Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T02:26:14.556Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The New Dutch and German Drug Laws: Social and Political Conditions for Criminalization and Decriminalization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2024

Sebastian Scheerer
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The “drug wave” of the late 1960s was widely perceived as a threat to the legitimacy of normative expectations in Dutch and German society. Although the overwhelming reaction of public opinion to drug users in both countries was hostile and punitive, the German legislature passed even more repressive laws whereas the Dutch legislature adapted the normative system to the use of both “soft” and “hard” drugs. Although in each instance the initiative for legal change came from the political and moral “progressives,” the conservative “moral center” retained a veto power. Why it used this veto power in Germany but actively supported the reform bill in Holland is explained in terms of the macrostructure of each society.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 12 , Issue 4: Special Issue on European Sociology of Law , Summer 1978 , pp. 585 - 606
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 The Law and Society Association.

References

BAAN, H. P. A. (1972) Background and Risks of Drug Use. Report of the Narcotics Working Party. The Hague: Government Publishing Office.Google Scholar
BAUER, Günter (1971) Rauschgift: Ein Handbuch. Lübeck: Römhild.Google Scholar
BEAN, Philip (1974) The Social Control of Drugs. London: Martin Robertson.Google Scholar
BECKER, Howard S. (1963) Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
BIANCHI, Herman (1975) “Social Control and Deviance in the Netherlands,” in Bianchi, H., Simondi, M., Taylor, I. (eds.) Deviance and Control in Europe. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
BLANKENBURG, Erhard and Hubert, TREIBER (1975) “Der politische Prozess der Definition von kriminellem Verhalten,” 7 Kriminologisches Journal 252.Google Scholar
BLASIUS, Dirk (1976) Bürgerliche Gesellschaft und Kriminalität. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BLUM, Richard H. and Mary Lou, FUNKHOUSER (1965) “Legislators on Social Scientists and a Social Issue: A Report and Commentary on Some Discussions with Lawmakers about Drug Abuse,” 1 Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 84.Google Scholar
BUNDESÄRZTEKAMMER (1970) “Gesundheits-, Sozial- und ärztliche Berufspolitik. Tätigkeitsbericht der Deutschen Ärztekammer 1969/70 an den 73. Deutschen Ärztetag,” 67 Deutsches Ärzteblatt—Arztliche Mitteilungen 1745.Google Scholar
CAGLIOSTRO, Anthony (1974) “New York's New Drug Laws—An Analysis,” 4 The Journal of Drug Issues 117.Google Scholar
CARSON, W.G. (1974) “The Sociology of Crime and the Emergence of Criminal Laws: A Review of Some Excursions into the Sociology of Law,” in Rock, P. and Mcintosh, M. (eds.) Deviance and Social Control. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
CHAMBLISS, William (1969) “A Sociological Analysis of the Law of Vagrancy,” in Quinney, R. (ed.) Crime and Justice in Society. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
COHEN, H. (1975) Drugs, druggebruikers en drug-scene. Alphen aan den Rijn: Samsom.Google Scholar
COHEN, H. (1976) “Het drugbeleid in Nederland: een pijnlijke bevalling,” 6 delikt en delinkwent 12–17.Google Scholar
DEUTSCHER, BUNDESTAG (1970) Verhandlungen des Deutschen Bundestages. 6. Wahlperiode. Anlagen zu den stenographischen Berichten. Vol. 144, Drucksache 1414. Bonn: Hans Heeger.Google Scholar
DEUTSCHER, BUNDESTAG (1971a) Verhandlungen des Deutschen Bundestages. 6. Wahlperiode. Anlagen zu den stenographischen Berichten. Vol. 147, Drucksache 1877. Bonn: Hans Heeger.Google Scholar
DEUTSCHER, BUNDESTAG (1971b) Stenographisches Protokoll über die 49. Sitzung des Rechtsausschusses des Deutschen Bundestages, 6. Wahlperiode 1969, am 14.5. 1971.Google Scholar
DICKSON, Donald T. (1968) “Bureaucracy and Morality: An Organizational Perspective on a Moral Crusade,” 16 Social Problems 143.Google Scholar
DIETZE, Lutz (1972) “Antidrogengesetz und Drogenprobleme,” 120 Goltdammer's Archiv 129.Google Scholar
ERIKSON, Kai T. (1966) Wayward Puritans: A Study in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: John Wiley & Son.Google Scholar
ETZIONI, Amitai (1968) The Active Society. A Theory of Societal and Political Processes. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
FEEST, Johannes, Hans, HAFERKAMP, Rüdiger, LAUTMANN, Karl F., SCHUMANN and Jörg, WOLFF (1977) “Kriminalpolitik und Sozialstruktur,” 9 Kriminologisches Journal 1.Google Scholar
GADOUREK, Ian and J.L., JESSEN (1972) “Proscription and Acceptance of Drug-taking Habits in the Netherlands,” 3 Sociologica Neerlandica 14.Google Scholar
GAEDT, Frigga, Christian, GAEDT and Karl-Heinz, REUBAND (1976) “Zur Rauschmittelberichterstattung der Tageszeitungen in der Bundesrepublik and West-Berlin,” in Reuband, Karl Heinz (ed.) Rauschmittelkonsum. Wiesbaden: Akademische Verlagsanstalt.Google Scholar
