Contact hours: 1 hour
Practical sessions: 1 hour
Self-study hours: 1 hour
Assessment hours: 20 min
This unit describes the national legal framework in the 6 consortium countries (Lithuania, Greece, Denmark, Slovenia, Romania, Portugal) concerning the approach of addictions to illicit substances, of existing limits, notions of confidentiality and the need to report potentially dangerous situations.
Upon successful completion of the Unit, the learner should:
The unit will be developed through:
Discussions
Practical sessions
Other
The unit will be evaluated through:
National Legislation in Lithuania
National Legislation in Romania
National Legislation in Slovenia
Slovenia has established a comprehensive legal framework to address substance use disorders (SUD) and regulate activities related to illicit drugs. The key national legislation includes:
These laws and regulations collectively form the foundation of Slovenia’s approach to managing and mitigating the impact of substance use disorders within the country.
National Legislation in Portugal
In 2001, Portugal implemented a groundbreaking reform by decriminalizing the personal possession of all drugs, shifting its approach from criminal punishment to a health-centered model. Rather than facing imprisonment and a criminal record, individuals caught with small amounts of drugs for personal use are subject to administrative penalties. These penalties can include fines or community service, though drugs are still confiscated.
Decisions on whether a penalty is imposed are made by Commissions for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction (CDTs), which operate at the district level. Each panel is composed of legal, health, and social work professionals. When someone is referred to a Commission for the first time, their case is automatically suspended if their drug use is deemed low risk, meaning no further action is taken. For repeat cases, fines may be issued. If moderate risk is identified, brief interventions—such as counseling—are recommended, though participation remains voluntary. In high-risk cases, where signs of dependence or serious behavioral concerns arise, individuals can be directed to specialized treatment services, though these referrals are not compulsory.
In most cases, individuals referred to the Commission are not found to have problematic drug use, and their cases are closed with no penalties. Many people who go through the process view the Commissions as a supportive, educational intervention, aimed at raising awareness of drug-related risks rather than punishing users. The system is intentionally non-judgmental, with a core mission of protecting public health and individual well-being.
It is essential to recognize that decriminalization was just one aspect of Portugal’s broader drug policy reform. The shift also involved expanding harm reduction initiatives and improving access to treatment services. By acknowledging that drug use is a social and health issue rather than a matter for criminal enforcement, Portugal’s policy aims to reduce harm rather than rely on punitive measures.
1970s – Carnation Revolution and rise of drug use
The Carnation Revolution of 1974 marked the end of Portugal’s dictatorship and the beginning of a transition to democracy. This political shift opened the country’s borders, exposing its population to a variety of global influences—including an influx of drugs. Substances like heroin, cocaine, and cannabis became more widely available, leading to a sharp rise in drug use, particularly among young people and returning soldiers from colonial wars. By the late 1970s, the country was facing an escalating heroin epidemic, with nearly 1% of the population becoming addicted by the early 1980s. The government responded by implementing stricter drug prohibition laws, focusing on punitive measures rather than prevention or treatment. Two key laws were enacted during this period:
Despite these laws, drug addiction rates continued to climb, laying the groundwork for a public health crisis in the decades to come.
1980s – First Treatment Measures
Throughout the 1980s, Portugal’s drug crisis deepened, leading to widespread drug-related crime, a surge in HIV infections, and increasing overdose deaths. The country’s prison system became overcrowded with drug users, as the legal system primarily treated drug use as a criminal offense rather than a health issue. The government remained committed to punitive approaches, enforcing even harsher legal measures. Key legislative actions included:
By the early 1990s, it became clear that criminalization alone was not reducing drug use. In response, Portugal introduced its first harm reduction programs in 1993, which included needle exchange programs and methadone therapy. This marked the beginning of a slow shift toward public health-focused policies, though drugs still remained illegal.
1999-2001: Decriminalization Reform (Law 30/2000)
Between 1997 and 1999, a government commission was established to explore alternative drug policies. The commission’s findings revealed that criminalization had worsened public health outcomes, increased the spread of HIV/AIDS, and failed to reduce drug consumption. Based on their recommendations, Portugal embarked on one of the most significant drug policy shifts in modern history—the decriminalization of drug possession. This reform was formalized in Law No. 30/2000, which was passed in 2000 and took effect on July 1, 2001. The law introduced several key changes:
This groundbreaking policy shifted the focus from punishment to treatment, laying the foundation for Portugal’s health-centered approach to drug use.
