Owen Bonnici has pledged “consensus building” in the wake of the Opposition’s stand on partial decriminalisation of drug use.

The Justice Minister said the White Paper on drug decriminalisation out in the coming days was wide ranging and would provide “fertile ground for a healthy national debate”.

The Nationalist Party yesterday outlined its stand in favour of diverting drug users away from the courts and towards a board that guides them to find help.

This approach would consider drug use as a health issue rather than a criminal offence but repeat offenders would eventually end up in court, in what can be described as a half-way approach towards decriminalisation.

Dr Bonnici yesterday said the government would work “tirelessly towards consensus building on this issue” but stopped short of saying whether he agreed with the conditional decriminalisation proposed by the PN.

Repeat offenders would eventually end up in court in what can be described as a half-way approach to decriminalisation

“The ministry believes the position adopted by the PN provides a sharp contrast to the negative stand adopted by [PN MP] Jason Azzopardi a few days ago in Parliament,” he said. The reference was to Dr Azzopardi’s criticism in Parliament of Dr Bonnici’s initiative to read out a letter from a reformed addict who was jailed for drug-related crimes years after he had already kicked the habit.

The debate on drug decriminalisation has occasionally cropped up on the back of cases involving youngsters arrested in possession of drugs for personal use. But the major parties had in the past opposed decriminalisation.

In November 2012, at the height of the Daniel Holmes case, a Briton jailed for 10 years for cannabis cultivation, both parties insisted the criminal deterrent had to remain in place even if they agreed the law should be lenient with first-time users. Changes to the law proposed by the then PN government had suggested first-time users of any drug be handed a warning, counselling and possibly community service rather than a criminal record.

The changes never came into force and, although the PN’s fresh stand on drug decriminalisation broadly follows the same principles, the focus has shifted to a health-based approach.

But part of the debate will be whether leniency should also be extended to repeat offenders, who may not necessarily want or need help.

The PN’s position follows that of Joe Sammut, head of the National Commission on the Abuse of Drugs, Alcohol and other Dependencies, a government agency.

In April Mr Sammut insisted he was not in favour of de-penalising the persistent use of drugs.

“We believe users should be given chances but if this behaviour continues other measures should be taken, including facing criminal repercussions.”

It was a sentiment shared by Fr Emanuel Cordina from the Oasi Foundation, a drug rehabilitation centre in Gozo, when speaking to this newspaper yesterday. “I am concerned about the semantics of the words being used to describe what is happening,” he said, adding that decriminalisation meant that something society believed was a crime would no longer be considered so.

With more than 20 years’ experience of dealing with drug addicts, Fr Cordina said he disagreed with decriminalisation and expected politicians to be clear on the use of words.

“Why should we make drug use a non-criminal act? Why afford preferential treatment to drug use and not theft?”

Fr Cordina insisted that a drug addict not only harmed himself but created a social and economic burden on his family and society.

While affording drug addicts every help possible, the criminal deterrent had to remain in place, he added.

He favoured “de-penalisation” instead of decriminalisation and called for a specific drug court to be set up where the magistrate would have the leeway and discretion to determine what penalty was best suited for the case at hand.

“Drug taking should remain a crime because otherwise we will be sending out the wrong message even though the magistrate should have the power to postpone a prison sentence,” Fr Cordina said.

He noted that the Constitution included the right to life and this obliged politicians to legislate in such a way as to defend life. Removing the criminal aspect of drug use went against this obligation, he added.

But a senior government health official, a doctor who asked to remain anonymous, insisted the criminal penalty should be removed for drug users.

“Possession of illegal drugs for personal use should remain an offence but not prosecuted criminally. There should be no prison time for drug use and it should not tarnish users’ conduct,” he said.

However, he was coy when asked about the PN’s proposal to cap leniency for repeat offenders, pointing out that being caught the first time did not necessarily mean the individual had used drugs for the first time.

“Treating this person as if this was a first-time offence would not necessarily help the user,” he said, adding that other problems normally triggered drug use.

The upcoming debate, he said, would have to determine whether decriminalising the use of drugs should apply indefinitely and what the alternatives to prison should be.

It should also focus on the meaning of personal drug use and whether this should be defined at law with quantity thresholds for individual drugs.

Where the debate will go still has to be seen but the PN’s proposals have provided the initial fodder for what seems to be a bipartisan approach to drug use.

What the PN wants

• Individuals caught with simple possession of drugs for personal use should not face court action.

• Drug users should appear in front of a board that includes medical professionals that will guide them to seek help.

• No distinction should be made between different drugs as long as they were for personal use.

• Repeat offenders should face criminal punishment.

• Personal drug use should not be defined at law by strict quantity thresholds, giving the police discretion to evaluate circumstances.