When a person commits any offence, then he or she is punished, so that such act or omissions do not repeat in the future. There are different theories to understand the nature of punishment and on the other hand, victim is entitled to compensation.

Punishment

There is no universal accepted definition of a punishment. It can be simply defined as an 'infliction of some kind of pain or loss upon for a misdeed'. It is a practice of imposing something unpleasant on a person as a response to some unwanted or immoral behaviour or disobedience that he/she has displayed. The chief objectives of punishment are providing retribution to victim against the offender, deter the criminal from future criminal act, and rehabilitation of the offender.

A punishment is not just only for taking revenge and retribution, but has a wide view which includes utlitarian concern for deterrence and rehabilitation. Humanists have different views on the relevancy of a punishment, some are in favour of punishment, while many oppose it. Crime and misdeed are part of every society, thus punishment become important to ensure smooth functioning of a society.

Theories of Punishment

A punishment has multiple facets. In order to understand them, scholars have propounded different theories of punishment. These theories cover almost all the aspects of punishment, which are as follows:

Deterrent Theory

Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham are considered as the founders of this theory. This theory was based on a hedonistic conception of man and that man as such would be deterred from crime if punishment were applied swiftly, certainly and severely.

This theory is most prominent theory of punishment. According to this theory, deterrence prevents crime, by the infliction of an exemplary sentence on the offender. The motives of the offender are impacted by the deterrence. The founders of this theory believed that, a punishment is meant to prevent the person concerned and other persons from committing similar offences. There are many countries in the world, which still follow practice of capital punishment, as they believe that capital punishment has highest deterrence.

The core principle of deterrence theory is that evil should be returned for evil without taking into consideration any consequences. There are mainly two types of deterrence, i.e. specific and general deterrence. In former, punishment is designed such that it can educate the criminals and later is designed to avoid future crime.

The Supreme Court, in Phul Singh v. State of Haryana case observed that:
the incriminating company of lifers and others for long may be counter-productive and in this perspective, we blend deterrence with correction, and reduce the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for two years.

Preventive Theory

After deterrent theory, preventive theory is another important theory of punishment. Both preventive and deterrent theories seem to be same but quite different from each other. The aim of deterrence theory is to warn society at large to not to commit a crime, whereas the preventive theory aims at disabling the criminal from doing further harm. The preventive theory utilizes a restraint that an offender if repeats the criminal act, is culpable for death, exile or imprisonment. This theory is based on the principle that society must be protected from criminals. This theory disables the criminals from committing offences, through different means such as death penalty, putting an offender behind bars, etc.

For example, an owner of the land puts a notice that 'trespassers' would be prosecuted. Thus, his aim is not to punish trespass but to prevent it.

In another case, sending a criminal to the prison, the society is in turn trying to prevent the offender from doing any other crime.

Reformative Theory

Reformative theory views punishment from different perspective. This theory is based on the notion that the objective of punishment should be to bring reform in the offender, so that in future, an offender should not commit crime again. This theory is a type of positive theory, which believes that crime can be reduced or abolished by 'positive' deeds. The exponents of this theory emphasize that, when offenders stay in prison, there should be facilities to re-educate them and re-shape their personality.

Followers of this theory criticise severe punishments, such as execution, solitary confinement and maiming are relics of the past and enemies of reformation. This theory focuses on the change in the character of the offender, in order to make him decent member of the society.

Retributive Theory

This theory is one of the oldest theories for justification of punishment. The foundation stone of this theory was laid down by the principle An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”.

For example, if person A breaks a hand of person B in mutual fight, then punishment according to retributive theory will be that, hand of A will be broken. This theory is quite close to the concept of revenge. Above mentioned theories perceive punishment as a means to some other end, while this theory looks on it as end in itself.

This theory helps in providing moral satisfaction to the victim and society by punishing the criminal or offender for his act. This theory legitimises the concept that evil should be returned for evil, and an offender should be dealt with in the manner in which he deal others.

This theory has many inherent limitations such as, it ignores the causes of the crime, and it does not focus on the reformation of offender.

Compensation Theory

This theory puts forward another aspect of the punishment. The exponents of this theory believe that punishment is not only for preventing crime, but also to compensate the victim of the crime.

According to the compensation theory, punishment is decided keeping the interest of victim. For example, if person A injures person B in a road accident, then law can punish person A to take care of person B and pay amount incurred in medication.

Kinds of Punishment

Capital Punishment

Capital punishment is also referred as death punishment. As the name suggests, in this punishment, a person is killed through different means such as hanging, giving poison etc. Among all the punishments, capital punishment is considered as most deterrent.