2001-Present: Expansion and adjustments to the model
2008 – Expansion of Harm Reduction Policies
Following the success of decriminalization, the Portuguese government increased investment in public health services, further strengthening its harm reduction programs. This included the expansion of community-based initiatives, such as:
2011 – International Recognition
A decade after decriminalization, Portugal’s drug policy reforms were widely recognized as a success. Organizations like the United Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU) praised the Portuguese model, citing significant improvements in public health. Studies showed: HIV infections among drug users had fallen by over 80%; drug-related deaths had declined sharply, making Portugal’s overdose mortality rate one of the lowest in Europe; levels of drug use remained stable, disproving concerns that decriminalization would lead to an increase in consumption.
Portugal’s evidence-based approach inspired other nations to rethink their drug policies, positioning the country as a global leader in drug policy reform.
2018-2021 – Adjustments to threshold quantities
As the model evolved, Portugal made several legal adjustments to ensure the fair and effective application of decriminalization laws, namely:
With these adjustments, Portugal continued to refine its harm reduction approach, maintaining its commitment to public health and evidence-based drug policies.
National Legislation in Greece
Policy Coordination in the Field of Drugs in Greece
Policy coordination in the field of drugs is provided for in Law 4139/2013. The highest coordinating body is the Interministerial Committee for the National Action Plan on Drugs, chaired by the Prime Minister. The National Action Plan on Drugs is drafted by the National Committee for Planning and Coordination for Drug Policy (NCPCD), under the chairmanship of the National Drug Coordinator. The National Action Plan is approved by the Interministerial Committee.
In addition to drafting the National Action Plan, (NCPCD) is responsible for promoting the necessary measures for its implementation and monitoring, as well as developing international collaborations. Based on the above, the National Strategy 2021–2026 and the National Action Plan 2021–2023 were completed in early 2021. As these two documents have been submitted to the Prime Minister by EESAN and are pending approval, their adoption by the State and the commencement of their implementation constitute a significant issue in the field of addiction in Greece.
A notable development in 2021 was the establishment, for the first time in Greece, of a legal framework (Ministerial Decision G.P.oik.78049, Government Gazette 5969/B/17-12-2021) for the administration of naloxone in cases of acute opioid intoxication by trained professionals (doctors and nurses, street-work program staff, shelter workers, drug treatment organization personnel, prison staff, etc.). The expansion of naloxone use had been a longstanding request from professionals in the field, as it is a substance capable of reversing the effects of opioids on the body and is used in overdose cases to prevent deaths.
Additionally, the publication of a Ministerial Decision (D2a/oik.25602/2020, Government Gazette 1607/B/27-4-2020) was significant, as it defined the terms and conditions for the operation of Supervised Consumption Facilities (SCFs). In these spaces, under the presence of specialized staff, individuals can use substances (which they bring themselves) in a controlled environment with clean syringes and equipment, thus reducing additional health risks and the transmission of infectious diseases within their networks. At the same time, there is the possibility to provide services for health issues and referral to other services and structures. This new legal framework enabled the issuance of a license in 2022 and the reopening by OKANA (the Organization Against Drugs) of a Supervised Consumption Facility in central Athens, under the name “STEKI 46”.
To simplify the process of producing and exporting medical cannabis, the relevant legal framework was further enriched by Law 4801/2021, which amends the 2014 law (4523/2014) concerning the export of medical cannabis products. It also includes a Joint Ministerial Decision (Government Gazette 1151/B/15-3-2022), which redefines the conditions for the cultivation and processing of medical cannabis, fully replacing the previous Joint Ministerial Decision from 2018. Furthermore, with Article 71 of Law 4864/2021, the import of finished medical cannabis products was prohibited.
The creation of specialized accommodation structures for homeless users of psychoactive substances was institutionalized through a Joint Ministerial Decision (Government Gazette 5252/11-10-2022), which allows drug treatment organizations to submit housing requests. In addition, Article 84 of Law 4985 provides that uninsured prisoners with substance use problems are entitled to free medical, pharmaceutical, and nursing care for as long as they are held in a detention facility.
Law 5129/2024 (Completion of the Psychiatric Reform): is the merger of the three major national addiction treatment organizations:
These entities are being unified under a single national body, in an effort to:
National Legislation in Denmark
Substance abuse treatment under both the Social Services Act and the Health Act is free of charge for the drug addict. If a drug addict is referred to residential treatment under the Social Services Act, the individual’s payment only covers the accommodation-related expenses.
