A sudden reversal of a decline in the number of illegal drug cases and abusers in Hong Kong should dispel any complacency in the community. Worringly, it is led by young people experimenting with psychotropic, or mind-altering, drugs. The International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking this week was marked by the release of alarming figures.
In the first three months this year the number of reported regular drug abusers aged under 21 in Hong Kong surged by more than 15 per cent to 1,226, compared with 1,064 in the same quarter last year. That follows a 13 per cent increase last year over 2006. Sixty per cent of young abusers reported having had their first illegal drug experience before the age of 16. It was this trend that prompted Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen to order the establishment nine months ago of the Task Force on Youth Drug Abuse, headed by Secretary for Justice Wong Yan-lung.
It is not surprising that radical measures have now been suggested to combat this growing problem. Two of them will understandably attract some sympathy. The government says it is willing to consider a proposal by the Action Committee Against Narcotics that drug testing be done at schools, with parents' consent. And the taskforce has proposed that police should be empowered to collect urine and saliva samples from suspects. A case in point would be during a police raid on a disco where a large quantity of illegal pills is found discarded by patrons on the floor.
The United States and Britain have both experimented with and introduced drug-testing in schools. Its effectiveness, however, remains a matter of debate. Problems that have been identified include ethical issues such as whether parents know what they are consenting to, verification of tests and confidentiality of results. Careful thought also needs to be given to the responses of both school and student to a positive drug test. We should not be rushing to follow suit. Intrusions by authority on personal privacy and liberty are typically justified by overriding public interest and prevention of harm to society and other individuals. Examples are police breath-testing of suspected drink-drivers and covert surveillance of people suspected of involvement in serious crime. But drug testing of young people in the manner proposed would be a step too far. The public would not be easily convinced of the need for an extension of police powers to conduct mass random drug testing in a busy disco. Testing at public schools could be a traumatic ordeal for students, even if counselling rather than punishment was the outcome and ethical issues were resolved. It should be regarded as a last resort.
The secretary for justice has said, rightly, that if young people with a drug problem could be persuaded to have a simple test, they might come to their senses. Some supporters of drug testing in schools have cited peer pressure on youths to conform, whether it be in fashion, culture, body image - or experimenting with drugs. They say the risk of returning a positive test helps students resist pressure.
There is no single knockout response to such a complex social problem. The whole community needs to be involved. Mr Wong has said the taskforce will map out a long-term and sustainable plan by October. It is to be commended for having already made training for schools and parents a priority. Law enforcement, outreach and treatment and rehabilitation of drug users remain frontline responses. But only by focusing on education of the community can the taskforce hope to turn the tide.
