The Role of the UN International Drug Control Conventions in Facilitating Law Enforcement Cooperation in the Policing of Transnational Drug Trafficking

Transnational policing is an increasingly important issue in today’s globalised world. Transnational crime is an expanding industry and when crime crosses borders, cooperation between states is key. Arguably, this is most important in illegal drug trafficking, a crime of high concern to many states which almost always involves multiple countries. To this end, the UN Drug Control Conventions, introduced to tackle drug trafficking across the world, contain a number of provisions regarding law enforcement cooperation. This piece, by examining legal instruments and existing literature, will explore the role of the conventions regarding cooperation in policing the transnational trafficking of illicit drugs with a particular focus on the US, a major player in the field. Law enforcement cooperation between states existed for many years without international law obligations, however, it was often plagued by political and cultural differences and suffered when international relations were tense. By implementing obligations within the UN conventions, existing practices were codified into international law, meaning that cooperation should be a smoother, and legally-backed, process regardless of the political situation. This piece argues that, although the UN International Drug Control Conventions may not have added completely novel principles or practices to transnational law enforcement, they remain an important tool in facilitating transnational police cooperation and have made a valuable contribution to jurisprudence on the subject.


Introduction
When crime crosses borders, cooperation between states in law enforcement is key in tackling it. Global policing has been expanding with the increased globalisation of crime.
Police cooperation can be found at the national, regional and international levels. 1 Although transnational policing interacts with a large range of issues, drug control has dominated research on the subject, 2 and the policing of the global drug market has been described as "the paradigm example" of transnational law enforcement. 3 The prohibition and restriction of the transport and importation of narcotics has been a concern for countries across the world.
Three treaties make up the major jurisprudence on transnational drug crime. These transnational drug trafficking?" To do this, an analytical discussion and comparison of the convention provisions is undertaken, followed by a review of historic and current practices.
First, the article discusses the meaning and origins of law enforcement cooperation in combatting drug trafficking. Second, the drug control conventions and the cooperation mechanisms in them are examined. This is followed by a look at other means, outside of the conventions, that are currently used for transnational cooperation, including international police organisations such as Interpol. Finally, the article will conclude with a discussion on the role of the drug control conventions in transnational police cooperation and how they have added to existing practices. This piece ultimately argues that, although the UN International Drug Control Conventions may not have added completely novel principles or practices to transnational law enforcement, they remain an important tool in facilitating transnational police cooperation and have made a valuable contribution to jurisprudence on the subject.

What is Transnational Law Enforcement Cooperation?
The idea of cooperation between law enforcement agencies has grown in importance with the rise of transnational crime. Though police have increased tools to pursue transnational criminals, transnational crime is still widely prevalent. 4 Law enforcement cooperation between states has developed an important role in transnational criminal law 5 and various forms of cooperation are encouraged. 6 When crime crosses borders, to successfully tackle it, so must law enforcement.
Jurisdiction cannot be exercised by a state outside its territory unless permitted by a rule derived from international customs or from a convention. 7 This potentially limits or hinders law enforcement action and investigations. Given the near universal respect for territorial Hufnagel and McCartney suggest that the very minimum needed for successful policing of cross-border crime is an efficient system of information exchange. 10 Yet even this is not always straightforward. Transnational cooperation of any kind, including policing, can be hindered by issues created by conflicting sovereignties, political tensions, and differences between national agencies. It is also recognised that even between friendly states, law enforcement cooperation can be difficult. 11 Commentators such as Nadelmann point out that having established mechanisms for transnational law enforcement cooperation help to reduce challenges. 12 This may be especially true when these mechanisms are enshrined in law.

The Origins of Law Enforcement Cooperation on Drug Trafficking
Collaboration among different police forces is almost as old as modern policing itself. 13 Mechanisms for transnational law enforcement cooperation date back to the mid-19th century, 14 a time when many western states were modernising and professionalising their police services. Transnational crime, in various forms, has been prevalent throughout history, and the reach and capabilities of law enforcement networks to tackle it continue to expand. 15

Law Enforcement Cooperation Mechanisms in the UN Drug Control Conventions
The UN Drug Control Conventions contain provisions that obligate parties to facilitate different forms of transnational law enforcement cooperation. According to some commentators, many of these originated from mechanisms developed domestically in the US.
Article 9(1) of the 1988 Convention consists of a general provision with an obligation on states to "cooperate closely with each other." This is followed by more details, including specific mechanisms in the subsequent subsections. Following is an overview of several instruments for law enforcement cooperation provided for in the conventions.

