Drug imports and exports: a Dutch criminal case at the border

A European trip is not an exception

Customs explains that the drug bans are also important when traveling within the EU. Open borders or the absence of regular customs controls do not automatically make a substance permitted. For the Opium Act, the relevant cross-border act is its own question. An assessment that only concerns a small quantity or use in the Netherlands may therefore be insufficient to form a suspicion regarding import or export. (Customs explains that drug bans are also important when traveling within the EU)

First determine what exactly is being charged or investigated. Does it involve bringing in, bringing out, transport, presence, preparation or a combination? The same trip can raise different legal questions, but that does not mean that every involvement is certain for every person. A precise overview of the alleged actions prevents a conversation from only being about the chance of being caught or the purpose of the trip. Ask the lawyer which components and forms of participation need to be assessed in this case.

The name in a message is not the full legal classification

The Opium Act makes a distinction between prohibited acts and the substances or substance groups to which the law applies. The current Customs Manual on the Opium Act refers to lists I, IA and II. A brand name, street name or description in a message does not have to be the same as the substance that a laboratory determines. Therefore, have it checked which material has been examined and on which the conclusion about the composition is based. (Opium Act · Customs manual on the Opium Act)

Connect that information to the date of the alleged conduct. Lists and bans are subject to change. The statement that a substance was for sale somewhere is not a determination of its legal status at the relevant time. The claim that a drug is legal elsewhere does not automatically answer the Dutch import question. A careful discussion makes it clear which substance, preparation or group of substances is relevant and what uncertainty still exists in the research.

Create a travel and transfer chronology

Note at each time who had access to the goods, which agreement applied and what data supports this. Distinguish between arranging a trip, collecting luggage, transferring an object, actually traveling and checking. Save travel confirmations, original messages and available business documents. The goal is not to construct a perfect story, but to show which events are certain and where the lawyer believes further investigation is necessary.

Also write down where a memory comes from. Your own observation is different from what a fellow traveler said later or what is stated in an official report. On a long trip, time zones, stops and different devices can make the order unclear. Highlight such differences instead of equalizing all times without explanation. Small administrative inaccuracies are not automatically decisive, but can become important if a conclusion is based on the precise sequence.

Ignorance is a research question, not a standard answer

When the suspicion concerns intentional import or export, there can be discussion about science and intent. Simply saying that you did not know what was in an object is not a substantiated assessment. The lawyer will want to know, among other things, what agreements were made, how the goods were obtained and what information was available before the trip. Unfavorable circumstances must be discussed as carefully as exculpatory data.

Avoid an apparent choice between immediately explaining everything and not being allowed to investigate anything anymore. As a suspect you have legal rights and can request legal assistance. At the same time, relevant material can be lost if no one knows it exists. Therefore, discuss in a timely manner which original data must be retained and which research questions arise from the file. A verifiable research question is different from a statement that is subsequently adjusted to every new detail that becomes known.

Traveling, transporting and organizing are different facts

A joint reservation can show that people traveled together. This does not automatically establish that they had the same knowledge or the same task. A telephone contact also does not say what was discussed without context. An assessment of personal involvement therefore requires the connection between data: which action, which time, which appointment and which contribution? Let the lawyer distinguish between indications of presence and indications of criminal participation.

That distinction also works the other way around. A limited visible role does not automatically mean that only the person who held the object can be criminally relevant. Organizing, supporting or making other contributions may raise legal questions. It is not wise to replace that assessment itself with a simple diagram of the main suspect and co-driver. Discuss your actual activities and available information in detail. Its meaning follows from the specific suspicion and the applicable law.

Fictional example: a joint reservation and a separate bag

In a fictional example, Aya travels with an acquaintance. There is one reservation, but their luggage has been packed and transferred at different times. During the inspection, a prohibited substance is found in a bag associated with the trip. The joint reservation is a fact. However, she does not say who packed the bag, what information the other person had or when access to the bag existed.

A useful preparation brings together reservation, baggage information, original messages and transfer moments. This does not automatically result in an exculpatory outcome: the data may also contain incriminating indications. The example above all shows that a single travel document does not answer every personal question. Discuss the real documents with the lawyer and do not approach others to agree on a joint story. The research must be able to examine verifiable differences, without new agreements clouding the original situation.

Traveling with prescribed medicines requires your own checks

Not every medicine falls under the same regime. Customs describes for travelers which declarations may be required for medicines under the Opium Act. A prescription or pharmacy label does not automatically answer every international document question. Which explanation is required depends partly on the drug and the journey. In case of a specific suspicion, have it checked which exception, exemption or documentation applied to the situation.

Keep the original packaging, instructions and actual used declarations when available. Distinguish between documents that existed before departure and documents that were requested later. A medical explanation obtained later can provide useful information, but does not automatically change the course of the trip. Also, do not take potentially prohibited material to various authorities to ask for an explanation. Discuss how the relevant data can be assessed safely and via the appropriate route.

A guideline is not a pre-filled statement

The Public Prosecution Service has a guideline for Opium Act substances from list I and list IA from 2025. It distinguishes between different behaviors and circumstances. A trade or possession table should therefore not simply be adopted in response to an import case. Nor is it responsible to promise an individual punishment from one quantity. The applicable arrangement, person, role and concrete circumstances must be taken into account.

Always ask what a comparison is based on when considering sentencing. Is the behavior the same? Are the means, date and relevant circumstances correct? Is it a demand from the Public Prosecution Service or a decision by a judge? These questions help prevent an outcome read on the Internet from being treated as a personal prediction. The same applies to additional topics such as attachment, financial consequences and pre-trial detention: they deserve their own legal assessment and do not disappear in a general assessment of the punishment.

Save data with its original context

An overview for the lawyer must enable control. Save entire conversations where you can legitimately, rather than just copying a favorable sentence without the date or sender. Do not change or delete information to make an explanation seem simpler. If the police have seized devices or documents, make it clear which material may be relevant and how it can be identified in the file.

• Suspicion: alleged act, case number, period and available procedural documents.
• Means: research, sample, description and the legal list or substance group.
• Trip: reservation, actual route, stops and relevant time indications.
• Transfer: access to goods, persons present and original agreements.
• Communications: complete relevant conversations, origins and known missing data.
• Documents: existing declarations, regulations or company documents with their date.
• Assistance: lawyer, interpreter, urgent decisions and specific research questions.

An accurate role description advances the defense

The most complicated question is often not whether a border exists, but how a specific person is legally linked to a prohibited cross-border act. This requires research into substance, behavior and science, without suppressing the differences between suspects. A timeline is especially helpful when it also makes the limits of the available knowledge visible. It is less useful if it subsequently fills in all uncertainties with assumptions.

In the event of an interrogation or deprivation of liberty, request legal assistance and an interpreter if necessary. The Code of Criminal Procedure provides the framework for the procedural position; the guide to drug possession deals with a different angle than border crossing. In the event of a suspicion that concerns preparatory actions, the in-depth information about preparatory actions in the Opium Act is also relevant. Use those topics to formulate the request for help more clearly, without assuming that every part fits every case. (Code of Criminal Procedure · drug possession · preparatory acts in the Opium Act)