Dutch Tolerance: On Drugs, Prostitution and Euthanasia

Introduction

Introduction: Dutch tolerance has long been a defining characteristic of Dutch culture, but recent events, such as the 2004 murder of filmmaker Theo van Gogh, have raised questions about whether this tradition of tolerance is being eroded. The murder was committed by a Muslim fanatic, and it was linked to the controversial film Submission by van Gogh and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, which criticized the oppression of women in Muslim cultures. The case exemplified tensions between Dutch values of tolerance and the rise of radicalism, prompting debates about how tolerance is understood and applied in modern Dutch society.

1. Understanding Tolerance in Dutch Culture: Tolerance in the Netherlands has evolved over time and is an integral aspect of both cultural and legal frameworks. It has been primarily associated with pragmatic acceptance of diversity, particularly in religious and cultural matters.

a) Historical Conception of Tolerance:

• Religious Tolerance: Initially, tolerance in the Netherlands emerged as a response to religious differences, with early Dutch tolerance focused on religious tolerance and coexistence. Over time, this evolved into a broader acceptance of cultural differences, with the Dutch prioritizing social harmony over imposing uniformity.

• Cultural Tolerance: Tolerance expanded beyond religion to encompass various cultural and social differences. It became a way to defuse conflicts and promote peaceful coexistence in a multicultural society.

b) Pragmatic Acceptance:

• Dutch tolerance has been historically pragmatic, aimed at maintaining societal peace and stability through acceptance of different views and lifestyles. This form of tolerance allows people to coexist peacefully despite holding different beliefs or practices, but it has limits, particularly when actions are perceived to threaten public order.

2. Conceptions of Tolerance in the Legal Context: In addition to its general cultural meanings, tolerance in the Netherlands has taken on several legal connotations, especially in the areas of crime and regulation. Tolerance in the legal context is not just about accepting difference but is a tool used by the government to address morally sensitive issues and manage societal challenges.

a) Tolerance as Leniency in Criminal Law:

• Incivilities and Petty Crime: In this context, tolerance refers to a lenient approach to minor offenses and nuisance crimes. Instead of applying strict penalties, authorities may adopt a more relaxed approach, opting to ignore or decriminalize certain behaviors that are considered socially acceptable or relatively harmless.

• This lenient approach has been applied to issues such as drug use, prostitution, and euthanasia, where the state allows certain actions to continue without imposing harsh criminal sanctions.

b) Tolerance as Governmental Indifference:

• In some instances, tolerance in the Netherlands has come to signify governmental indifference or apathy toward certain illegal activities. This is particularly true for activities like drug use or prostitution, where the government takes a "don’t ask, don’t tell" approach and does not actively enforce laws in specific areas unless the behavior leads to serious harm.

3. Tolerance as a Legal Concept:

• Deferment of Sanctions: The legal concept of tolerance in Dutch law allows the government to refrain from imposing sanctions for specific infractions in certain circumstances. This has created a unique legal approach where not all illegal activities are subject to legal enforcement. For example, low-level drug use or small-scale prostitution may be tolerated without criminal penalties as long as they do not result in significant harm to society.

• Pragmatic Problem-Solving Tool: Tolerance has also evolved into a pragmatic tool for resolving societal issues without strict legal enforcement. It is often used as a strategy to minimize negative consequences that might arise from overly strict enforcement of laws. For instance, strict regulation or criminalization of minor infractions might lead to overcrowded prisons or disproportionate punishment for non-harmful behaviors.

4. The Policy of Tolerance in Dutch Law:

• Regulated Tolerance: A distinct characteristic of Dutch legal culture is the idea of a "policy of tolerance," which allows certain behaviors to continue without legal interference, provided they do not pose a significant threat to public order or safety. This is most visible in the regulation of drugs, prostitution, and euthanasia, where the government has created legal frameworks that allow for tolerance of these behaviors, subject to specific regulations and controls.

• Drugs and Prostitution: The Netherlands has long had a policy of regulated tolerance regarding drugs and prostitution. While these activities are technically illegal, they are regulated in a way that prevents legal enforcement from disrupting the lives of those involved in them. For example, drug use is tolerated in certain contexts, such as within specific spaces or quantities, and prostitution is legal and regulated to ensure the safety and rights of sex workers.

• Euthanasia: Similarly, euthanasia is allowed under strict legal conditions in the Netherlands, and the government tolerates this practice as long as it meets legal criteria. The state ensures that euthanasia is conducted with appropriate safeguards, recognizing the complex moral issues involved while allowing individuals the right to make autonomous decisions about their lives.

5. Tolerance and Ethnic and Muslim Minorities:

• Ethnic and Muslim Minorities: The events surrounding the murder of Theo van Gogh and the subsequent tensions in Dutch society highlight challenges to traditional notions of tolerance, especially with respect to Muslim minorities. The concept of tolerance has become more difficult to apply in a multicultural society where clashes between cultural values, particularly those related to religion, can provoke violent reactions.

• Challenges to Tolerance: The rise of radicalism and the perception of Islamic extremism in certain segments of Dutch society has strained the idea of tolerance. While the Dutch have historically embraced multiculturalism, the limits of tolerance have been tested as certain practices and beliefs, particularly in the Muslim community, challenge core Dutch values such as gender equality, freedom of expression, and secularism.

6. Conclusions and Reflection on the Future of Tolerance:

• Erosion of Tolerance: In light of recent developments, especially regarding Muslim immigration and radicalization, the six different conceptions of tolerance may be losing their power. The cultural and legal tools that once allowed for pragmatic tolerance are now seen by some as insufficient to address the challenges posed by extremism and cultural clashes.

• Continued Viability of Regulated Tolerance: Despite these challenges, the policy of regulated tolerance remains an important part of Dutch governance. Law enforcement professionals still view tolerance as a viable approach to managing societal issues, particularly in areas like drug use and prostitution. However, as tensions around religious and cultural diversity rise, it is unclear how long the Dutch system can continue to apply tolerance in a way that maintains social harmony.

Key Takeaways:

1. Dutch tolerance has evolved from religious and cultural acceptance to a more complex legal tool that allows for leniency and pragmatism in addressing controversial issues.