During ancient and middle ages, this punishment was very common. In these ages, sometimes people were given death punishment for minor offence. In modern period, many countries abolished capital punishment.

Scholars have different views on capital punishment, many are in favour of completely abolishing it, while others are in favour of keeping it in cases of rarest of rare.

In Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab case, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is constitutionally valid and does not constitute an unreasonable, cruel or unusual punishment. The majority pointed out that the death penalty is to be imposed only for 'special reasons' and only in the rarest of rare case.

Deportation

The next punishment is deportation. It is a mechanism through which a person or group of people are expelled from a country. In India, it is referred as transportation. Deportation can be of both, citizen as well as illegal migrant.

This method does not provide long-term solution, as a man who is dangerous in one society and if he is let lose in another society, he is likely to be equally dangerous in other society also. Most of the countries have abolished this type of punishment.

Corporal Punishment

The punishment like modulation, flogging and torture falls under the category of corporal punishment. It is also known by the name of physical punishment. This punishment is quite horrific in nature.

Many prisoners bled to death as a result of the wound received by the lashes. Whipping was most common form of punishment, which continues mercilessly even after the prisoner has fainted.

Imprisonment

A state of being physically incarcerated or confined at a specific place, according to law of a land, is referred as an imprisonment. It can be of different terms, depending on the type of offence committed i.e. it can be for 1 year, 2 years, 10 years, 20 years or lifetime imprisonment. It serves many objectives of punishment, such as deterrence, preventive and building the character of the offender.

Solitary Confinement

Solitary confinement is a type of imprisonment. This type of punishment exploits fully the social nature of human beings and by denying them the society of their fellow beings, it seeks to inflict pain on them.

When offenders are left alone for longer time and they learn for company of someone, such situation is inflicted on an offender. A solitary confinement has a high probability to turn a person of sound mental health into a lunatic.

Indeterminate Sentence

In this kind of punishment, the accused is not sentenced to imprisonment for any fixed period. This punishment is effective in serving the reformative purpose to a great sentence. The term of sentence does not mention any specific period of time or release date.

Fine

Fine is monetary form of punishment. In this punishment, an offender has to pay amount, directed by a competent authority. Quantum of fine may be decided on the basis of cases. It can be from thousands to lakhs, fines can also be collected by forfeiting the property of the offender. Many times, offenders are imprisoned if they are not able to pay the fine.

Compensation to the Victims of Crime

Victim is an umbrella term which includes any person, group, or entity who have suffered harm, injury or loss due to illegal activities of others. A victim can undergo mental, physical and economic harm. In order to reduce the problem of victim, there is a provision of compensation. Compensation cannot fully solve the problem of victim, but it can help victim in starting a new journey.

For example, in the case of acid attack, a victim has a right to get compensation of rupee 3 lakh.

In India, compensation can be delivered through the following ways:

1. Compensation from State, which is the outcome of judicial imposition or sometimes even ex-gratia, under Constitution of India.
2. Compensation from an offender, which is the outcome either as a part of fine or allocation of a specific sum to victim, either under Cr.PC or Constitution of India.

Role of Judiciary in Compensation to Victims of Crime

The judiciary has played significant role in providing compensation to the victim of crime.

Some renowned cases are as follows: In the case of Hari Kishan and State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh and others, the court held that, the payment by way of compensation must, however, be reasonable. What is reasonable may depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The quantum of compensation may be determined by taking into account the nature of crime, the justness of claim by the victim and the ability of accused to pay.

In the case of Balraj Singh v. State of UP, the Supreme Court stated the point, as discussed in the case, in most appropriate words by saying that the power to award compensation is not ancillary to the other sentence but in addition thereto.

In the case ofBodhi Satta Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty, the Hon'ble Supreme Court invented the concept of interim compensation. An interim payment is an amount of compensation that is paid by the defendant to the injured person before their personal injury claim has settled.

In the landmark judgment of Saheli v. Commissioner of Police, where the son of the Kamlesh Kumari died due to ill treatment of an SI of Delhi Police, the Supreme Court directed the Delhi Administration to pay the compensation of rupee 75,000.

Provisions of Compensation to victims of Crime under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Following are some of the important provisions regarding compensation to victim of crime under Cr.PC, 1973

Compensation for Accusation without Reasonable Cause [Section 250 (1)]

If, in any case instituted upon complaint or upon information given to a police officer or to a Magistrate, one or more persons is or are accused before a Magistrate of any offence triable by a Magistrate, and the Magistrate by whom the case is heard discharges or acquits all or any of the accused, and is of opinion that there was no reasonable ground for making the accusation against them or any of them, the Magistrate may, by his order of discharge or acquittal, if the person upon whose complaint or information the accusation was made is present, call upon him forthwith to show cause why he should not pay compensation to such accused or to each or any of such accused when there are more than one; or, if such person is not present, direct the issue of a summons to him to appear and show cause as aforesaid.

