Slovenia is the third among the EU countries in terms of the number of police officers per capita (after Greece

and Spain). According to the police, in some police administration units (PAU) at least half of all performed duties involve criminalistic work related to drugs - of which at least 80% includes offenses due to cannabis. The vast majority of users are actually convicted of trafficking due to the rather questionable level of professionalism practiced by the Slovenian police, prosecution and courts. This is evident from the reports of individual PAU, where they record up to 30% of criminal returnees, when in reality they were not criminals to begin with. They were only drug users, who were convicted under PC-1 instead of PPPD. This is also confirmed by the police statistics. The average ratio between felonies and misdemeanors (with relation to drugs) in the EU is 5-10% of felonies (trafficking) and 90-95% of misdemeanors (possession). In Slovenia, the picture in this area is rather horrifying - the Slovenian average is 30% of felonies and 70% of misdemeanors. If you look at the data in more detail, the deviations between individual PAU are rather amazing. By far most notable is PAU of Murska Sobota, where the average is 70% of felonies and only 30% of misdemeanors. (Chart. 1)

Chart. 1 - Relationship between felonies (PC-1) and misdemeanors (PPPD) shown by each PAU 2003-2010 - MI-police source

Another worrying fact is that the PAU Murska Sobota records the highest rate of felonies related to drugs in Slovenia. Slovenian average is 5 felonies (PC-1) and 9 misdemeanors (PPPD) per 1000 inhabitants, whereas in the PAU Murska Sobota the ratio is 10 felonies (PC-1) and only 4 misdemeanors (PPPD) per 1000 inhabitants. This could mean that PAU Murska Sobota artificially inflates its performance at criminal investigations which can be seen from the graphs no. 3 and 4.

Chart. 2 - Average number of felonies (PC-1) and misdemeanors (PPPD) with relation to drugs per 1000 inhabitants from 2003 to 2010 Source: MI-Police

Chart. 3 - The average number of felonies and misdemeanors related to drugs per individual police officer from 2003 to 2010 Source: MI-Police

While the PAU Murska Sobota marks the highest amount of felonies per 1,000 inhabitants, the graph no. 3 shows that at the same time it is by far the least successful in the number of felonies per individual police officer. Therefore one may conclude with a high level of certainty that PAU Murska Sobota exploits the lack of felonies related to drugs while at the same time artificially inflates its performance at criminal investigations which is shown in the graph no. 4.

Chart. 4 - Number of felonies (PC-1) and misdemeanors (PPPD) in PAU Murska Sobota from 2002 to 2011 Source: MI-Police The graph no. 4 shows that the PAU Murska Sobota compensates the lack of felonies by treating the drug users by PC-1 instead of PPPD. This corresponds to the prosecutor's office as well as the court as it lifts their performance. Thus we can see that in 2005 PAU Murska Sobota did not record any misdemeanor in relation to drugs, while at the same time one can notice an incredible increase in the number of felonies, as well as a higher increase in the so-called returnees since 2005. However, onwards from 2008 the phenomenon of felonies seems to be rapidly decreasing. In addition, PAU Murska Sobota recorded only 34 felonies (PC-1) and 35 misdemeanors (PPPD) in relation to drugs during the first half of 2011. This trend is not followed by the annual reports PAU Murska Sobota where every year is highlighted that the number of felonies related to drugs is increasing. In 2010, due to the increasing number of crimes related to drugs, PAU Murska Sobota even set up a special group in the SKP - PAU Murska Sobota for the fight against drug trafficking.

Chart. 5 - The number of felonies and the relationship between PC-1 and PPPD by PAU in the first half of 2011 Source: MI-Police It is highly noticeable from the graph no. 5 that the number of felonies related to drugs in PAU Murska Friday fell sharply in 2011 (34), while at the same time there is also an extremely low number of misdemeanors under the PPPD (35). Nevertheless, PAU Murska Sobota still insists at the all more tougher approach towards cases that involve illicit drugs. Was the situation proportional to the Slovenian average, PAU Murska Sobota would only have 21 felonies and 48 misdemeanors. Recently, trends that are similar to those in PAU Murska Sobota can be noticeable also in other PAUs.

