The DTC was established in 2001 as an alternative to custody and aims to provide an intensive, supervised treatment, education and recovery pathway for individuals whose offending is driven by an underlying drug dependency.

Participants join the DTC programme after pleading or being found guilty of a non-violent offence. Their charges are paused during the programme, which operates on a voluntary supervision model, meaning individuals must agree to participate. If they engage satisfactorily, their charges are struck out.

One of the main issues identified by the report was the lack of “clear and consistent aims” with confusion as to who the DTC should be targeting, what its primary objective is, where it fits within Ireland’s emerging health led approach to drugs and how success should be measured.

A DTC practitioner quoted in the report said: “I do know within the team even asking, ‘What are we here for? What is our goal?’ I have heard others say at team meetings we’ve had, ‘Our goal is to leave people with no convictions’ It’s like, ‘No, that’s not my understanding of it.’”

This view that the DTC is a form of ‘soft justice’ reflects a lack of belief in the DTC that the report believes drives low referral numbers. It was also suggested that there may be some reluctance to refer among some members of the legal community due to the understanding that participants would no longer need legal representation once admitted onto the programme, meaning a loss of financial incentive for them arising from legal aid.

The report, however, argues that the DTC should not become a mechanism for dealing with lower-level possession cases which may increasingly be diverted away from the criminal justice system.

Instead, its principal cohort should be people with significant drug dependency and associated offending who are at risk of receiving a custodial sentence.

From possession to persistent offending

The report suggests that the Court should occupy a distinct position between health led diversion and imprisonment: an intensive, structured intervention for offenders whose drug use is a significant driver of their offending.

That would give the DTC a more defined sentencing function, while avoiding duplication with emerging diversionary approaches for less serious drug offences.

The report stresses the importance of identifying the right participants rather than simply increasing referrals.

Historically, approximately 1,700 people had been referred to the Dublin DTC, but only 722 (42 per cent) were admitted.

The report also identifies limited awareness among judges, lawyers, Gardaí and probation personnel as one reason for the relatively low level of referrals and admissions and recommend clearer eligibility criteria and more proactive identification of suitable candidates.

A move away from focus on abstinence

Perhaps the most significant policy recommendation concerns the Court’s approach to recovery.

The report found that current model places too great a focus on abstinence from drugs as a condition of progression and graduation with some suggesting that outcome of this is low graduation numbers.

The report recommends a broader conception of success, including reductions in harmful drug use, improved health and wellbeing, increased stability and meaningful progress towards recovery.

The report’s recommendations would require the DTC to recognise incremental progress rather than treating recovery as a binary question of abstinence or relapse.

That could have consequences for how participants are assessed, how sanctions are applied and how judicial reviews are conducted.

Treatment, not simply testing

The report is particularly critical of the relationship between the court and treatment services.

Some participants reported wanting greater access to counselling, drug education, keyworker support and other therapeutic interventions. The report concludes that treatment should be more firmly embedded in the operation of the court.

It recommends greater access to relapse prevention programmes, psychosocial interventions, trauma informed care and programmes addressing offending behaviour.

The underlying message is that supervision and drug testing cannot, by themselves, constitute an effective treatment programme.

For the DTC to fulfil its intended role, the report argues, criminal justice supervision and clinical intervention must operate as an integrated model.

Judicial engagement a key strength

The report, however, identified judicial engagement as a key strength.

Participants generally viewed their interactions with the DTC judge positively and regarded the court as more supportive and respectful than conventional criminal proceedings.

The report nevertheless found that some court reviews were extremely brief, limiting opportunities for participants to explain setbacks or engage meaningfully with the judge and treatment team.

The report, therefore, recommends a less formal and more therapeutic approach to reviews, with greater opportunity for dialogue.

Lack of data collection a key weakness

Conversely the lack of a data collection framework for the DTC was identified by the report as a key weakness.

The report stating that: “the data collected on DTC outcomes is very limited, omitting any measures of success beyond drug abstinence, and fails to capture the final sentences of non-graduating participants.”

The report recommends a comprehensive monitoring framework covering reoffending, drug use, treatment engagement, education and employment, wellbeing, graduation and outcomes following completion of the programme.

The report also calls for proper financial and cost-benefit analysis.

That evidence gap means that the report should not be read as a definitive finding that the existing DTC is either successful or unsuccessful in reducing crime. Instead, the conclusion is that the current model requires reform and that future effectiveness must be demonstrated through better data.

Commenting on the publication of the report justice minister Jim O’Callaghan said: “The Drug Treatment Court represents an important alternative to traditional criminal justice responses for people whose offending behaviour is linked to addiction. It aims to address the root causes of offending by providing participants with access to treatment, support and supervision in a structured environment.

“This report acknowledges the commitment of those involved in delivering the programme while also identifying a number of challenges that have limited its effectiveness and reach. I welcome these findings and I am committed to implementing the majority of the report’s recommendations.

“The report makes clear that the Drug Treatment Court has significant potential to deliver better outcomes for individuals, communities and the wider justice system. My priority is to ensure that the Court operates as effectively as possible and that the necessary reforms are put in place to support its future development.”

An Implementation Board will oversee the introduction of the reforms to the DTC. The Board will examine the recommendations of the evaluation report to strengthen the Court’s operation and improve outcomes for participants.

Since the evaluation was completed, a number of operational reforms have already been introduced, including changes to the Court’s graduation framework and measures to increase awareness of the programme among members of the judiciary, which have contributed to an increase in referrals in recent months.