2. Tolerance is used as a strategy to minimize the negative consequences of strict enforcement and has been applied to areas such as drugs, prostitution, and euthanasia.

3. The concept of tolerance faces challenges in a multicultural society, especially when cultural values clash with Dutch norms.

4. The future of Dutch tolerance is uncertain, as the country grapples with how to balance freedom, multiculturalism, and security in an increasingly diverse society.

Historical Background

1. Early Conceptions of Tolerance

• 16th-17th Century Religious Tolerance:
  Tolerance in the Netherlands initially focused on accepting religious views that diverged from the official doctrine. This began during the Eighty Years' War (1568–1648) against Spain, which was also part of the larger Thirty Years' War (1618–1648) in Europe, a time of religious conflict between Catholics and Protestants.

  • The Calvinists (Protestants) emerged victorious in the Netherlands, but religious division was still evident.

  • The idea of tolerance came from the pragmatic need to foster unity against the Spanish oppressor, even with a divided religious landscape.

2. Role of the Netherlands as a Refuge

• Safe Haven for Religious Minorities:

  • The Netherlands became a refuge for many religious groups, including Spanish and Portuguese Jews and French Protestant Huguenots.

  • The Dutch allowed the practice of different faiths, with limited restrictions, as long as individuals were willing to accept the state’s supremacy.

  • Sir William Temple (1672): A British diplomat, Temple praised the Netherlands for allowing freedom of worship without interference in private religious practice.

  • John Locke (1632-1704): Locke, a philosopher who collaborated with the Dutch, also lived in exile in the Netherlands, contributing to the idea of religious tolerance.

3. Philosophical and Intellectual Contributions

• Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677):

  • Spinoza, a Portuguese Jew, found refuge in the Netherlands and became one of the most influential rationalists of the 17th century.

  • His work emphasized reason over faith, which led to his excommunication from the Jewish community but was tolerated in the secular environment of the Netherlands.

• Pierre Bayle (1647–1706):

  • A French Huguenot who fled persecution under King Louis XIV, Bayle advocated for religious tolerance and was a key figure in early Enlightenment thinking, promoting the separation of reason and faith.

4. Exemptions from Persecution

• Absence of Witch Hunts:

  • Unlike other European countries, the Netherlands did not have large-scale witch hunts. For instance, after 1600, no one was prosecuted for witchcraft in the Netherlands.

  • Dutch Pragmatism: Dutch towns, such as Oudewater, capitalized on practical solutions, like selling certificates to exonerate people falsely accused of witchcraft. The Oudewater witch's stool was a symbol of Dutch sensibility, where people could prove they were not witches by being weighed, as witches were believed not to weigh the same as normal people.

5. Economic and Social Tolerance

• Tolerating Diverse Immigrants:

  • The Netherlands attracted many immigrants, particularly from religiously and politically persecuted regions. Some came as refugees, while others sought work in agriculture and trade (e.g., Dutch East India Company).

  • The Dutch urban elite preferred a separation of church and state, allowing for a variety of religious practices, even if not fully equal in status.

  • Living with Differences:
    Tolerance extended beyond intellectual elites to everyday life, where individuals worked together for shared economic goals despite deep religious differences. For example, people from different faiths had to work together to reclaim land from the sea.

6. The Polder System

• Concept of the Polder System:

  • The term polder system is used in Dutch political culture to describe the necessity of working together despite ideological and religious differences. This is a metaphor for collective problem-solving, where different sectors of society cooperate to address common challenges.

  • The notion of working together was also reflected on Dutch ships, where crew members from different backgrounds, including immigrants, had to cooperate for survival in voyages to the East Indies.

7. Political Evolution and Compartmentalization (Verzuiling)

• Evolving Concept of Tolerance:

  • By the 18th century, the Dutch concept of tolerance had broadened beyond religious differences to include political and cultural ones. This evolved as Dutch society moved from debates over "true religion" to questions of religious autonomy and the coexistence of different religious communities.

  • By the late 19th century, religious differences still shaped Dutch society, but these differences were often managed through political bargaining, not religious conflict.

8. Early 20th Century – Political Accommodation (Verzuiling)

• Sectarianism in Politics:

  • Dutch society became characterized by verzuiling (pillarization), where different religious and political groups operated largely separately but cooperated at the political level. Major societal divisions included Catholic, Dutch Reformed, liberal, and social democratic groups.

  • These religious and ideological “pillars” were supported by institutions such as newspapers, schools, hospitals, and trade unions, all organized along religious lines.

  • Tolerance as a Political Necessity:
    Tolerance became a central political value as the various groups had to negotiate with each other to form coalitions. This form of political accommodation stabilized Dutch society through a shared commitment to respect differences and co-exist peacefully.

9. Secularization and Shift in Meaning

• Secularization of Dutch Society:

  • By the 20th century, the role of religion in Dutch society began to decline. By 1999, 63% of the Dutch population was no longer affiliated with a church.

  • With the decrease in religious influence, tolerance evolved to focus on accepting social and cultural differences, particularly in a pluralistic society.

  • The rise of postmodern values emphasizing individual autonomy and diversity reshaped Dutch tolerance, particularly in response to the growing number of North African and Turkish Muslim immigrants.

10. Challenges of Modern Tolerance

• Islamic Immigration and Tension:

  • As the Muslim population in the Netherlands grew, tensions arose between their traditional values and the Dutch postmodern emphasis on individual autonomy and diversity.

  • These cultural differences led to new challenges in defining and applying tolerance in a changing, multicultural society.

Key Takeaways:

• Tolerance in the Netherlands has historically evolved from religious tolerance to a broader acceptance of social and cultural differences.

• It was rooted in pragmatic cooperation to address shared challenges, particularly in urban areas and through the "polder system."

• Over time, tolerance has shifted from being a religious necessity to a cultural and political principle, which helped manage the coexistence of diverse groups.

• Today, Dutch tolerance is tested by the influx of immigrants and the cultural divide between postmodern values and conservative religious communities.

