For decades, Sweden has pursued one of Europe’s strictest drug policies, characterized by zero tolerance and a repressive view of both use and small possession. In other countries, however, there has been a gradual change, with both decriminalisation and legalisation of certain drugs being tested in the hope of reducing both abuse and drug-related crime. Sweden is going in the opposite direction – here consumption is even criminalized, which means that the police, on only a vague suspicion, can require individuals to provide urine or blood samples to show whether they may have smoked cannabis before.
This tough stance has also made the drug market extremely lucrative, something that has led to an escalation of violence and crime, where Sweden is now facing one of Europe’s bloodiest gang wars. The question is whether a change in Sweden’s drug policy could help reduce both addiction and gang-related violence?
Minister of the Environment Romina Pourmokhtari and the Liberal dilemma
US presidential candidate Kamala Harris recently took a stand for the legalization of cannabis on the platform X (formerly Twitter). Among those who liked the post was Sweden’s Minister of the Environment, Romina Pourmokhtari, which received a lot of attention. One of Sweden’s largest newspapers, Aftonbladet, reported on her reaction with the headline “Harris’ narcotics promise on the Internet is liked by the Minister of the Environment.” However, the headline was met with criticism and was later changed to “Environment Secretary Likes Harris’ Marijuana Post.”
Pourmokhtari, Sweden’s youngest minister ever, has a history of challenging Swedish drug policy. During her time as chair of the Liberal Youth League, she worked for a reform of the strict drug policy and emphasized the importance of a more humane and science-based approach. After becoming a minister, many activists and cannabis smokers have expressed disappointment, as they believe that she has abandoned her previous positions. However, the question remains whether Pourmokhtari has really changed her mind or whether she is waiting for the right opportunity to put forward her previous visions.
Police focus: Users instead of complicated gang crimes
A telling example of the police’s zeal in the fight against drugs was recently noted when the police in Stockholm tweeted about a drug offence where a person was reported for possession and personal use. This incident highlights how the Swedish drug policy, with its zero tolerance, leads to a misguided prioritization.
Despite the increasing violence and gang crime, the police devote considerable resources to hunting down and punishing users, while gang conflicts escalate and lead to both murders and injuries, often even to innocent civilians. This hard line against drug users can be seen as a pathetic misprioritization at a time when resources are needed more than ever to counter organized crime and protect the public.
The rule of law and democratic principles are undermined by populist laws
In recent years, Sweden has introduced several surveillance laws, often motivated by the ongoing fight against drugs and organized crime. These laws have often been criticized for compromising the rule of law and democratic principles.
A recent example is the new law that came into force on November 8, 2024, which gives the police expanded powers to seize and confiscate assets such as money, watches and cars from people in criminal circles, even in situations where crimes cannot be proven. This law has been introduced despite the fact that there is already similar legal support and that several important bodies have advised against its introduction.
Critics believe that such laws risk undermining the rule of law by giving the police tools that can be used in a way that is contrary to fundamental democratic principles. This raises questions about the balance between effective law enforcement and the protection of individual rights in a democratic society.
A new way forward is needed for Swedish drug policy
Swedish drug policy, with its focus on zero tolerance and prioritization of users, appears outdated and ineffective in light of today’s challenges. While gang violence is claiming lives and organized crime is growing, a hard line against individual users remains the priority – a strategy that seems to reinforce the very problems it seeks to solve. The populist legislation of recent years, designed in the name of control and security, has instead led to an erosion of the rule of law and democratic principles.
There is a growing need for a more humane and science-based drug policy, where resources are reallocated from the hunt for users to the fight against organised crime. By reconsidering and adapting legislation to today’s society, Sweden can meet the real threats and at the same time restore the democratic values that should characterize law and justice.