TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIME

“"Therefore, we commit ourselves to:...Resist the enormous threat posed by narcotic traffickers, by implementing the UN conventions against drugs, and intensifying efforts to put traffickers behind bars and prevent them from laundering their money."

Grade: 0

Background
The United Nations (UN) has had a long history of attempting to curb the threat that is posed by the international dealing in illicit drugs. In 1961, the UN adopted the Single Convention on Narcotics Drugs, which was followed ten years later by the Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Building on these past achievements, the UN approved the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances on December 19, 1988. (1) The 1988 Convention is comprehensive and outlines what constitutes an illegal narcotics offence; gives guidance regarding how the judiciaries of UN member states should deal with such offences; provides for the confiscation of drug-related profits, illegal substances, and illegal drug-processing equipment; and requires that signatories adjust their laws in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. The Convention also establishes guidelines for appropriate extradition procedures, and other forms of international cooperation in the prosecution of those accused of narcotic-related offences. In addition to these measures, the UN General Assembly's Political Declaration and Global Programme of Action, adopted on February 23, 1990, calls on member countries to curb international drug trafficking by limiting the global markets that exist for narcotics traffickers through such means as implementing policies that discourage the use of illegal substances, and which seek to treat and rehabilitate drug abusers.

Analysis
While the Canadian government has undertaken some actions to curb narcotic trafficking since the Lyon Summit, such actions do not appear to have been taken with the above UN documents in mind. Therefore, it cannot be said that Canada is fully in compliance with its above commitment. Measures adopted by Canada have included participating in discussions with the Guatemalan government on drug- related issues, after which Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy stated that "...Canada will do whatever it can to help [the Guatemalan government] deal with corruption, narcotics trafficking and terrorism, and to establish the rule of law." (2) As well, on September 21, 1996, the UN-associated Inter-Parliamentary Council, of which Canada is a member, unanimously endorsed a set of recommendations on the implementation of the results of the World Summit for Social Development. These recommendations included provisions that urged governments to strengthen domestic laws regarding money laundering, organised crime, narcotic trafficking, and the seizure of money acquired through illegal drug deals. (3) Furthermore, on December 19, 1996, Canada agreed to renew the Canada-Mexico Memorandum of Understanding on the fight against drug trafficking.

There are a couple of reasons for why these measures cannot be seen as bringing Canada into full, or almost full compliance with its commitment to curb international drug trafficking and money laundering. First, neither the above actions, nor the sources consulted in preparing this study make significant reference to, or provide for the further curbing of money laundering in Canada. This aspect of the commitment, therefore, does not seem to have been adequately addressed. Second, in announcing the measures described above, no mention was made of their having been motivated by the desire to further implement the 1988 UN Convention or the 1990 Programme of Action. Consequently, the extent to which such actions are in line with these UN documents must be judged as being largely by chance, and therefore, cannot be said to constitute a fulfilment of Canada's commitment to implement the UN agreements. (4)

Nonetheless, the actions taken by the Canadian government are not insignificant enough to warrant a complete dismissal. For instance, Foreign Affairs Minister Axworthy's statement about providing the Guatemalan government with assistance in dealing with narcotic trafficking could reasonably be seen as a public statement of intent for future action that would involve a commitment of resources should they be required. The same could be said of the government's endorsement of the Inter- Parliamentary Council's set of recommendations for fighting international drug dealing and for the measures to combat it. The renewal of the Memorandum of Understanding with Mexico also presumably entails a commitment of resources or other assistance by the Canadian government. Finally, the above actions illustrate that fighting international organised crime and drug dealing is a priority for the government. Thus, although Canada cannot be said to be in full compliance with its commitment, the above measures illustrate not only the government's acknowledgement of its responsibilities to curb international drug trafficking, but also its efforts to act upon those responsibilities in the post-Lyon Summit period. A grade of zero, therefore, is warranted.