Information Sharing
A key part in tackling transnational crime is the sharing of information. The UN Drug Control Conventions provide a legal structure for the transferring of information between parties. The earlier conventions did not contain extensive measures. For example, the 1961 Convention only provides for the sharing of information to international narcotics control bodies, not to other states. 28 The 1988 Convention provides more detail. Going further than previous conventions, Article 9(1)(a) asserts that states must "establish and maintain channels of communication between their competent agencies and services to facilitate the secure and rapid exchange of information concerning all aspects of offences." 29 This is a somewhat broad obligation. Usually, international conventions leave the institutional arrangements for exchange of information to be worked out between the agencies. Regional agreements and conventions can be more prescriptive with this. There has been much discussion surrounding this issue in relation to the US and counter-terrorism, particularly in the context of EU-wide vs. individual state cooperation. In recent years, the US signed information sharing agreements with individual states in exchange for visa-free travel for their citizens. 31 The main problem with this is the concern that data sent under the agreements may not be protected to the same standard as under EU-wide arrangements. 32 Further concerns over data protection were heightened when it was revealed that the National Security Agency (NSA) was undertaking surveillance and information collecting operations without warrants, including in Europe. 33 This led to tensions between the US and the EU authorities, and put several joint counter-terrorism projects in jeopardy. 34 It also hindered further cooperation and restricted information sharing, having potentially damaging effects for current and future investigations.

Liaison Officers
One of the earliest methods of police cooperation was placing law enforcement agents in diplomatic missions abroad. 35 The FBI Legal Attaché programme (discussed below) was one of the first, but many countries followed and now have liaison officers in foreign states. 36 Article 9(1) experts, including the posting of liaison officers." 37 Liaison officers have no policing powers within the host nation, they rely on the national agencies of that state to perform such functions in exchange for access to intelligence and expertise. Their role is primarily to gather intelligence and provide guidance, supporting both their host and home states. In 2012, there were more than 500 Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) officers operating outside the US in drug-producing and transit states. 38 Despite facing some challenges, Nadelmann reported that they have been largely successful in supplying expertise and knowledge as well as gathering and contributing to intelligence. He credited this to officers ensuring that local policing, laws and practices were harmonised with their own, and effectively operating vicariously through host police agencies. 39 The inclusion of this practice in the 1988 Convention does not introduce liaison offers as a new concept, but it does codify into international law one of the oldest practices of transnational police cooperation.

Joint Investigation
Another method of extraterritorial policing is creating joint investigation teams with  are only formed when a sending state has an interest in taking specific action in another state.
Though this is rare and expensive. In practice, according to Boister, instead of joint investigations, states prefer to work only on the parts of the crime that take place within their own territory and investigate parallel to, rather than jointly with, agencies elsewhere. 44 Although this may be an example of politics and bilateral relationships being detrimental to cross-border investigations, the other international mechanisms for law enforcement cooperation in the treaties, particularly those dealing with information sharing, can come into play to avoid great losses of valuable intelligence or investigations.

Special Investigative Techniques
There are a number of "special investigative techniques" endorsed within the various drug conventions. These are mechanisms which allow for law enforcement officials to carry out certain activities which would otherwise be criminally punishable. if their basic legal principles allow it, but only on a case-by-case basis and only by agreement between the parties. 48 If domestic law is not adapted to allow controlled deliveries, the mechanism can fail to meet its purposes and potentially lead to undetected cases. However, it is now a standard technique used in many countries and has resulted in a number of important detections. 49 Controlled delivery as a method for disrupting a range of transnational crimes has been promoted by major international organisations and policing agencies including the UNODC and EuroJust (who have produced a handbook to aid agencies wishing to utilise the technique in Europe). 50

National Efforts
The fight against transnational crime begins at the individual state level and many national police agencies take the lead in solving transnational crimes. In the US, law enforcement officers have been actively involved with international policing efforts. 51 For example, The New York City Police Department has a successful liaison programme with police officers in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. They work abroad to collect criminal intelligence connected to crimes within their city. 52 The use of federal law enforcement agencies was one of the earliest tools the US deployed in the fight against transnational crime and mainly focused on drug related offences. 53 The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)'s Legal Attaché (LEGAT) programme was one of the first official liaison officer programmes. 54 The DEA is well known for pursuing leads in foreign nations and working with agents in their host countries in areas of mutual concern, with 48

Regional Agreements
Regional transnational policing efforts often happen in areas along borders. For example, at the US-Mexican border there are agreements for cooperation on immigration and customs issues as well as substantive crimes such as human smuggling and drug trafficking.
Traditionally these links were kept largely informal, and ignored the concepts of sovereignty and international law, but political and cultural differences between states soured relationships. 58 In more recent times, due to geopolitics and social circumstances, relations with Mexican agents for manpower and intelligence, particularly on transnational crimes such as 55 Cencich, "Policing: Transnational," 319. 56 "Drug Seizure Statistics," United States Customs and Border Protection, last modified June 9, 2021, https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/drug-seizure-statistics. 57 Cencich, "Policing: Transnational," 320. 58 Andreas and Nadelmann, "Policing the Globe," 117. gun and drug smuggling, is essential in the US. Many drugs destined for the US originate in, and are transported through, South and Central America. Often there are numerous countries involved, therefore multi-lateral, regional agreements are crucial. They can also provide a "middle ground" between international agreements or conventions and bilateral agreements as they allow for a more tailored approach with less compromises but provide a legal comeback backed up by other members, although not to the same extent as the bigger international conventions.