Order to Pay Compensation (Section 357)

When a court imposes a sentence of fine or a sentence (including a sentence of death) of which fine forms a part, the court may, when passing judgment, order the whole or any part of the fine recovered to be applied:

1. in defraying the expenses properly incurred in the prosecution;
2. in the payment to any person of compensation for any loss or injury caused by the offence, when compensation is, in the opinion of the Court, recoverable by such person in a Civil Court;
3. when any person is convicted of any offence for having caused the death of another person or of having abetted the commission of such an offence, in paying compensation to the persons who are, under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, entitled to recover damages from the person sentenced for the loss resulting to them from such death;
4. when any person is convicted of any offence which includes theft, criminal misappropriation, criminal breach of trust, or cheating, or of having dishonestly received or retained, or of having voluntarily assisted in disposing of, stolen property knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen, in compensating any bonafide purchaser of such property for the loss of the same if such property is restored to the possession of the person entitled thereto. [Section 357(1)]

If the fine is imposed in a case which is subject to appeal, no such payment shall be made before the period allowed for presenting the appeal has elapsed, or, if an appeal be presented, before the decision of the appeal. [Section 357(2)]

When a court imposes a sentence, of which fine does not form a part, the court may, when passing judgment, order the accused person to pay, by way of compensation, such amount as may be specified in the order to the person who has suffered any loss or injury by reason of the act for which the accused person has been so sentenced. [Section 357(3)]

An order under this section may also be made by an Appellate Court or by the High Court or Court of Session when exercising its powers of revision. [Section 357(4)]

At the time of awarding compensation in any subsequent civil suit relating to the same matter, the court shall take into account any sum paid or recovered as compensation under this section. [Section 357(5)]

Victim Compensation Scheme (Section 357A)

Every State Government in co-ordination with the Central Government shall prepare a scheme for providing funds for the purpose of compensation to the victim or his dependents who have suffered loss or injury as a result of the crime and who, require rehabilitation. [Section 357A (1)]

Whenever a recommendation is made by the court for compensation, the district legal service authority or the state legal service authority, as the case may be, shall decide the quantum of compensation to be awarded under the scheme referred to in sub-section (1). [Section 357A (2)]

If the trial court, at the conclusion of the trial, is satisfied, that the compensation awarded under Section 357 is not adequate for such rehabilitation, or where the cases end in acquittal or discharge and the victim has to be rehabilitated, it may make recommendation for compensation, [Section 357A(3)]

Where the offender is not traced or identified, but the victim is identified, and where no trial takes place, the victim or his dependents may make an application to the State or the District legal services authority for award of compensation. [Section 357A (4)]

On receipt of such recommendations or on the application under sub-section (4), the State or the District legal services authority shall, after due enquiry award adequate compensation by completing the enquiry within two months. [Section 357A (5)]

The State or the District legal services authority, as the case may be, to alleviate the suffering of the victim, may order for immediate first-aid facility or medical benefits to be made available free of cost on the certificate of the police officer not below the rank of the officer incharge of the police station or a Magistrate of the area concerned, or any other interim relief as the appropriate authority deems fit. [Section 357A (6)]

Compensation to Persons Groundlessly Arrested (Section 358)

Whenever any person causes a police officer to arrest another person, if it appears to the Magistrate by whom the case is heard that there was no sufficient ground for causing such arrest, the Magistrate may award such compensation, not exceeding one hundred rupees, to be paid by the person so causing the arrest to the person so arrested, for his loss of time and expenses in the matter, as the Magistrate thinks fit. [Section 358(1)]

In such cases, if more persons than one are arrested, the Magistrate may, in like manner, award to each of them such compensation, not exceeding one hundred rupees, as such Magistrate thinks fit. [Section 358(2)]

All compensation awarded under this section may be recovered as if it were a fine, and, if it cannot be so recovered, the person by whom it is payable shall be sentenced to simple imprisonment for such term not exceeding 30 days as the Magistrate directs, unless such sum is sooner paid. [Section 358(3)]

Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power, 1985

The declaration was adopted by United Nations General Assembly resolution 40/34 of 29th November, 1985.

Important points of the declaration are discussed below:

Victims of Crime

Victims means persons who, individually or collectively, have suffered harm, including physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their fundamental rights, through acts or omissions that are in violation of criminal laws operative within member States, including those laws prescribing criminal abuse of power.