Chart. 6 - Number of felonies (PC--1) and misdemeanors (PPPD) in RS 2003-2011

The graph no. 6 shows that the situation with regard to drugs in Slovenia is quite stable and shows more realistic picture. Considering criminal proceedings, which would actually have to be misdemeanors under the ZPPPD, the number of felonies related to drugs in Slovenia is continuously decreasing. At the same time we must not forget that Slovenia each year unnecessarily spends at least 300,000,000.00 due to the criminalization of its citizens for the use of cannabis - this dizzying number includes the cost of police, prosecution, courts, experts, witnesses, lawyers, spies, helicopters etc.

Chart. 7 - Number of police officers per capita in the EU

While speaking of criminalization of citizens due to the use of cannabis (or other illicit drugs) one can not ignore the role or, should we say, zeal of the district public prosecutors and courts (district, county and higher). Since the data from other regions / district courts are not available, we will list just a few examples of the District Court of Murska Sobota for which we have collected all the documents. 1. Due to the possession of 13 grams of cannabis with tobacco mixture (approximately 5-6 g of pure cannabis), the District Court of Murska Sobota sentenced the Slovenian citizen to 4 months of imprisonment with a probation period of 12 months. Although it was more than obvious that the police unlawfully searched the vehicle and that there was no evidence of the intended sale, the court fully followed allegations of the police and prosecutors. In this case the police officer, although he has been advised otherwise, searched the bag whose owner was not present at the time of search. This was done in the way that he ordered another person to vacate the said bag, as well as the jacket. In the bag there were 5 packages of seeds, which happens to be completely legal in Slovenia. (They were purchased in Austria.) In confirming the trial court judgment, Higher Court in Maribor mainly focused on those five

packets of seeds in its ruling and reasoning, while at the same time the convicted got those packets returned after the end of the procedure, because the lower court did not seize them. According to PC-1 and PPPD court has to confiscate all items that are prohibited under these laws - which actually means that the higher court upheld the conviction of the district court on the basis of returned seeds, which do not constitute a delict. 2. District Court of Murska Sobota issues search warrants that are contrary to the applicable law which says that the issue of the search warrant requires a reason for a justified suspicion. In one of the cases the proposal PAU Murska Sobota (PP G. Radgona) states that a police officer learned from a person nicknamed Ivan Mali that XY was supposed to have cannabis at home. Just this statement in the proposal of the police was sufficient evidence for the investigative judge to issue a search warrant. Anonymous information can not and should not be the reason for a justified suspicion, especially if anonymous applicant can not give statement. In the District Court of Murska Sobota it is also common for the court not to file the proposal of the police. Therefore, District Court of Murska Sobota explicitly and systematically violates the Slovenian Constitution, CCP, PC-1, case-law, the judgments of the higher courts (Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court), all of which have indicated that the proposal must be in the police file because the search warrant is issued based on the proposal from the police. Should this not be the case, the search is contrary to the law and as such, inadmissible. However, this does not apply to the District Court of Murska Sobota.

The vast majority of drug users is therefore - according to the rough analysis of statistic data - convicted of trafficking, although the drugs are possessed solely for personal use. One of the main reasons for the neccessity to end the criminalization of drug users in Slovenia is the fact that the register of those convicted of drug trafficking is led for the entire Schengen system, which is also available in the U.S. Thus, for example, the U.S. can prohibit the entry to the country for a person who has been convicted of drug trafficking, as a border official does not know whether it is a drug user who has been convicted for possession of 5 grams of cannabis or whether it is a real dealer. Another aspect is the social marginalization that is implemented by the state in a manner that allows testing for illegal drugs as a condition for employment. It is an unlawful discrimination because the employer can not interfere into personal affairs of the applicant for employment or the employee as long as he carries out his work in accordance with the work contract.