Legislation §
The Social Services Act, cf. Consolidated Act no. 798 of 7 August 2019 Section 4(1) of the Social Services Act. The municipal board must ensure that there are the necessary services in accordance with this Act
The Danish Health Act, cf. Consolidated Act no. 903 of 26 August 2019 Section 2(1)(1) of the Danish Health Act. The Act sets out the requirements for the healthcare system in order to ensure respect for the individual, their integrity and self-determination and to meet the need for 1) easy and equal access to the healthcare system.
Section 2(1)(5) of the Danish Health Act. The law sets out the requirements for the healthcare system in order to ensure respect for the individual, their integrity and self-determination and to fulfil the need for 5) easy access to information
Section 6(2) of the Social Supervision Act, cf. Consolidated Act No. 846 of 21 August 2019 Executive Order No. 536 of 2 May 2019 on social supervision, cf. Appendix 1, quality model criterion 14. The physical environment of the offer supports the development and well-being of citizens. Indicator 14.a: The citizens thrive in the physical environment. Indicator 14.b: The physical environment and facilities meet the special needs of the citizens.
Section 139 of the Danish Act on Social Services, cf. Consolidated Act no. 846 of 21 August 2019 Executive Order no. 1477 of 17 December 2019 on coverage, vouchers and quality standard for social treatment for substance abuse in accordance with section 101 of the Danish Social Services Act, section 3(1). The municipal council shall establish a quality standard for the municipality’s offer of social treatment for substance abuse pursuant to section 101 of the Social Services Act. Stk. 2. The quality standard shall contain comprehensive information about the programmes and services offered by the local council to persons seeking social treatment for drug abuse. The quality standard must describe the level of service in the substance abuse treatment area decided by the municipal council, including the political objectives and priorities behind the decision.
Action Plans
It is mandatory for the municipal authority to offer the preparation of an action plan pursuant to section 141 of the Danish Social Services Act when assistance is provided to citizens with significantly reduced physical or mental functional capacity or citizens with serious social problems who cannot or only with significant support can stay in their own home, or who otherwise need significant support to improve their personal development opportunities (section 141(2) of the Danish Social Services Act. 2.) The purpose of the section 141 action plan is to clarify the goal of the effort, to ensure a coherent and holistic effort and to clarify the obligations of all persons, agencies and administrative branches involved in the effort. In the field of substance abuse, it would be appropriate for several reasons to offer citizens the opportunity to draw up section 141 action plans. For those citizens with substance abuse who may not be covered by the requirement for an action plan, the preparation of action plans may be appropriate to ensure their participation and motivation and to involve relevant parties as early as possible in the process. [68] It is important for the treatment programme to clarify whether the citizen has a section 141 action plan and if so, to coordinate the social substance abuse treatment with it to ensure coordination across all offers and services. As part of the overall action plan, a description of the substance abuse treatment should be included. If the citizen is in medical substance abuse treatment, the treatment plan for this treatment must be included as part of and coordinated with the overall action plan. The action plan cf. paragraphs 1 and 2 can be replaced by a holistic plan, cf. section 141(7), in the case of citizens with complex and multifaceted problems and where there is a need for coordination. The citizen must consent to the action plan being replaced by a holistic plan.
Overview:
A. Limits and confidentiality issues.
Therapeutic relationship – Doctor-patient confidentiality – legal and ethical obligations; exceptions/limits to confidentiality: duty to warn in case of a potential danger that will endanger the life of the patient or others, making information available, collaboration with another doctor or institution specialized in treating addictions, child abuse, courts, etc.
Therapeutic relationship – doctor-patient confidentiality legal and ethical obligations
The International Code of Medical Ethics states that the therapist “shall respect the patient’s right to confidentiality. It is ethical to disclose confidential information when the patient consents to it or when there is an imminent danger or threat to the patient or others and this threat can only be removed by breaching confidentiality.”
The therapeutic practitioner-patient relationship requires respect for confidentiality and the preservation of professional secrecy on all information given by the person.
Breaches of confidentiality raise legal issues and may lead to legal action for defamation, invasion of privacy or breach of contract.
The ethical principle of confidentiality ensures that medical information held about a patient is accessible only to those to whom the patient has given access by fully informed and autonomous consent.