A person may be considered a victim, under this declaration, regardless of whether the perpetrator is identified, apprehended, prosecuted or convicted and regardless of the familial -relationship between the perpetrator and the victim.

The term victimalso includes, where appropriate, the immediate family or dependants of the direct victim and persons who have suffered harm in intervening to assist victims in distress or to prevent victimization.

Access to Justice and Fair Treatment

Victims should be treated with compassion and respect for their dignity. They are entitled to access to the mechanisms of justice and to prompt redress, as provided for by national legislation, for the harm that they have suffered. Judicial and administrative mechanisms should be established and strengthened where necessary to enable victims to obtain redress through formal or informal procedures that are expeditious, fair, inexpensive and accessible. Victims should be informed of their rights in seeking redress through such mechanisms.

The responsiveness of judicial and administrative processes to the needs of victims should be facilitated by:

1. Informing victims of their role and the scope, timing and progress of the proceedings and of the disposition of their cases, especially where serious crimes are involved and where they have requested such information.
    
2. Allowing the views and concerns of victims to be presented and considered at appropriate stages of the proceedings where their personal interests are affected, without prejudice to the accused and consistent with the relevant national criminal justice system.
    
3. Providing proper assistance to victims throughout the legal process.
    
4. Taking measures to minimize inconvenience to victims, protect their privacy, when necessary, and ensure their safety, as well as that of their families and witnesses on their behalf, from intimidation and retaliation.
    
5. Avoiding unnecessary delay in the disposition of cases and the execution of orders or decrees granting awards to victims.

Informal mechanisms for the resolution of disputes, including mediation, arbitration and customary justice or indigenous practices, should be utilized where appropriate to facilitate conciliation and redress for victims.

Compensation

When compensation is not fully available from the offender or other sources, States should endeavour to provide financial compensation to:

1. Victims who have sustained significant bodily injury or impairment of physical or mental health as a result of serious crimes.
2. The family, in particular dependants of persons who have died or become physically or mentally incapacitated as a result of such victimization.

The establishment, strengthening and expansion of national funds for compensation to victims should be encouraged. Where appropriate, other funds may also be established for this purpose, including in those cases where the State of which the victim is a national is not in a position to compensate the victim for the harm.

Counterfeiting

In the Section 28 of IPC 'Counterfeit' is defined as:
A person is said to 'counterfeit' who causes one thing to resemble another thing, intending by means of that resemblance to practice deception, or knowing it to be likely that deception will thereby be practiced”.

Some of the important provisions related to counterfeiting are as follows:

Counterfeiting Coin (Section 231)

Whoever counterfeits or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting coin, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Counterfeiting Indian Coin (Section 232)

Whoever counterfeits, or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting Indian coin, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Making or Selling Instrument for Counterfeiting Coin (Section 233)

Whoever makes or mends, or performs any part of the process of making or mending, or buys, sells or disposes of, any die or instrument, for the purpose of being used, or knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used, for the purpose of counterfeiting coin, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Making or Selling Instrument for Counterfeiting Indian Coin (Section 234)

Whoever makes or mends, or performs any part of the process of making or mending or buys, sells or disposes of, any die or instrument, for the purpose of being used, or knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used, for the purpose of counterfeiting Indian coin, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Import or Export of Counterfeit Coin (Section 237)

Whoever imports into India, or exports there from, any counterfeit coin, knowingly or having reason to believe that the same is counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Import or Export of Counterfeits of the Indian Coin (Section 238)

Whoever imports into India, or exports there from, any counterfeit coin, which he knows or has reason to believe to be a counterfeit of Indian coin, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Counterfeiting Government Stamp (Section 255)

Whoever counterfeits, or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting, any stamp issued by Government for the purpose of revenue shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Making or Selling Instrument for Counterfeiting Government Stamp (Section 257)

Whoever makes or performs any part of the process of making, or buys, or sells, or disposes of, any instrument for the purpose of being used, or knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used, for the purpose of counterfeiting any stamp issued by Government for the purpose of revenue, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Sale of Counterfeit Government Stamp (Section 258)

Whoever sells, or offers for sale, any stamp which he knows or has reason to believe to be a counterfeit of any stamp issued by Government for the purpose of revenue, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 475 of the Act

This section deals with 'Counterfeiting device or mark used for authenticating documents described in section 467, or possessing counterfeit marked material'.

