There is an issue that, in the wake of the election dispute that we are experiencing, has gained relevance again, but the discussion of which should not remain only on that scenario, but should go beyond and look for real solutions, whoever the winner is. I am referring to the table of minimum drug consumption that has been applied in the country for several years, and which was the least boring that was recently presented to us by the debate of the finalists on October 1.

The table that was part of the constitutional and legal reforms that, with particular emphasis since 2008, international consultations, launched the Correísta government, with the support of broad benches whose members are now in other political groups and do not speak tweet on the controversial issue of allowing the legal use of low-quality drugs for those who suffer from addiction and who are considered victims of the disease, not perpetrators of crime.

When was the list of drugs created in Ecuador and how many times was it proposed to remove it? Daniel Noboa questioned her in the presidential debate, and Luisa González defended her

However, in domestic practice, what theoretically seems sustainable enough and which is applied relatively successfully in better culturally, politically and economically organized societies, is blamed for the increase in consumption, especially among children and adolescents of school age, which although the Theory indicates that they would not should have been in this problem as adults, they were at the center of the economic desires of those who take advantage of the table not only for their own consumption, but to bring drugs in small quantities to schools and colleges. And so, undeniably, hordes of child consumers and even resellers of that terrifying product called H.

School breakfast, access to higher education and the ‘pros and cons’ of the drug table, in the discussion of the social axis

The debate about the table, whatever the result next Sunday, should not stop there.

At the meeting of the presidential candidates, one of whom will rule the country before the end of the year and for about 17 months, the positions were clear: Daniel Noboa, who raised the issue, started it with a refusal and tried to be ironic with the “volatile” effects that drugs leaves on its victims, but it was not clear how to end its use, other than an official ban or recall. How to make this effective, like many other ways, was not up for debate. Luisa González, the representative and disciplined activist of the political group that inspired the table of drug consumption, did not say so specifically, but it was clear that she agreed with its creation and use “in adults”, because she said that this was the purpose of the creation from the government whose was an active part and which he tries to imitate. He did not want to accept the impact that this retailing had on children and defended the table as a measure that has already been tried in other countries and that tries to give alternatives and treatment to the poor, not just stop them.

This last speech which since 2008 has spawned a series of legal changes in the classification of crimes and misdemeanors, in giving judges the option of preventive detention, with an apparent desire to close prisons. Prisons which, paradoxically, are now experiencing their deepest crisis.

The debate about the table, whatever the result next Sunday, should not stop there. Society, and especially the mothers of popular sectors flooded with H, are crying out for a review of the measure. (OR)