The So-Called Tolerance of Crime

Introduction to Tolerance and Crime

• Cultural vs. Legal Tolerance: Earlier, tolerance in Dutch society was mainly discussed as a cultural phenomenon, particularly around religious beliefs. In contrast, contemporary discussions about "tolerance" now often include government responses to criminal behavior. This shift towards crime concerns has resulted in the term "tolerance" being viewed by some as a euphemism for leniency in addressing petty crimes and minor offenses.

Dutch Crime and Punishment: A Historical Context

• Historically Lenient Approach:

  • Dutch society, particularly in the second half of the 20th century, was considered one of the most liberal and non-moralistic countries in terms of crime and punishment.

  • By 1980, the Dutch imprisonment rate was notably low compared to other Western countries: 23 per 100,000 inhabitants (significantly lower than West Germany, France, or England).

  • However, the imprisonment rate rose by 2005 to 127 per 100,000 inhabitants, indicating a significant shift towards more stringent crime policies.

Changing Attitudes Towards Crime

• 1970s: Leniency and Tolerance for Minor Crimes:

  • The Dutch approach to crime in the 1970s was characterized by a tolerant, lenient stance on petty offenses like traffic violations, welfare fraud, and environmental pollution.

  • In 1970, 72% of the Dutch population agreed criminals should be rehabilitated rather than punished. However, this attitude shifted in the mid-1990s, with only 49% supporting the rehabilitation of criminals.

• Rise of Crime and Public Discontent:

  • Starting in the 1960s, crime rates began to rise significantly, particularly violent crime.

  • This increase, coupled with a perception that police were not effectively handling crime, led to growing public dissatisfaction.

  • There was an observed shift in public opinion where Dutch citizens started expressing less tolerance for crime, even minor offenses.

Key Factors Influencing the Shift in Crime Tolerance

1. Rising Crime Rates:

   • Although property crime remained stable or declined, violent crime saw an increase in the late 20th century.

   • Citizens were less tolerant of crime as they began to feel that police and judicial systems were increasingly ineffective. Crime clearance rates dropped, reflecting the declining efficiency of the police in solving crimes.

2. Ethnic Diversity and Crime:

   • The growing number of non-Dutch individuals in the Netherlands raised concerns about ethnic minorities being disproportionately involved in criminal activities.

   • A significant percentage of recorded suspects (37.5%) were non-Dutch or had non-Dutch parents, contributing to growing unease, especially in large cities like Amsterdam and Rotterdam.

3. Increased Reporting and Prosecutorial Action:

   • A paradoxical trend emerged where the number of crimes reported to the police increased, yet the number of cases prosecuted decreased (until around 2000, when prosecution rates began to rise).

   • The public began reporting even minor offenses like threats or minor assaults, showing less tolerance for such behavior.

   • Legal definitions of crimes, such as minor assaults, began to expand (e.g., assaults were more likely to be classified as grievous bodily harm).

Major Events Triggering the Change in Tolerance

• Fireworks Disaster (2000): In May 2000, a fireworks disaster in Enschede killed 22 people, injuring 947 and leaving thousands homeless. The government's tolerance of safety violations, particularly the fireworks company’s failure to observe safety regulations, became a focal point of public anger.

• Little Heaven Cafe Fire (2000): A fire at a café in December 2000, caused by the negligence of local authorities, resulted in 14 deaths and numerous injuries. This tragedy contributed to the shift in public perception of governmental "tolerance" of indifference toward public safety.

The Shift in the Meaning of Tolerance

• Emergence of a Negative Connotation:

  • After the fireworks disaster and the fire at Little Heaven, the term "tolerance" lost its positive connotation, which had previously been linked to postmaterialism and liberal values. Instead, it became associated with governmental indifference and negligence.

  • The public started associating tolerance with inaction in the face of avoidable accidents and a perceived lack of governmental accountability.

• Erosion of Tolerance for Minor Offenses:

  • In recent years, tolerance has shifted from being a general acceptance of minor violations (like incivilities) to a more punitive stance. The government began taking stricter measures, including criminalizing petty infractions like rude behavior and other minor offenses, which were previously tolerated.

  • The criminal justice system increasingly treated minor infractions as serious offenses, which contributed to the decline in societal tolerance for certain behaviors.

Conclusion: The Changing Concept of Tolerance

• Governmental Response to Public Pressure:

  • The Dutch government’s response to public dissatisfaction involved stricter measures towards crime, even minor infractions. The shift in public opinion led to changes in the way the law was applied, transforming tolerance from a cultural acceptance of diversity and difference to a more restrictive stance aimed at addressing perceived crime-related problems.

• Impact on Dutch Society:

  • As a result, Dutch society’s approach to tolerance evolved. While tolerance once referred to the peaceful coexistence of various societal groups with different lifestyles and beliefs, it now increasingly involves controlling or punishing behaviors deemed harmful to public order and safety.

Tolerance as a Legal Concept

Introduction to Legal Tolerance

• Tolerance in Dutch Legal System:

  • Tolerance, in the context of Dutch law, refers to the practice of nonprosecution for actions that are technically prohibited by the Criminal Code or other laws. The term used for this in Dutch is gedogen.

  • It applies to both criminal law and administrative law, and it represents a form of selective leniency or forbearance, not indifference or a "blind eye."

  • Legal tolerance is not the same as the absence of action, but rather a postponement of punitive measures under specific conditions.

Key Features of Legal Tolerance

1. Postponed Punishment:

   • Instead of prosecuting immediately, authorities may delay legal action if the perpetrator agrees to follow specific instructions.

   • These instructions can be case-specific or part of broader, general guidelines (e.g., regulations for handling environmental crimes).

2. Tolerance Orders (Gedogbeschikking):

   • Local or provincial authorities can issue tolerance orders, which legally bind the relationship between authorities and citizens.

   • These orders prevent prosecution for a defined period under certain conditions, but they are not equivalent to a permit. Prosecution can still occur if the Public Prosecutor decides to act.

3. Expediency Principle (Article 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure):

   • Pre-1970: The principle was prosecution unless it was deemed unnecessary or unjustifiable.

