This chapter critically examines the multifaceted beneficiaries of the UKs continued criminalisation of drug users, highlighting how punitive drug policy serves the interests of powerful institutions while disproportionately harming the marginalised. Despite mounting evidence supporting harm reduction and decriminalisation approaches, the UK persists in enforcing a criminal justice-led model that centres on prohibition, surveillance, and punishment. This approach has been widely discredited on grounds of efficacy, public health, and justice, yet it endures due to the political, institutional, economic, and symbolic gains it provides to key stakeholders. The chapter begins by analysing the role of political actors in sustaining the “tough on drugs” narrative, which functions as a form of moral posturing and political theatre. By framing drug users as a societal threat, politicians are able to appeal to conservative values and middle-class fears, deflecting attention from deeper structural inequalities. Drawing on the work of theorists such as Seddon and contemporary commentators like David Nutt and Stuart Taylor, the chapter explores how drug users have been scapegoated to maintain hegemonic social order. Law enforcement is also identified as a major beneficiary of drug criminalisation. Police forces gain institutional legitimacy and funding through high arrest rates for drug possession—crimes that are relatively easy to detect and prosecute. The use of stop-and-search powers disproportionately targets racialised and working-class communities, reinforcing systemic inequalities and generating a steady stream of low-level offenders into the criminal justice system. Moreover, the existence of drug-related crime provides a rationale for aggressive policing and broader surveillance in marginalised areas. The chapter also considers the economic interests underpinning the UK’s punitive drug policy. The partial privatisation of the penal system and the outsourcing of probation, drug treatment, and testing services have created a carceral economy in which the management of drug users becomes a source of profit. Corporations such as Serco and G4S benefit from contracts to run prisons and deliver criminal justice services, while private treatment providers gain from court-mandated rehabilitation and monitoring schemes. These arrangements produce a system that prioritises compliance and control over care, with limited incentives to adopt more humane or effective models. The media is shown to play a pivotal role in perpetuating these dynamics by fuelling moral panics, stigmatising drug users, and obscuring the prevalence of drug use among privileged populations. Sensationalist reporting reinforces public fears and provides political cover for continued criminalisation, while failing to highlight the social, economic, and racial disparities embedded in drug law enforcement. In conclusion, the chapter argues that the criminalisation of drug users functions less as a policy tool for reducing harm and more as a mechanism for sustaining inequality and institutional power. A transition towards a public health-based model would require confronting these entrenched interests and acknowledging the political economy of punishment. Only by doing so can the UK begin to adopt a rational, compassionate, and evidence-based approach to drug policy—one that prioritises social justice over control.

Who Benefits from the Criminalisation of Drug Users?

章节
发表日期：

2025年

查看全文

Elizabeth Peatfield

摘要

This chapter critically examines the multifaceted beneficiaries of the UKs continued criminalisation of drug users, highlighting how punitive drug policy serves the interests of powerful institutions while disproportionately harming the marginalised. Despite mounting evidence supporting harm reduction and decriminalisation approaches, the UK persists in enforcing a criminal justice-led model that centres on prohibition, surveillance, and punishment. This approach has been widely discredited on grounds of efficacy, public health, and justice, yet it endures due to the political, institutional, economic, and symbolic gains it provides to key stakeholders. The chapter begins by analysing the role of political actors in sustaining the “tough on drugs” narrative, which functions as a form of moral posturing and political theatre. By framing drug users as a societal threat, politicians are able to appeal to conservative values and middle-class fears, deflecting attention from deeper structural inequalities. Drawing on the work of theorists such as Seddon and contemporary commentators like David Nutt and Stuart Taylor, the chapter explores how drug users have been scapegoated to maintain hegemonic social order. Law enforcement is also identified as a major beneficiary of drug criminalisation. Police forces gain institutional legitimacy and funding through high arrest rates for drug possession—crimes that are relatively easy to detect and prosecute. The use of stop-and-search powers disproportionately targets racialised and working-class communities, reinforcing systemic inequalities and generating a steady stream of low-level offenders into the criminal justice system. Moreover, the existence of drug-related crime provides a rationale for aggressive policing and broader surveillance in marginalised areas. The chapter also considers the economic interests underpinning the UK’s punitive drug policy. The partial privatisation of the penal system and the outsourcing of probation, drug treatment, and testing services have created a carceral economy in which the management of drug users becomes a source of profit. Corporations such as Serco and G4S benefit from contracts to run prisons and deliver criminal justice services, while private treatment providers gain from court-mandated rehabilitation and monitoring schemes. These arrangements produce a system that prioritises compliance and control over care, with limited incentives to adopt more humane or effective models. The media is shown to play a pivotal role in perpetuating these dynamics by fuelling moral panics, stigmatising drug users, and obscuring the prevalence of drug use among privileged populations. Sensationalist reporting reinforces public fears and provides political cover for continued criminalisation, while failing to highlight the social, economic, and racial disparities embedded in drug law enforcement. In conclusion, the chapter argues that the criminalisation of drug users functions less as a policy tool for reducing harm and more as a mechanism for sustaining inequality and institutional power. A transition towards a public health-based model would require confronting these entrenched interests and acknowledging the political economy of punishment. Only by doing so can the UK begin to adopt a rational, compassionate, and evidence-based approach to drug policy—one that prioritises social justice over control.