Supreme Court dismisses appeal against two-and-a-half-year sentence for cannabis possession, endorsing severe social problem approach.
Cipro (CY)
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAThe Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against a two-and-a-half-year prison sentence for possessing 17 grams of cannabis. The trial court justified the harsh penalty by characterizing narcotics use as a severe social problem requiring stern judicial response. The court rejected the appellant's claim of excessive sentencing, noting that his failure to explain why he kept the drugs for two years undermined his defense of accidental possession.
Regesto Legislator
Generato dall'IASections 6 and 24 of the Narcotic Drugs Law 1967; The court held that when narcotics use constitutes a serious social menace, courts must adopt a severe approach to sentencing, rejecting arguments for leniency based on possession alone.
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADisposizioni normative citate
Generato dall'IAGiurisprudenza citata
Generato dall'IADecisioni correlate
Generato dall'IATesto completo
[*1272] 1971 June 18
(TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P., L. LOIZOU, A. LOIZOU, JJ. )
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Ioannis Andreou Maos,
Appellant,
v.
The Republic,
Respondent.
(Criminal Appeal No. 3254).
Criminal Law - Sentence - Two and a half years’ imprisonment for possessing a narcotic drug - Sections 6 and 24 of the Narcotic Drugs Law 1967 (3/67) and Regulation 5 of the Narcotic Drugs Regulations, 1967 - Trial Court's approach that use of narcotics is becoming a social problem in Cyprus endorsed - Appeal dismissed.
Narcotics
- Sentence - Use of Narcotics a social problem - See, also, under "Criminal Law".
Sentence
- Narcotics - See under "Criminal Law".
E. Odysseos with E. Efstathrou, for the Appellant.
No appearance for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
The following judgment was delivered by: -
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.: In this case the appellant appeals against the sentence of imprisonment for two [*1273] and a half years which was imposed on him by an Assize Court in Nicosia, on the 11th May, 1971, for the offence of possessing, without being authorised by the Director of Medical Services, a narcotic drug, viz. 17 grams of cannabis sativa, contrary to the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs Law, 1967 (3/67) and of the Narcotic Drugs Regulations, 1967.
It has been submitted by counsel for the appellant that the sentence imposed on him should be reduced because it is, in the circumstances, manifestly excessive. We are unable to agree with this submission, for the following reasons:-
The Assize Court in passing sentence stated, inter alia, that
"The use of narcotics has become a social problem all over the world ........ We had hoped that Cyprus would not have to face the problem of narcotics to any considerable extent, but it appears that this is not so. From the statistics before us it is obvious that it has now become a social problem in Cyprus and as such it has to be faced by the Courts in Cyprus very sternly".
We fully endorse the severe approach of the Assize Court towards what is, indeed, becoming a terrible social evil in our country.
The Assize Court went on to state the following in relation to the explanation of the appellant that the said 17 grams were found in his possession because they [*1274] had been forgotten by him, where they lay, since the time, two years ago, when he was taking narcotics as a means of relief from pain which he was suffering before undergoing a certain operation:
"It has been further suggested that the quantity found was what was left over from the time he was taking it and that he had no intention either to take it himself or supply it to other persons. However, no explanation was put forward as to why he had not destroyed this quantity and kept it for two years if, what was alleged on his behalf, were correct. This leads us to the conclusion that his version in this respect cannot be true. However, we will give him the benefit of the doubt as to whether he intended to trade in it or take it for himself".
As counsel who appeared for the appellant before the Assize Court, and who are the same counsel who have appeared for him before us today, had pleaded, in mitigation, that according to their instructions the appellant was no longer an addict, one would have expected that the conclusion to be arrived at, without any doubt, by the Assize Court - after it had rejected, as aforesaid, the appellant's version - would be that he intended to supply to others the 17 grams of cannabis sativa which were found in his possession; and, in such a case, the appellant's conduct called for punishment even more severe than two and a half years of imprisonment. It is, therefore, with some difficulty that we have refrained [*1275] from increasing the sentence imposed on him by the trial Court.
Counsel for the appellant have referred us to three previous cases involving possession of narcotic drugs: Anastassiou v. The Republic, (1969) 11 J.S.C. 1370, Afamis v. The Republic, (1969) 7 J.S.C. 891 and Grivas and another v. The Police, (1967) 11 J.S.C. 1304. The case of Anastassiou was dealt with on the basis of very special considerations which render it definitely distinguishable from the present one. In the two other cases there were imposed in the first instance, and upheld on appeal, sentences of eighteen months' imprisonment, two years ago and four years ago, respectively, at times when the possession of narcotics was not becoming, as now, a social menace.
In concluding we would like to observe that in this appeal there was no appearance of counsel for the respondent; this is a most unfortunate situation which we trust will not be allowed to recur.
In the result the appeal is dismissed and the sentence of the appellant is to run, according to law, from today.
Appeal dismissed.