   • Post-1970: This principle reversed to prosecution only if deemed in the public interest. The idea was to reflect societal preferences and avoid unnecessary criminal prosecutions.

   • This shift came as part of the broader cultural changes of the 1960s and 1970s, when Dutch society became more tolerant of behaviors that were previously criminalized, such as drug use or the purchase of contraceptives.

The Discretionary Authority of the Public Prosecutor

• Discretion in Prosecution:

  • The change in the law led to a significant increase in the discretionary authority of the Public Prosecutor's Office.

  • The prosecutor was no longer obligated to prosecute every violation of the law. Instead, the decision to prosecute was based on whether it was in the public interest, and in many cases, the prosecutor would choose not to pursue cases.

• Policy Guidelines:

  • The Public Prosecutor's Office developed specific directives and rules that outline when prosecution should occur and when tolerance (non-prosecution) is allowed.

  • For example:

    • Soft Drugs (2000 Directive): Prosecutors are instructed not to prosecute individuals possessing less than 30 grams of marijuana or businesses with less than 500 grams of hashish or marijuana.

    • Tax Fraud (2000 Directive): Tax fraud cases below a certain threshold (5,500 euros for individuals and 11,500 euros for companies) may not be prosecuted.

Pragmatic vs. Democratic Perspective on Legal Tolerance

• Pragmatic View:

  • Legal tolerance, particularly in the Netherlands, is seen as pragmatic and efficient. While the law prohibits certain activities (e.g., drug use, prostitution, euthanasia), authorities may choose to ignore these violations under certain conditions, allowing these behaviors to persist without prosecution.

  • This approach is more transparent than in other countries, where similar behaviors might be tolerated informally or clandestinely, often requiring bribes or other forms of discretion to avoid prosecution.

  • In the Netherlands, written guidelines make it clear when authorities will refrain from prosecuting, ensuring the public knows the limits of enforcement.

• Democratic Criticism:

  • From a democratic perspective, the existence of non-prosecution rules could be seen as contradictory: the law prohibits certain actions, but these rules explicitly allow for non-enforcement under specific conditions.

  • This system might seem illogical because it suggests that something forbidden by law can be tolerated without legal consequences.

Institutional Framework for Legal Tolerance

1. Decision-Making Meetings:

   • Since the early 1970s, regular meetings have been held between key figures in the criminal justice system, such as the chief of police, mayors, and the Public Prosecutor.

   • These meetings help decide when legal tolerance will be applied in specific cases, including issues like drug use or prostitution, and determine under what conditions authorities may refrain from prosecuting.

2. Limits of Legal Tolerance:

   • While legal tolerance can be applied in various situations (e.g., drug possession, environmental violations, tax evasion), there are limits to how far this leniency extends.

   • Case Law Example: In 1985, the Dutch Supreme Court ruled that a decision by the Secretary of State to tolerate an environmental violation was not binding on the prosecutor. The prosecutor was still free to pursue legal action despite the official's position on tolerance.

3. Differences Between Informal Tolerance and Official Guidelines:

   • The Netherlands differs from other countries where informal, secretive tolerance of illegal behavior may take place. Dutch authorities, however, make their stance on tolerance transparent, providing clear guidelines on what will be tolerated and under what conditions.

Conclusion: Legal Tolerance in the Netherlands

• Transparency and Accountability:

  • The Dutch system of legal tolerance is more transparent than in many other countries, where leniency often occurs under the radar. The Netherlands has institutionalized tolerance, offering a clear framework for when and why prosecution may be postponed.

• Pragmatic Approach to Law Enforcement:

  • While the system may seem contradictory from a strictly legal or democratic standpoint, it is considered pragmatic. The approach balances societal attitudes towards certain behaviors with the need for a functioning legal system, ensuring that resources are used effectively and that certain minor violations are not over-punished.

• Challenges and Criticism:

  • Despite its pragmatic benefits, this system can be difficult to understand and apply, especially when non-enforcement decisions appear inconsistent with the written law. There are also tensions between the need for leniency in certain areas and the expectations of the public for law enforcement to ensure safety and order.

Tolerating Morally Ambiguous Behavior

Introduction

• This section explores Dutch policies on drugs, prostitution, and euthanasia, where legal tolerance plays a significant role.

• Legal tolerance, as discussed previously, refers to the decision by authorities not to prosecute certain illegal actions under specific conditions. It serves as a basis for decriminalization in certain areas.

• In some cases, tolerance shifts from a flexible legal grey area to a formalized, legal framework that decriminalizes behavior or provides legal justifications for certain actions (e.g., euthanasia).

1. Drugs Policy

• Legal Tolerance of Soft Drugs:

  • The Dutch policy towards drugs is characterized by a distinction between soft drugs (e.g., marijuana) and hard drugs (e.g., heroin, cocaine).

  • Prosecution Guidelines: The Dutch legal system allows for non-prosecution of minor offenses related to the possession or sale of soft drugs under certain conditions. For example:

    • Possession of up to 30 grams of marijuana is tolerated.

    • Licensed cannabis shops (often referred to as coffeeshops) are allowed to sell marijuana, as long as they stock no more than 500 grams.

  • Rationale: This policy seeks to regulate soft drug use rather than criminalize it, promoting harm reduction and focusing law enforcement resources on more serious crimes.

  • While these practices are not officially legalized, they are treated with tolerance under certain conditions, preventing the criminalization of individuals involved in the soft drug market.

2. Prostitution

• Decriminalization and Legal Tolerance:

  • Prostitution in the Netherlands is decriminalized, meaning that it is not considered a criminal offense for adults to engage in sex work, either as a worker or as a client.

  • Legal Framework: The Dutch legal system regulates prostitution through labor laws and public health regulations, rather than through criminal laws.

  • Prosecution Guidelines: The Dutch authorities tolerate prostitution within legal parameters, focusing on ensuring that workers are protected from exploitation and violence, and that business practices are regulated.

  • Legal Tolerance in Practice:

    • Brothels are legal, but human trafficking, exploitation, and forced prostitution are strictly prohibited.

    • The government has implemented health and safety regulations to protect workers, including regular health checks.

