The implementation of rehabilitation provisions in the drugs Act17/2011 of Maldives

Abstract

The Drugs Act 17/2011 of the Maldives, while criminalising drug use, permits rehabilitation for both first-time and repeat offenders, including voluntary rehabilitation without criminal charges. However, since its implementation in 2011, drug offences have increased, and those seeking treatment have failed to complete the programme and return to society as law-abiding citizens. This prompts the need to evaluate the Act’s implementation, with the purpose of identifying issues related to the enforcement of rehabilitation provisions under the Drugs Act 17/2011 of the Maldives, and discovering the reason for the exponential growth in numbers related to drug-related crimes in the Maldives. This research, using a qualitative doctrinal method, analysed the drug framework from two primary aspects: (1) punishment under the laws of the Maldives and (2) rehabilitation and treatment offered in the country. To analyse the first aspect, the research utilised the benchmark under Section 10 of the Constitution of the Maldives, which requires the laws to be fully compliant with Shari’ah. Any law that is in contravention would be deemed unconstitutional. Using this benchmark, the concept of punishment for drug offences was identified in Shari’ah literature, and it was established that the punishments for drug offences in the Maldives were in compliance with Shari’ah ta’zir. For the second aspect, the objectives and purposes of Shari’ah regarding rehabilitation and treatment were analysed. It showed that Shari’ah requires the provision of treatment and rehabilitation as a fundamental objective for those requiring treatment. Furthermore, analysis was conducted on conventional rehabilitation models and other modern Shari’ah-based rehabilitation models to relate them to the Maldivian rehabilitation model. It showed that the Maldives has codified in detail the rehabilitation and treatment for drug addicts, and these treatments were found to be compliant with Shari’ah. The research also focused on the Malaysian drug framework, a country similar to the Maldives. However, unlike the Maldives, Malaysia has a successful system for managing the influx of drugs and providing rehabilitative treatment with positive results. It was found that Malaysia has given priority to a community treatment and rehabilitation model, which is not found in the Maldivian drug framework. Moreover, regarding the punishments, it was found that although both countries' punishments for drug offences are fully compliant with Shari’ah, the approach to punishment for drug offences in the Maldives is much more lenient than in Malaysia. The research then focused on identifying the monitoring and rehabilitation authorities established under the drug framework of the Maldives. It was found that two key actors were established in the Maldives: the Drug Court and the National Drug Agency. Failures in the system were generally attributed to issues related to these establishments. Conflicting laws and a lack of oversight functionality in the drug framework led to multiple system failures. It was identified that most drug addicts in need of treatment were denied due to various factors, which could be addressed if the rehabilitation and treatment strategy of the Maldivian drug framework included enhanced oversight functionality and was redrafted into a positive, health-centric model to accommodate everyone needing treatment, as proposed in this research. The findings of this research will help stakeholders address the issue of enforcement failures and promote a more viable rehabilitation and treatment model that is humane, Shari’ah-compliant, and in accordance with international best practices.