Confidentiality may be breached if the information shared by the patient relates to a potential danger to public safety or if ordered by a court.
Exceptions to the obligation of confidentiality:
1. Duty to warn.
Materials and data collected may remain confidential, with several notable exceptions that must be explained to the patient.
If the patient poses a threat to himself or herself or to another person or is seriously affected by his or her disorder and is unable to care for himself or herself or the children in his or her care, we must report the risk to the appropriate authorities.
The most important exception is the duty to warn, which requires healthcare professionals to notify potential victims of the patient’s expressed intention to harm another person.
In this case the healthcare professional faces an ethical dilemma: breach of confidentiality versus duty to protect another potential victim. (welfare, non-harm)
Child abuse or abuse of a vulnerable person
All US states now require by law that, among other things, psychiatrists who believe that a child has been physically or sexually abused must immediately make a report to the appropriate agency.
It will also violate the principle of confidentiality to report abuse of a vulnerable person (elderly, disabled, etc.).
2. Making information available.
The patient must consent to the disclosure of information from their medical records before the healthcare professional can make that information available. The healthcare professional may invoke therapeutic privilege, but then the release must be made by a representative of the patient (usually the patient’s lawyer), in accordance with the relevant national law concerned.
Making information available for research purposes (studies, scientific articles, case presentations, etc.) Conditions under which personal data may be made public: the individual has agreed to the publication of the data; the individual has not objected; the interest of the research justifies the publication; the publication of the data is in accordance with the law and justified on public health grounds.
Availability of information in supervision situations (in psychological counseling training and in situations of doctors with limited competence: students, resident doctors, doctors with a specialty other than psychiatry or addiction).
By discussing the case with his or her supervisor, the student, resident physician or counsellor-in-training will violate the principle of confidentiality and the trust of his or her patient.
In such situations the trainee practitioner will inform patients that they are being supervised by a licensed psychiatrist or licensed trainer and ask for consent to release confidential information.
Making information available for health insurance and payment of health services
In order to obtain information with which to assess the administration and cost of various specialised substance use disorder treatment programmes, the insurer must have access to the medical data and documents held by the therapist or institution, as appropriate, in order to provide protection to the insured person.
3. Discussing patients in the best interests of the case.
Clinicians have an obligation not to disclose identifiable patient information without the patient’s informed consent. In most cases of substance use, managing the medical problem involves collaboration between several specialties. A second opinion also allows the clinician to obtain information about the standard of practice of the peer group. For this the patient will be informed that his/her consent is required for communication or discussion of the case with another colleague or institution. Whenever an examination or treatment is beyond his/her capabilities, the clinician will consult with a colleague or refer the patient to another clinician who has the necessary skills. (International Code of Medical Ethics)
Example 1: A general practitioner has limited powers to prescribe and treat substance use disorders or to establish a psychiatric condition related to substance use. For this he will consult with a psychiatrist disclosing data about the patient.
Example 2: a patient with psychiatric conditions requiring the presence of a legal guardian becomes a substance user, becomes pregnant in the meantime, but her mental state endangers the pregnancy. It is necessary to communicate this to the psychiatrist or gynecologist with the consent of the guardian.
Example 3: a general practitioner has a patient with schizophrenia with multiple admissions to a psychiatric clinic, who in the meantime develops a substance use disorder, the patient no longer presents for treatment of the underlying condition putting his health and life at risk. The general practitioner will consult with fellow psychiatrists about the course of action in this case, disclosing information about the patient.
4. Preventive disclosure (safeguard).
The healthcare professionals must report to the authorities in situations specifically provided for in the law.
Mandatory reporting of this kind will include, for example, the patient with epilepsy and chronic substance use disorders who drives a motor vehicle or works on a mechanized device (crane, forklift, etc.).
5. Witness status of the clinician (courts)
The clinician cannot disclose information as a witness about patients against their will.
Exceptions: hospitalization proceedings, examinations decided by a court (military or civil), custody hearings, malpractice claims.
A doctor will practice independent professional judgment and maintain the highest standards of professional behaviour towards patients.
The physician will be dedicated to providing competent medical care in full moral and professional independence, with compassion and respect for human dignity. He/she will behave honestly with patients and colleagues and will report to the authorities those physicians who practice unethically or incompetently or who engage in fraud or deceit. (International Code of Medical Ethics)