  • Tolerating Ambiguous Behavior: The acceptance of prostitution is based on a pragmatic approach—recognizing it as a social reality and focusing on regulation rather than complete prohibition.

3. Euthanasia

• Euthanasia as Legalized Tolerance:

  • Euthanasia in the Netherlands is a legal practice, but it operates under strict guidelines and is not automatically accepted.

  • Legal Framework: Euthanasia became officially legalized in 2002, but it is not simply a matter of tolerance—specific statutory conditions must be met.

  • Statutory Conditions:

    • Euthanasia is permitted if the patient is experiencing unbearable suffering, has expressed a voluntary and well-considered request, and has made the request repeatedly.

    • The physician performing euthanasia must consult with at least one other doctor who agrees with the diagnosis and prognosis.

    • The practice is regulated and documented to ensure compliance with these conditions, and any euthanasia case is reviewed by a commission.

  • Legal Justification for Mercy Killing:

    • Euthanasia moved beyond a mere "tolerance" zone into statutory legality, meaning that, under the right circumstances, euthanasia is considered a legally justified act rather than a crime.

  • Moral Ambiguity: While euthanasia remains morally controversial, it is treated in the Netherlands as a matter of personal autonomy and mercy, with legal frameworks ensuring its ethical and regulated application.

4. Comparing the Three Topics: Drugs, Prostitution, and Euthanasia

• Legal Tolerance as the Basis for Decriminalization:

  • Drugs and prostitution illustrate cases where the government adopts policies of non-enforcement or decriminalization through legal tolerance—allowing behavior that was once illegal but regulating it to reduce harm.

  • Euthanasia, while similarly controversial, transitioned from tolerance to full legalization with a clear set of statutory guidelines and conditions, offering a legal justification for actions that were previously criminal.

• Shifting from Grey Zones to Formalized Legal Frameworks:

  • Drugs and prostitution remain within a grey legal area, where authorities tolerate certain activities under regulated conditions.

  • Euthanasia, however, transitioned from a grey zone of tolerated actions to a legalized practice with a structured, statutory framework to protect both patients and physicians.

5. Implications of Tolerating Morally Ambiguous Behavior

• Balancing Pragmatism and Morality:

  • Dutch tolerance policies aim to balance pragmatism—acknowledging societal realities and reducing harm—while respecting the moral and ethical boundaries of society.

  • These policies are shaped by public health concerns, human rights considerations (e.g., autonomy in euthanasia), and a desire to focus law enforcement on more pressing issues.

• Public Perception and Societal Values:

  • The Dutch approach to morally ambiguous behaviors reflects a progressive mindset that prioritizes individual rights, social welfare, and practical harm reduction over strict moral or legal judgments.

  • However, such tolerance also raises complex moral and ethical questions, especially regarding issues like euthanasia and drug use.

A. Tolerating drugs

Overview of Dutch Drug Policies

• Coffee Shops: The Netherlands is famous for its coffee shops, where cannabis can be freely bought and consumed. The term "coffee shop" refers to establishments where cannabis is sold, not coffee.

• Legal Status of Drugs: While the selling of drugs has been illegal since the 1919 Opium Act, Dutch policy since the 1970s has been based on accommodation. This system emphasizes a weak enforcement of drug laws, alongside a strong public health approach.

• Soft vs. Hard Drugs: A major distinction was made between soft drugs (e.g., cannabis) and hard drugs (e.g., heroin, cocaine, Ecstasy). Soft drugs were tolerated to avoid exposure to hard drugs, especially for young people. This policy has been in place since the 1980s.

The Evolution of Dutch Drug Policy

• Initial Legal Developments: During the 1960s, the Dutch authorities responded to rising drug use among youth cultures, such as hippies and provos, by adopting a more tolerant approach to cannabis. The government appointed two expert groups to review drug policy, leading to a policy of tolerance for cannabis use.

• Opium Act of 1976: The key distinction between soft and hard drugs was codified in this law, which imposed varying penalties depending on the drug.

  • Hard Drugs: Trafficking, manufacturing, or possession of hard drugs could result in lengthy sentences (up to 12 years for trafficking).

  • Soft Drugs: Possession of cannabis under 30 grams, or cultivation for personal use, was largely tolerated. Selling cannabis in coffee shops was allowed under strict conditions.

The Dutch Approach to Soft Drugs (Cannabis)

• Coffee Shops and Regulations:

  • Legal Toleration: Coffee shops are tolerated as long as they comply with rules, such as no advertising, no hard drugs, no sales to minors, and no large stocks of cannabis (500 grams limit).

  • Small-Scale Operations: The selling of cannabis is technically illegal, but the government tolerates it under specific conditions to control the market and minimize harm.

  • Foreign Use: Many foreign tourists visit the Netherlands specifically to buy cannabis in coffee shops. This creates tensions with neighboring countries, especially Germany and France, leading to complex European Union legal disputes.

Public Health and Drug Use in the Netherlands

• Public Health Approach: Dutch drug policy focuses on treating users with medical and social assistance rather than criminal prosecution. The expediency principle ensures that small-scale possession of cannabis is tolerated, as long as it doesn't disrupt public order.

• Drug Use Trends:

  • Cannabis: The percentage of people who have ever used cannabis has remained stable. By 2001, 17% of the population had used cannabis, with 3% using it in the past month.

  • Ecstasy and Hard Drugs: Use of Ecstasy rose from 0.8% in 1997 to 1.5% in 2001, but this trend plateaued in 2002. Heroin use is low, and overdose deaths are relatively rare.

• Low Drug Abuse Rates: Compared to other Western countries, drug abuse in the Netherlands is relatively low. The estimated prevalence of problem drug use (e.g., heroin, crack) is one of the lowest in Western Europe.

Law Enforcement and Crime

• Prosecution of Drug Users: The Dutch system does not aggressively prosecute small-time cannabis users. While possession of cannabis is illegal, the government doesn't actively pursue prosecutions for small quantities.

