbouring countries, we can hit internationally operating criminals harder.”
Potential Impacts of the New Drug Law Proposal
Floor van Bakkum, manager of Jellinek Prevention—the first addiction center in the Netherlands—discusses the possible implications of this law beyond preventing crime. First, she discusses the effects of decriminalization: “It’s very important not to treat people who use substances as criminals, and that’s why we are always pro-decriminalization of usage of substances, and that’s because we want to make sure that people who use substances are not stigmatized and are able to find their way to help and care and prevention. And by stigmatizing them, you notice that they are going more underground and are not very open about their use, which makes help more difficult.”
Prior research suggests that by criminalizing people who use drugs, they are put into situations posing an extra risk to their well-being. Issues with the justice system might also lead to loss of jobs, loss of living facilities, and getting into more debt, leading to further addiction and troubles with the law. “It’s important that people are given the help they need and are not stigmatised and getting into different problems because of drug use. Also, when you’re in prison, you usually get into contact with other people who are in prison for some reason. Generally, people don’t tend to come out of prison in a better situation; it’s often where they end up getting involved in further crime.
Miss van Bakkum also clarified how prison sentences might not result in successful changes, especially in the long run. While the standpoint of lawmaking is understandable, their work might need to be revised. “I think nobody ever came out of a prison sentence better than they went in. I think that’s something we generally know. So I think it’s more important to ensure people get help, and any kind of penalty should always be focused on that and not on giving people prison sentences,” she asserts.
“When people do start using drugs, you must focus on harm minimization and harm reduction. That means making sure that people have access to the right information about the risks that they’re taking. Having access to the right information makes those risks less risky, so they are used in the safest possible manner.“
Punitive Measures vs. Harm Reduction
Van Bakkum also commented on the law’s distinction between hard and soft drugs. Some countries do not make a distinction, highlighting how the effect of drugs can depend on the individual and their medical background. These countries focus on individual cases and administrative measures rather than criminal prosecution. Doctors and medical professionals also debate the validity of these categories. The current law Van Weel proposed makes this distinction again, as does the Opium Act.
Van Bakkum states that, from the point of view of a prevention expert and in her personal experience, the distinction between soft and hard drugs is a good and valuable one. The distinction is made based on risks and health implications. The creation of coffeeshops as a legal measure explains how legalisation can even be a form of prevention: “We made sure that cannabis was sold in coffee shops in the Netherlands, which was not legal, really, but at least it was tolerated. In that way, we could prevent people who might be using cannabis but were not interested in other drugs from getting into contact with dealers who were also selling other drugs, so people can just buy cannabis at the coffee shop. They don’t have to go to a dealer that also sells cocaine or heroin, so they don’t get offered that kind of substance.”
The work of Jellinek Prevention highlights the importance of supportive and harm reduction-based approaches in addressing drug issues. The Netherlands has long been known for its revolutionary practices, such as distributing clean needles for users or creating a testing center where one can anonymously test on the spot before getting back their substance and receive validity results. These measures are made in the hope of harm reduction, which is an essential method of the Dutch drug policy.
According to Miss Van Bakkum, people who are living in situations where they don’t have the facilities needed for a comfortable life tend to use more drugs. These unstable mental health situations go together with the usage of alcohol or other drugs as the individuals are stuck in unhealthy cycles. So, ensuring that all the necessities are taken care of is a crucial preventive measure. But when prevention fails, harm reduction follows.
“When people do start using drugs, you must focus on harm minimization and harm reduction. That means making sure that people have access to the right information about the risks that they’re taking. Having access to the right information makes those risks less risky, so they are used in the safest possible manner. That means that you, for example, distribute information about it, but also distribute things that people can use safely. (…) We know that people are already using drugs, than make sure that at least they’re doing it as safely as possible.”
Van Bakkum offers a new perspective—a standpoint not only lawmakers but parents, teachers, and every citizen should examine. Instead of waging a perpetual battle against drugs, should we consider accepting their reality and focusing on coexisting with them in a way that minimizes harm and promotes safety?
Jellinek’s work demonstrates that effective addiction care is rooted in understanding, acceptance, and a nonjudgmental approach. Their success in addiction treatment doesn’t come from punitive measures but from creating pathways to support education and harm reduction. It’s about questioning the system rather than the individual, dismantling the stigma, and building new systems and platforms.
If you or someone you know could benefit from the support and guidance offered by Jellinek, comprehensive information, including contact details and locations, is available on their website. Their help is genuine, kind, valuable, and makes a difference.
No further updates on the proposal have been released as of the editorial deadline. Should new information become available, it will be accessible on the Central Government’s website.
Natalie Gal is a university student in Amsterdam. The views expressed here are not necessarily those of The Amsterdammer.