Bilateral Agreements
As previously mentioned, in the past, law enforcement cooperation was mainly facilitated through bilateral agreements and tradition between the US and individual states.
This reflected the idea that crime and security issues was considered a matter to be dealt with by individual states. Despite largely positive attitudes towards international agreements, some critics doubt the usefulness of collaborating in this way, especially given the existing productive bilateral agreements. 59 These agreements are still preferred in certain matters. 60 The US has bilateral law enforcement cooperation treaties with a number of states, particularly within the EU and United Kingdom, with regards to law enforcement and terrorist offences.
Bilateral agreements can often provide for more detailed and specific cooperation mechanisms between states. They also often lead to more robust agreements with a lesser level of compromise, as would be found in international agreements due to the fewer participants.
However, much like the issues with customary or trust-based agreements, they can fall victim to increased politicisation and related problems. Although they are official mechanisms like the international treaties, they do not have the same backing, number of participants, or arbitration and enforcement options that are available within the International Drug Control Conventions. 59 Archick, U.S. -EU Cooperation Against Terrorism. 60 Funk and Trauner, "Transatlantic."

International Organisations -The Role of Interpol
Outside of playing a pivotal role in the creation of international legal regimes and utlising its own power internationally, the US is also heavily involved in a number of international organisations relating to policing and judiciary matters. In terms of operational police cooperation, the most important of these is The International Criminal Police Organisation, better known as Interpol. Although legal frameworks, including conventions and legislation, play an important part in their activities, the main purpose is practical cooperation, partnership working and collaboration to achieve their goals, backed by the power of multiple members coming together.
Interpol is not a law enforcement agency in itselfit does not have its own agents and cannot make arrests. Its primary aim is "to ensure and promote the widest Despite Interpol's long history and many major successes, it has not escaped controversy. There have been concerns that red notices (the system whereby a state requests a notice for the arrest of a wanted person and Interpol relays it to all member countries) have been used for political reasons. A report conducted by NGO Fair Trials International, found that since the introduction of an electronic system in 2008, the use of red notices has risen and several countries were using the system against political activists. 66 A red notice, however, is not an international arrest warrant and Interpol cannot compel any country to arrest an individual. Compliance with a red notice is up to the discretion of the member countries and Interpol's system does not allow for the monitoring of the quality of national-level information. 67 This means that the system is open to potential abuse.
Interpol has been recognised by the UN as an intergovernmental body, but it is not a "formal" police cooperation initiative because its constitution is not binding and its members are police forces, not states. 68 Interpol cannot compel or force states to take any action and, as mentioned above, does not have any powers of arrest. It depends on cooperation from its member countries. However, it is still a very useful tool in tackling transnational crime. 69 By including the provision in Article 2(1) of the 1961 Convention (as discussed previously), which is binding on states, the procedure is made more formal. Therefore, the conventions have not only contributed to direct state-to-state cooperation but also between individual police forces across borders, via Interpol.

The Role of Law Enforcement Mechanisms in the UN Drug Control Conventions
It has been said that police cooperation depends more on trust than it does on legal frameworks, and the greater the trust between the states, the less formal the procedures need to be. 70 Although this may be true for cooperation in practice, legal mechanisms still play an

Conclusion
With the rise of transnational crime comes the rise in the importance of transnational law enforcement cooperation. Issues of jurisdiction and state sovereignty mean that national police forces cannot exercise their power in foreign states, therefore, to gather evidence or conduct investigations they need to work with other states. Transnational police cooperation has been around for a long time but in the latter half of the 20 th century cooperation, specifically in policing the illicit drugs trade, became a stronger focus. Since then, law enforcement cooperation in the case of drug trafficking has been used as a prime example of transnational policing.
Together, the UN Drug Control Conventions aim to create an international regime for the suppression of the illegal drugs trade. As discussed throughout this article, they do this through many measures but also include several mechanisms for transnational law enforcement cooperation. Alongside a general provision obliging cooperation with agencies from other states there are also specific mechanisms for operational cooperation. These include information sharing, liaison officers, joint investigations, and controlled deliveries.
Prior to the introduction of the mechanisms in the conventions, police cooperation was achieved largely through customs and trust. There are also regional and bilateral agreements which can provide more details and specificity than international conventions. However, these can be plagued with implementation and application issues due to political differences or illwill between different states. There is also an important role for international policing and judicial organisations such as Interpol. These organisations do not have powers as police agencies in themselves, but instead provide support to facilitate cooperation between the national police forces of member states. 76 Boister, An Introduction, 160. 77 Steward, "Internationalizing the War on Drugs." Despite these other mechanisms, the UN Drug Control Conventions have still made a valuable contribution in the field of transnational law enforcement cooperation. They have helped to overcome some issues surrounding cooperation in practice. By including mechanisms for transnational police cooperation, the UN Drug Control Conventions globalised standards, and harmonised and enhanced practices which were already in place. The conventions provide a legal backing and include an enforceable obligation on signatory states who do not comply.
The conventions may not have introduced anything completely new, but they have formalised some existing mechanisms and codified practice into international law. This is still a valuable contribution to transnational criminal jurisprudence.