• Organized Drug Crime:

  • Focus on Trafficking: The primary target for Dutch law enforcement is organized drug crime, especially trafficking. The Netherlands is a major transit hub for drugs, with significant drug seizures at key locations like Schiphol Airport and the Port of Rotterdam.

  • Ecstasy and Cannabis: The Netherlands is a major producer and exporter of Ecstasy and cannabis, with global drug seizures concentrated in the country.

  • International Connections: The Netherlands' role as a drug trafficking hub is partly due to its geographical location and historical connections with regions like the Dutch Antilles and Surinam.

Challenges and Criticism

• High Potency of Cannabis: Concerns have been raised about the potency of modern cannabis, which has higher levels of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active ingredient, than in previous decades.

• Underage Use: Despite regulations, some minors manage to purchase cannabis in coffee shops, with around 32% of minor cannabis users buying their supply there.

• Semi-Legal Coffee Shop Model: While coffee shops are technically illegal, their operation is tolerated. However, this creates a grey area where criminal entrepreneurs grow cannabis in hidden locations and supply the shops.

• Public Perception: Public acceptance of cannabis use is high, but there are concerns about the impact on public order and the potential risks of cannabis. Some local governments, like Amsterdam, have imposed restrictions on public cannabis smoking due to nuisance concerns.

Tolerance of Hard Drugs

• Decriminalization Debate: While there is a push from certain experts to decriminalize hard drugs, such as heroin and Ecstasy, this view is less popular than the decriminalization of soft drugs like cannabis.

• Social Issues in Rotterdam: In Rotterdam, a policy of tolerating drug use zones, such as Platform Zero, caused problems, including drug-related violence and crime. The city eventually shut down such zones due to public outcry and political pressure.

• Growing Drug Problems: The Millinxbuurt neighborhood in Rotterdam experienced a rapid escalation in drug trade and addiction, highlighting the challenge of managing drug use in more vulnerable areas.

Public Opinion and Political Implications

• Public Support for Tolerance: The majority of the Dutch public supports decriminalization of soft drugs, and there is broad tolerance for the system of coffee shops. However, political pressures, particularly from neighboring countries, prevent further liberalization.

• Declining Tolerance for Public Drug Use: There is a growing sense that cannabis might not be as harmless as once thought, with some local governments pushing back against public cannabis use. Political figures like Pim Fortuyn gained popularity with strict views on drugs, though his stance on drug policy was seen as contradictory, given his other progressive views.

Conclusion

• Dutch Drug Policy: The Dutch drug policy is a complex balance of tolerance for soft drugs, strict enforcement against hard drug trafficking, and a public health approach that minimizes harm while avoiding excessive criminalization. Though largely successful in keeping drug abuse low, the policy faces challenges from both within the country and abroad, particularly as cannabis use continues to evolve and attract debate.

B. Tolerating Prostitution

1. Historical Context of Prostitution in the Netherlands

• Early Attitudes:

  • Calvinist ministers in the 16th-19th centuries were strongly opposed to prostitution, but local magistrates didn't fully support these views. Brothel exploitation was common and not legally restricted.

• Legal Developments:

  • Penal Code of 1886: Prostitution and brothel exploitation were not forbidden.

  • 1911: Brothel exploitation was criminalized, but prostitution itself remained unregulated.

  • 1949 UN Treaty: Dutch policy decided against criminalizing prostitution, focusing only on cases involving force, deception, or exploitation of vulnerable individuals (e.g., trafficking).

  • Late 20th Century: Prostitution remained legal, and a trade union for sex workers was founded in 1985, receiving government support by 1987.

2. The Amsterdam Red-Light District and the Dutch System of Prostitution

• Estimates of Prostitutes in the Netherlands:

  • An estimated 20,000 prostitutes in the country, with 25% believed to be victims of human trafficking.

  • Many work in various sectors, including window prostitution (Amsterdam), streetwalking, escort services, and clubs.

  • 1995 Police Study: 1,005 women of 56 nationalities registered as window prostitutes in Amsterdam, plus 700 streetwalkers.

• Prostitution as a Tolerated Business:

  • The Dutch system allowed prostitution, and known prostitutes and brothels were not necessarily prosecuted.

  • Police Registration: Prostitutes were sometimes registered for public health reasons, and many cooperated with authorities, suggesting a level of trust.

3. Legalization of Prostitution in 2000

• Changes Under New Law (2000):

  • Prostitution was legalized, and the ban on brothels was lifted.

  • Municipal Licensing: A system of licensing for brothels and voluntary adult prostitution was introduced to regulate and control the industry.

  • Focus on Human Trafficking and Minor Protection: The law aimed to address forced prostitution and exploitation of minors.

  • Key Provisions:

    • Prohibition of nonvoluntary prostitution and prostitution involving minors remains a serious crime.

    • The goal was to separate prostitution from associated crime-related side effects, particularly in relation to trafficking.

• Rights for Sex Workers:

  • Sex workers gained legal rights, such as access to bank services, police protection from violence, hygienic working conditions, and unemployment benefits when out of work.

• Challenges with Financial Institutions:

  • Some banks and insurance companies are reluctant to work with the prostitution sector due to concerns about reputation and financial risk.

• Unregulated Sectors: Streetwalking and illegal escort services remain problematic, with minors and illegal foreign prostitutes still vulnerable.

4. The Issue of Human Trafficking

• Human Trafficking Data:

  • 2002: 55 criminal investigations concluded regarding human trafficking, with 76% involving cross-border trafficking.

  • 2010s Statistics: Many trafficked victims come from countries like Turkey, Bulgaria, Albania, and Eastern Europe.

  • Victim Demographics: Around 25% of victims are minors, often trafficked through "lover boy" schemes.

  • Sexual Violence: Many cases of trafficking involve sexual violence, with the average punishment for perpetrators being 21 months.

• Foreign Victims:

  • Victims often face physical and emotional coercion, such as withholding passports, or in some cases, cultural practices like voodoo, especially in cases involving Nigerian women.

5. Impact of Legalization and Unintended Consequences

• Unintended Negative Effects:

  • Vulnerable Workers: Prostitutes, especially minors and trafficking victims, have not benefited as much as expected from legalization.