As per the provisions of this section, whoever counterfeits upon, or in the substance of, any material, any device or mark used for the purpose of authenticating any document described in Section 467 (forgery of valuable security, will etc.) of this code, intending that such device or mark shall be used for the purpose of giving the appearance of authenticity to any document then forged or thereafter to be forged on such material, or who, with such intent, has in his possession any material upon or in the substance of which any such device or mark has been counterfeited, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which May extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 476 of the Act

This section deals with 'Counterfeiting device or mark used for authenticating documents other than those described in section 467, or possessing counterfeit marked material'. As per the provisions of this section, whoever counterfeits upon, or in the substance of, any material, any device of mark used for the purpose of authenticating any document other than the documents described in Section 467 of this code, intending that such device or mark shall be used for the purpose of giving the appearance of authenticity to any document then forged or thereafter to be forged on such material, or who with such intent, has in his possession any material upon or in the substance of which any such device or mark has been counterfeited, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Counterfeiting a Property Mark used by Another (Section 483)

Whoever counterfeits any property mark used by any other person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Counterfeiting a Mark used by a Public Servant (Section 484)

Whoever counterfeits any property mark used by a public servant, or any mark used by a public servant to denote that any property has been manufactured by a particular person or at a particular time or place, or that the property is of a particular quality or has passed through a particular office, or that it is entitled to any exemption, or uses as genuine any such mark knowing the same to be counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Making or Possession of any Instrument for Counterfeiting a Property Mark (Section 485)

Whoever makes or has in his possession any die, plate or other instrument for the purpose of counterfeiting a proper mark, or has in his possession a property mark for the purpose of denoting that any goods belong to a person to whom they do not belong, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

Selling Goods Marked with a Counterfeit property Mark (Section 486)

Whoever sells, or exposes, or has in possession for sale, any or things with a counterfeit property mark affixed to or impressed upon the same or to or upon any case, package or other receptacle in which such goods are contained, shall, unless he proves:

1. that, having taken all reasonable precautions against committing an offence against this section, he had, at the time of the commission of the alleged offence, no reason to suspect the genuineness of the mark, and
2. that, on demand made by or on behalf of the prosecutor, he gave all the information in his power with respect to the persons from whom he obtained such goods or things, or
3. that otherwise he had acted innocently.

Be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

Counterfeiting Currency-notes or Bank-notes (Section 489A)

Whoever counterfeits, or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting, any currency-note or bank-note, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Using as Genuine, Forged or Counterfeit Currency-notes or Bank-notes (Section 4898)

Whoever sells to, or buys or receives from, any other person, or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine, any forged or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Possession of Forged or Counterfeit Currency-notes or Bank-notes (Section 489C)

Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit, Currency-note or bank note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.

Section 489D of the Act

This section deals with 'Making or possessing instruments or materials for forging or counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes'.

As per the provisions of this section, whoever makes, or performs any part of the process of making, or buys or sells or disposes of, or has in his possession, any machinery, instrument of material for the purpose of being used, or knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used, for forging or counterfeiting any currency-note or bank-note, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Drug Trafficking

Drug trafficking is one of the evils, which is spreading at the alarming rate. Almost all the countries are facing this giant problem. It can be defined as an illicit trade involving the cultivation, manufacture, distribution and sale of substance which are subject to drug prohibition laws. Drug trafficking is a billion dollar industry, and integral component of the organized crime. It is active at both national and international level. Drugs which are generally trafficked are cannabis, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine. For drug trafficking, porous international border, act as a bonus. Youths are highly vulnerable to drug trafficking. India is situated between The Golden Cresent and The Golden Triangle, which makes it highly vulnerable to be affected from drug trafficking.

Offence of Drug Trafficking in India

According to the Chapter IV of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (NDPS Act, 1985), fine and punishment varies with drug offence i.e. accuse for small quantity of drugs, the punishment is rigorous imprisonment or fine of rupee 10,000 or both and for large quantity, it is 10 years to 20 years rigorous imprisonment and fine from rupee 1 lakh to 2 lakhs.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)

Since 1997, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has been putting the efforts to make the world safer from drugs, organized crime, corruption and terrorism. UNODC is committed to achieve health, security and justice for all by tackling these threats and promoting peace and sustainable well-being as deterrents to them. Because, the scale of these problems is often too great for states to confront alone, UNODC offers practical assistance and encourages transnational approaches to action.

The office is committed to supporting Member States in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at its core. The 2030 Agenda clearly recognizes that the rule of law and fair, effective and humane justice systems, as well as health-oriented responses to drug use, are both enablers for and part of sustainable development.

Some of the Important International Treaties related to Drug Trafficking:

1. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 as amended by the 1972 Protocol
2. Convention of Psychotropic Substances of 1971
3. United Nations Convention against illicit traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988.