You are viewing archived content
Please note that this page is a static copy of a previously published web page and is no longer actively maintained.
Be aware that the information contained here may be out-of-date.
For the most recent information, we recommend visiting the main website of the EMCDDA.
Table DLO-1. Drug law offences, 1995–2011
Part (iii) Methodological notes
| Country | Notes | |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | Before 2000 and 2003-2005, data refer to the number of offences and each offence is represented as one separate record in the database. | |
| Since 2006 data refer to the number of offences and only the main offence and the main substance is mentioned. Offences without a specified substance are included. These changes are likely to affect comparability across time. | ||
| Bulgaria | Since 2005 persons arrested for drugs and precursors related to supply law offences are also reported. | |
| Czech Republic | For number of reports of offences initial reports for ascertained drug related offences and persons prosecuted for primary drug related crime according to Penal Code and drug-related misdemeanours are included. For number of reports of persons only initial reports for number of persons prosecuted for primary drug related crime according to Penal Code are included. | |
| Estonia | Since 2007, data are provided by a different source and include both the number of offenders and the number of offences. In addition, the delivery or distribution of narcotic substances in prisons were reported as drug-related crime for the first time. In the past only the number of main offences was provided. This change is likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| Ireland | In 2007 responsibility for reporting crime data transferred to a different agency. The new agency reassessed the data for 2005 and 2006 on the basis of information held in a new Garda IT system. This change is likely to affect comparability of the data across time. | |
| Italy | From 1985 to 1994, data include only persons charged with criminal offences held under restriction were reported. From 1995, persons charged with criminal offence but at liberty were included in the submission. Before 1997 only criminal offences were included in the submission. From 1997 onwards, non criminal offences (sentenced by administrative sanctions) are included in the submission. For the three years 2002, 2003 and 2004, persons for whom the substance is not known were included in the submission. These have been excluded from the table as after 2004 they ceased to be reported. These were respectively 34282, 34256 and 32608. These changes are likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| Latvia | Since 2007, data are provided by a different source, providing number of offenders and number of offences. Previously only data on the number of offenders was reported. 2007 also marks a large increase in the number of offenders reported. Since 2007, data are provided by a different source and include both criminal offences and/or administrative violations. In addition, different methodology and calculation procedures were applied. This change is likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| Luxembourg | Due to a complete upgrade of the RELIS database, since 2007 data is not comparable with data from previous years. | |
| Hungary | In case of number of offenders, statistics refer to the most serious offence committed by an offender and the year of the offence is the year during which criminal investigations were closed rather than the year during which the offences were committed. Since 2011 the subject of the offence was recorded for all offences, unlike previous years. The category "use and trafficking" is no longer used in the ENYUBS statistical system. These changes are likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| Netherlands | Data refer to cases registered by the Public Prosecutor. | |
| Austria | Up to and including 1998, the total number of reports for drug law offences includes reports for drug-related deaths. From 1998 onwards, the total number of reports for drug law offences includes psychotropic substances and precursors. | |
| Portugal | Since July 2001 drug use and possession for use have been decriminalized and made an administrative offence. Data on such offences, although included in this table, come from a different monitoring system. 2001 data should be treated with caution since this new monitoring system was being tested for the first time. | |
| Romania | Since 2009, data are provided by a different source (the Superior Council of Magistracy), providing number of persons convicted under national drug legislation (Law 143/2000). Previously data on the number of persons suspected were reported. This change is likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| Slovakia | Up to and including 2005, the unit reported was suspected offenders. No data is available for 2006, during which year a new criminal code was introduced. From 2007 onwards, the unit reported is offenders convicted according to the new criminal code. This change is likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| Finland | Since 2002, data are provided by a different source. This change is likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| United Kingdom | Previous data has been on an offender (person basis). Since 2005 data are based on an all drug offence basis, except for Northern Ireland, which continues to be on a principal drug (i.e person) basis. | |
| Turkey | 2002 data refer only to police data, while after 2002 data refer to all data reported by the main prosecuting authorities (police, gendarmerie, customs). Since 2009 data refer to both narcotics units and police stations actions. This change is likely to affect comparability across time. |