  • Taxation Issues: Prostitutes are required to pay taxes on earnings that are often overestimated by tax authorities.

  • Enforcement Problems: After the legalization of brothels, some illegal foreign prostitutes were pushed to streetwalking, facing even more exploitation and abuse.

  • Decreased Tolerance: As some cities close down designated zones (e.g., "tippel zones"), the situation for sex workers worsened, with some advocating for a return to the previous system of tolerance.

• Debates on Policy:

  • In some regions, there is a debate over whether the earlier tolerant approach was more effective in safeguarding sex workers compared to the problems that arose after full decriminalization.

6. Prostitution and Crime

• Focus on Human Trafficking:

  • The main criminal focus in the Netherlands regarding prostitution is human trafficking (Art. 250a of the Penal Code).

  • National efforts to combat trafficking include a National Reporter on the Trade of Human Persons, with investigations yielding a high conviction rate.

7. Conclusion: The Complexities of Prostitution Regulation

• Ongoing Issues:

  • The legalizing of prostitution in the Netherlands did not resolve all issues, particularly regarding the most vulnerable workers, such as minors and trafficked individuals.

  • Some cities and areas are reconsidering the effectiveness of legalization, suggesting a return to the previous system of tolerance.

  • Brothel legalization aimed to separate prostitution from crime but brought with it new challenges that require further legal and social intervention.

C. Tolerating euthanasia

1. Introduction to Euthanasia in the Netherlands

• In 2002, the Netherlands legalized euthanasia through the Act on the Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide (Euthanasia Act 2001).

• The law allows a physician to administer a lethal injection to terminally ill patients who request to die, with strict legal safeguards in place.

2. Historical Background of Euthanasia in the Netherlands

• Traditional Medical Ethics (1886): Originally, medical ethics emphasized safeguarding life, with euthanasia and abortion forbidden.

• 1970s–1980s: Public commissions were formed to discuss the possibility of legalizing abortion and euthanasia. Despite not providing clear advice, the discussions laid the foundation for the change.

• Debates in Civil Society: Rather than formal government decisions, the debates on euthanasia evolved through discussions in civil society, where professional groups (e.g., medical associations) became pivotal players.

3. The Evolution of Euthanasia Legalization

• Early 1970s: The first significant case of euthanasia occurred when Dr. Postma ended her mother's life upon her request. This case, while controversial, set the stage for further debates.

• 1978: A Medical Disciplinary Tribunal ruled that a doctor’s action of giving sleep-inducing drugs (despite the patient's potential death) was acceptable. This signaled growing acceptance of euthanasia in medical practice.

• 1984 Supreme Court Ruling: The Dutch Supreme Court ruled that a doctor could be acquitted if they followed professional medical guidelines, marking a significant legal step towards tolerating euthanasia.

• 1984 Medical Association Guidelines: Official guidelines allowed for euthanasia under strict conditions, emphasizing medical ethics and patient consent.

4. Key Developments Leading to the Euthanasia Act (2001)

• 1990s Shift in Medical Practice: By 1995, euthanasia and assisted suicide were becoming more widely practiced, with increasing numbers of physicians willing to carry them out.

• Regional Review Boards (1998): An official review process was established for reporting euthanasia cases, where cases were examined by multi-disciplinary boards to ensure adherence to ethical and legal standards.

• 2001 Euthanasia Act: The legislation codified the procedures for euthanasia, providing a clear legal framework and safeguards to ensure that the act is performed in a controlled, ethical manner.

5. Requirements for Euthanasia Under the 2001 Law

• Voluntary Request: The patient must request euthanasia voluntarily and thoughtfully.

• Unbearable Suffering: The patient must be suffering from an incurable and unbearable condition.

• Informed Decision: The patient must be fully informed about their medical situation and available options.

• No Alternatives: The physician and patient must agree that no other viable solutions exist.

• Second Opinion: At least one other independent physician must be consulted.

• Execution of the Act: The procedure must be performed in a medically appropriate manner.

6. Data on Euthanasia in the Netherlands

• Statistics on Euthanasia:

  • In 1995, 39% of deaths were influenced by medical decisions leading to death, including euthanasia and indirect euthanasia (e.g., pain relief).

  • The number of euthanasia reports increased over the years, reaching 2,216 cases in 1999, with a decline to 1,815 reports in 2003.

  • Family doctors and nursing home physicians saw a higher increase in performing euthanasia compared to hospital specialists.

• Decline in Euthanasia Cases (2003): Possible factors include better palliative care and the growing rigor of review boards.

7. Legal Challenges and Prosecutions

• Prosecutions and Legal Challenges: Between 1981 and 2003, 20 physicians were prosecuted for euthanasia. Most were acquitted or found guilty with light sentences.

• Regional Review Boards' Role: In 2003, the regional review boards reviewed 7,000 cases, with only a few deemed unjustifiable, leading to a small number of prosecutions.

8. Public Opinion and Debate

• General Public Opinion: There is broad public acceptance of passive euthanasia (abstaining from life-sustaining treatment) and indirect euthanasia (e.g., using painkillers that may shorten life).

• Active Euthanasia: Opinions on active euthanasia (administering a lethal dose of medication) vary, with some seeing it as murder and others as respecting a person’s last wish.

• The "Drion Pill" Debate (2000s): The idea of providing elderly people with the option of committing suicide via prescribed lethal pills generated significant public discussion. Polls showed mixed reactions, with 45% in favor and 35% against.

9. Controversial Cases and Discussions

• Non-requested Euthanasia: Issues surrounding euthanasia without explicit patient consent, such as in cases of severely disabled newborns or comatose patients, remain contentious.

• Dementia and Competence: Ethical questions arise when patients with dementia are not fully competent throughout the decision-making process.

• The Need for Open Debate: The culture of tolerance in the Netherlands allows for open discussions on these difficult issues, particularly in cases where patients may not be able to express their wishes clearly.

10. Conclusion

• Tolerance as the Foundation: The evolution of euthanasia laws in the Netherlands reflects a societal shift toward greater tolerance, with open debates and gradual acceptance of practices that once seemed controversial.

