The Federal Supreme Court overturned a sentence that commuted a psychotropic user to six months' imprisonment with a three-year moratorium, considering the suspension order to be a form of commutation.

In detail, the Public Prosecutor referred an accused to trial for abuse of psychotropic substances, other than legally authorized cases, demanding that he be punished.

The Federal Court of First Instance ruled that the criminal case was suspended before the accused for treatment. The Court of Appeal ruled that the first sentence was canceled, and the sentence was re-sentenced to six months' imprisonment for the charge against him, with a three-year suspension starting from the date of this judgment. The public prosecution and the convicted of this judiciary Vtaa it.

The defendant said his client was being treated for addiction, and that most of the drugs in the urine sample were authorized by prescriptions prescribed by the health authority.

The Federal Supreme Court rejected the appeal against the verdict, confirming the availability of all legal elements of the crime for which the accused was convicted, based on his confession before the police and the Public Prosecution investigations that he had used psychotropic substances, and proved from the criminal laboratory report that they were not included in the prescription given to the accused. He did not abide by the treatment plan set by the treatment unit and therefore does not benefit from the license prescribed by law.

She pointed out that the legislator has authorized the user to submit at his request or the request of his wife or a relative to be placed in one of the treatment units of addiction, and if approved to be deposited must abide by the treatment plan set by the treating body.

For its part, the Public Prosecution stated in its appeal that the verdict was a mistake in the application of the law, as it ruled to stop the implementation of the sentence prescribed, even though the Anti-Narcotics Law has prohibited the judge from using his discretion to impose the penalty in those crimes or to stop its execution when the court convicted the accused.

The Federal Supreme Court upheld the appeal of the prosecution, stating that it is prescribed by law and in accordance with the provisions of article 65 of Law No. 14 of 1995 on the control of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances that “it is not permissible to impose the penalty imposed by the application of this law” to the effect that the legislator Restricting the Court's authority to use its discretion in assessing the penalty for crimes committed in violation of the provisions of Law No. 14 of 1995, as mentioned above, because of the seriousness of these crimes to society and does not warrant the use of extenuating circumstances or excuses. The mind It is considered a form of commutation of the sentence and, in consequence, the decision to stop the execution of the sentence of imprisonment imposed is misplaced, which must be partially overturned in respect of the assessment of the sentence.