In the United States of America and Canada, there are "drug courts" or "drug treatment courts": these are specialised chambers or courts that offer drug treatment programmes to defendants. The aim is to reduce the risk of recidivism, but also to give people with a drug problem a second chance to reintegrate into society. In 2008, a similar project was started in Ghent: the Drug Treatment Room (DBK) was born.
The operation of the DBK
The Drug Treatment Chamber (hereafter 'DBK') is a specialised chamber that is part of the court of first instance, which offers the opportunity for a defendant to work out and follow a pathway - under the supervision of the DBK - with a view to treating his or her drug problems before he or she is sentenced. If this pathway is successfully completed, it will be taken into account in the final sentence. If not, the drug treatment chamber will immediately proceed to pass the final sentence.
In the DPC - as in a "normal" correctional chamber - there is a Chairman, a member of the public prosecutor's office and a registrar. The Chairman and the member of the public prosecutor's office specialise in drug matters. What makes the DBK different is that the accused is accompanied for some time by a justice assistant, with whom he/she is put in contact. This justice assistant supports and assists the accused during the preparation and implementation of his/her treatment programme. In this way, the judicial assistant forms the bridge between the court and (drug) assistance.
The conditions for appearing before the DBK
One cannot simply appear before the DBK. Some admission requirements are:
- the accused must confess to the charges;
- the accused should acknowledge the existence of a drug problem and show willingness to work on it;
- Any offence caused by drug and or alcohol use is eligible to be dealt with by the DTC. This means that the offences would not have occurred without the drug problem because the addiction is at the root of the offence. It can therefore include violent offences, but excluding moral offences and life offences. Note that drug sales for profit cannot be dealt with by the DTC, except when one committed such offences to finance his own use;
How is a case submitted to the DBK?
Initially, the public prosecutor selects the cases that can be heard before the DBK. In doing so, the public prosecutor will check whether the admission conditions have been met and whether effective punishment is necessary, after which the accused is directly summoned to appear before the DBK.
Since it is not always easy to decide whether a case can be heard before the DBK, the judiciary provides a correction option for defendants who have been summoned before another chamber. Thus, a defendant, possibly through his lawyer, can request a referral to the DBK at the introductory hearing of the chamber for which he was summoned.
After hearing the defendant's motivation and the opinion of the prosecution, it remains the appreciation of the judge before whom the case was brought whether or not to accede to this request. The judge will postpone the case indefinitely and request the accused to appear voluntarily before the next DBK hearing.
The actual appearance before the DBK
The accused must first appear at the introductory hearing, where the prosecution explains in its claim why the accused was summoned before the DBK. Afterwards, the judge will discuss the facts in detail with the accused. At this hearing, the willingness of the accused to be accompanied will be probed. If so, the DBK will refer the accused to the judicial assistant, who will then draw up a counselling plan together with the accused, as well as possibly conducting a social survey
One month later, the orientation hearing follows. At the orientation hearing, the defendant must present a treatment plan which he or she must support with the necessary supporting documents. The treatment plan covers all areas of life in which the defendant has problems (such as housing, work or education, administration, financial situation, reimbursing any civil parties, etc.). This treatment plan is accepted or adjusted, after which it can begin.
Several follow-up hearings will follow afterwards to evaluate the ongoing treatment process. The accused will have to demonstrate by means of documentary evidence that he or she has made the necessary commitments and submit interim reports. The public prosecutor will motivate the accused to continue the course of treatment in a positive way, or point out the seriousness of the facts, the possible punishment and the importance of continuing the course of treatment, if it should fail.
If an unmotivated or manifestly uncooperative attitude of the accused should persist, a final hearing will be held immediately and a verdict will be passed by the DBK.
After the accused has completed a successful treatment path, the final hearing is organised, where the case is heard on the merits. The assessment of the case will take this trajectory into account. For example, instead of an effective punishment, the DPC will be able to impose a probation measure in accordance with which the accused must comply with further conditions for a certain period of time.
In my view, it would be highly desirable to organise such a DBK within every court of first instance, given its stated purpose. The operation of the DBK demonstrably and significantly reduces recidivism risk by referring the individual to counselling rather than effectively punishing him or her. In such procedure, the focus is on the person and a thorough approach to the problem, while punishment is used as a ultimum remedium.