GALLIHER, John F., McCARTNEY, James L. and Barbara E., BAUM (1977) “Nebraska's Marijuana Law: A Case of Unexpected Legislative Innovation,” in Galliher, J. F. and CcCartney, J. L. (eds.), Criminology: Power, Crime, and Criminal Law. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
GOUDSBLOM, Johan (1967) Dutch Society. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
HALL, Jerome (1952) Theft, Law, and Society. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
HEINZ, John P., Robert W., GETTLEMAN and Morris A., SEESKIN (1969) “Legislative Politics and the Criminal Law,” 64 Northwestern University Law Review 277.Google Scholar
JASINSKY, Michael (1973) Rauschmittelkonsum Hamburger Schuler. Zweite Repräsentativbefragung an Hamburger Schulen. Berichte und Dokumente Nr. 387 Hamburg: Staatliche Pressestelle.Google Scholar
KREUZER, Arthur (1975) Drogen und Delinquenz. Wiesbaden: Akademische Verlagsanstalt.Google Scholar
LEONHARDT, Rudolf W. (1970) Der Haschisch-Report. München: Piper.Google Scholar
LINDESMITH, Alfred R. (1965) The Addict and the Law. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
LÜDERSSEN, Klaus (1972) Strafrecht und “Dunkelziffer“. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
LÜDERSSEN, Klaus and Fritz, SACK (eds.) (1975) Seminar: Abweichendes Verhalten II—Die gesellschaftliche Reaktion auf Kriminalität, Vol. I, II. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
LUHMANN, Niklas (1964) Funktionen und Folgen formaler Organisation. Berlin: Duncker und Humblot.Google Scholar
MEIJRING, K.M. (1974) Recht en verdovende middelen. Ph.D. Dissertation, Faculty of Law, Den Haag.Google Scholar
NEDERLANDSE STICHTING VOOR STATISTIEK (ed.) (1970) Drugs in Nederland, Vol. I. The Hague: Saxen Weimarlaan.Google Scholar
NETHERLANDS MINISTRY OF PUBLIC HEALTH (1977) Non-medical Use of Drugs in the Netherlands. The Hague: Ministry of Public Health.Google Scholar
NOELLE-NEUMANN, Elisabeth (ed.) (1971) Allensbacher Berichte Nr. 11. Allensbach am Bodensee: Institut für Demoskopie.Google Scholar
NOELLE-NEUMANN, Elisabeth (1972) Allensbacher Berichte Nr. 8. Allensbach am Bodensee: Institut für Demoskopie.Google Scholar
NOELLE-NEUMANN, Elisabeth (1977) Allensbacher Jahrbuch der Demoskopie Vol. VII. Vienna: Molden.Google Scholar
PETERSOHN, Franz (1972) “Das Rauschmitteldesaster,” 9 Grundlagen der Kriminalistik 531.Google Scholar
PLAGET, Jean (1955) The Child's Construction of Reality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
POPITZ, Heinrich (1968) Über die Präventivwirkung des Nichtwissens. Dunkelziffer, Norm und Strafe. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
QUINNEY, Richard (1969) “Introduction: Toward a Sociology of Criminal Law,” in Quinney, R. (ed.) Crime and Justice in Society. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
RUSCHE, Georg and Otto, KIRCHHEIMER (1939) Punishment and Social Structure. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SCHEERER, Sebastian (1977) “Rauschmittelmissbrauch. Juristischkriminologischer Beitrag,” in Sieverts, R. and Schneider, H.J. (eds.) Handwörterbuch der Kriminologie, Vol. II. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
SCHEERER, Sebastian (1979) Die Genese der Betäubungsmittelgesetze in den Niederlanden und in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Münster, West Germany: University of Münster, Department of Criminal Sciences (doctoral thesis).Google Scholar
SCHUMANN, Karl F. and Michael, VOSS (1976) Control System in the Federal Republic of Germany. Basic informations. Presented at the 4th Conference of the European Group for the Study of Deviance and Social Control, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, September 1976.Google Scholar
SMELSER, Neil J. (1962) Theory of Collective Behavior. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
STEINER, Gilbert Y. and Samuel K., GOVE (1960) Legislative Politics in Illinois. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
SUTHERLAND, Edwin H. (1969) “The Diffusion of Sexual Psychopath Laws,” in Quinney, R. (ed.) Crime and Justice in Society. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
SUTHERLAND, Edwin H. and Donald R., CRESSEY (1974) Criminology (9th edition). Philadelphia: Lippincott.Google Scholar
TURK, Austin T. (1976) “Law as a Weapon in Social Conflict,” 23 Social Problems 276.Google Scholar
WALDMANN, Helmut, Rüdiger, BOEHM and Manfred, MROCZKOWSKI (1971) “Rückschrittliche Reform,” 26 Juristenzeitung 612.Google Scholar
WORMSER, Rudi (1976) “Manifester Inhalt und latente Vorurteile der Drogenberichterstattung” in Reuband, K.H. (ed.) Rauschmittelkonsum. Wiesbaden: Akademische Verlagsanstalt.Google Scholar
ZIMMERMANN, Robert (1972) “Tendenzen der Presseberichterstattung in der Rausch- und Suchtmittelfrage” in Schäfer, H. (ed.) Grundlagen der Kriminalistik, Vol. IX. Hamburg: Neutor.Google Scholar
ZURCHER, Louis, George, KIRKPATRICK, Robert G., CUSHING and Charles K., BOWMAN (1973) “The Anti-Pornography Campaign: A Symbolic Crusade” in ViViona, Ch.M. (ed.) The Meanings of Deviance. New York: MSS Information Corp.Google Scholar