• Ethical and Legal Challenges: While the legal framework for euthanasia is well-established, ongoing challenges include ensuring strict adherence to guidelines, addressing public concerns, and managing complex cases of non-requested euthanasia.

Conclusion

Introduction to Tolerance

• Tolerance is a concept used to avoid negative reactions toward things considered morally wrong or unacceptable. It is shaped by different contexts such as culture, law, and society.

• The concept of tolerance has evolved significantly over time, particularly in the Netherlands, with different layers of meaning depending on the situation.

Six Conceptualizations of Tolerance

1. Religious Tolerance in the 17th Century

   • Historically, tolerance began as a concept related to religious acceptance. In the 17th century, religious tolerance meant accepting religious differences, specifically between Protestants and Catholics.

   • Over time, this acceptance of religious difference evolved into broader moral ambiguity acceptance, including areas like crime and cultural diversity.

2. Moral Ambiguity and Cultural Tolerance

   • In contemporary society, tolerance has extended to accepting moral ambiguity, such as behaviors that may be disliked but are not actively persecuted.

   • Tolerance has become a means to accept actions or behaviors that are morally unclear or controversial, often out of pragmatism rather than approval.

3. Leniency in Crime (Crime and Incivilities)

   • Tolerance in criminal law has taken on the form of leniency, especially regarding petty crimes and minor infractions. This can sometimes blur the lines between acceptance and indifference.

   • Governmental indifference is considered a form of tolerance in certain circumstances, particularly in managing the legal system’s complexities.

4. Legal Tolerance in the Netherlands (1970s)

   • Tolerance was formally integrated into Dutch law during the 1970s, where it served as a policy tool. This "policy of tolerance" allowed the government to overlook certain infractions (e.g., drug use or prostitution) to reduce the consequences of strict enforcement.

   • This concept in law acted as a regulatory tool to reduce harm, rather than eliminate illegal activities entirely.

5. Tolerance in Cultural Context

   • Cultural tolerance involves the acceptance of behaviors or values that are significantly different from one's own. It goes beyond legal or governmental leniency and taps into deep cultural forbearance.

   • This form of tolerance often involves accepting practices that might be seen as immoral but are seen as acceptable within specific cultural frameworks.

6. Governmental Indifference and Tolerance

   • Governmental tolerance is more closely associated with leniency and a lack of action towards certain illegal activities, like drug use or prostitution. However, governmental indifference to some forms of crime may be mistaken for tolerance.

   • In recent years, public sentiment has shifted towards demanding stricter policies and actions against crimes, particularly when ethnic minorities are involved.

Tolerance in Dutch Society: Historical and Current Context

• Tolerance has played an essential role in Dutch society, particularly in religious and cultural contexts. The Dutch have often prioritized reducing harm over moral judgments, which allowed them to accept behaviors they disapproved of for the sake of minimizing societal conflict.

• However, recent events such as terrorist attacks, cultural clashes, and issues regarding Muslim communities have forced the Dutch to reconsider their understanding and practice of tolerance.

Key Developments in Dutch Tolerance Policies

1. Focus on Harm Reduction

   • Dutch policies prioritize safety and security rather than moral condemnation, particularly concerning issues like drug use, prostitution, and euthanasia. The idea is to reduce harm without immediately imposing negative moral judgments.

2. Differentiating Between Harmful and Less Harmful Behaviors

   • The Netherlands makes distinctions between types of problematic behavior. For instance, soft drugs are treated differently from hard drugs, and vice crimes involving minors or vulnerable people are treated with more severity than others.

3. Moral Judgment and Delayed Action

   • In Dutch society, tolerance allows for a delayed moral judgment. This means that difficult issues like drug use or euthanasia are discussed and analyzed before any legal action is taken. This delayed judgment allows for nuanced policy development.

4. Public and Expert Discussion Before Legalization

   • Issues like prostitution and euthanasia have been discussed publicly, with experts involved, before moving toward formal legalization with specific requirements. This approach stems from a commitment to creating informed, rational discussions.

5. Tolerance and Legal Boundaries

   • While individual illegalities may be tolerated (e.g., soft drugs, euthanasia), organized crimes like drug trafficking or human trafficking are not tolerated. The government differentiates between personal behavior and organized criminal activity.

6. Tolerance's Effectiveness

   • The impact of tolerance policies on drug use or euthanasia practices is debated, with some arguing that tolerance may have contributed to increases in behaviors like cannabis use, while others suggest that open discussion has led to more responsible attitudes.

Negative Side Effects of Tolerance

1. Governmental Indifference vs. Tolerance

   • There is a danger of confusing indifference with tolerance. While tolerance may be a policy for managing specific issues, indifference often leads to societal discontent. For example, leniency toward drug users may inadvertently promote a lack of action on larger, organized criminal activities.

2. Impact on Marginalized Groups

   • Policies like the legalization of prostitution may worsen the position of marginalized groups, particularly foreign prostitutes without legal documents. These policies, although meant to protect individuals, sometimes have unintended negative consequences for vulnerable populations.

3. The Complexity of Cultural Tolerance

   • Cultural tolerance is not just about indifference. It involves complex judgments about when and how to accept behaviors that contradict one's values. For example, although controversial individuals like filmmaker Theo van Gogh were tolerated for their provocative views, their death highlighted the tensions between cultural tolerance and extremism.

Conclusion

• Tolerance as a Tool and Cultural Imperative

  • Tolerance has evolved from a legal tool aimed at managing moral issues like drug use and euthanasia to a more complex cultural imperative in the context of multiculturalism.

  • It reflects society's growing challenge to navigate cultural differences, particularly as the Netherlands faces increasing tensions surrounding ethnic minorities and religious differences.

• The Future of Tolerance

  • Tolerance, as a technique for handling moral and legal challenges, is likely to evolve further, especially in response to crises like terrorism. The Dutch may have to refine their understanding of tolerance, balancing acceptance of difference with the need to uphold societal cohesion.

  • In times of crisis, it becomes difficult to postpone moral judgment. The Dutch will need to continue differentiating between acceptance and indifference while developing new policies to address emerging challenges.