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Please note that this page is a static copy of a previously published web page and is no longer actively maintained.
Be aware that the information contained here may be out-of-date.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-5. Drug law offences related to drug trafficking, 2000 to 2007 [see all tables in this series...]
Part (ii) Methodological notes
| Country | Notes | |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | From 2000 to 2002, data refer to the number of persons and only the main offence is reported, although the same person could be counted several times if arrested several times during the same year. | |
| Before 2000 and 2003-2005, data refer to the number of offences and each offence is represented as one separate record in the database. | ||
| Bulgaria | From 2001 to 2004 offences for 'use and trafficking' were reported twice, in both the category 'use/possession' and in the category 'dealing/trafficking'. From 2005 onwards these offences are included only in their own specific category. This change is likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| 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 subtances in prisons were reported as drug-related crime for the first time. In the past only the number of 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. | |
| 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. This change is likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| Luxembourg | Calculated on arrests for presumed offences against the 1973 drug law. | |
| Austria | The law only distinguishes between small and large quantities. Thus cases of possession and small-scale trafficking have been considered as 'use/possession for use' and cases of possession and trafficking of large quantities as 'dealing/trafficking', | |
| 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 | Since 2004 police have been able to issue cannabis warnings for possession offences of small amounts of cannabis. These are not included in drug law offence data The increased use of cannabis warnings is likely to affect comparability over time. | |
| Croatia | Since 2006, the statistical unit considered is criminal drug law offences (persons arrested in previous years, 2001 to 2004). This change is likely to affect comparability across time. | |
| 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). This change is likely to affect comparability across time. |
(see the help page for information about formats etc.)