It has been a year since the Early Drug Diversion Initiative (EDDI) came into effect in NSW and advocates have highlighted a number of ways the program can be improved.
The EDDI came into effect on 29 February last year with the aim to address some of the harms caused by our unfair drug laws.
‘Unfortunately, the implementation of EDDI has been a disappointing missed opportunity, many people had hoped for better for those they love who are living with drug dependency,’ Alice Salomon, Uniting NSW.ACT’s Head of Advocacy said.
‘Any positive change to the way we approach drug use and dependency in NSW is always welcome – but we know that the chance for diversion through EDDI is being delivered unevenly across the state.
Equitable program needed
‘Preliminary data shows that EDDI is more available for those who use cocaine or MDMA and those who aren’t First Nations, making EDDI a system that favours those with privilege. People who would be more likely to be able to afford a lawyer are also more likely to receive diversion rather than a court date.
‘So instead of creating pathways to treatment for people who are experiencing drug dependency, EDDI has continued to treat the people who could benefit most from that approach as criminals, with all the harm, shame and stigma that goes with that.
‘It’s clear that NSW needs evidence-based, equitable and inclusive diversion programs which will result in better outcomes for people. This means all people should be eligible to access them, including First Nations people, those without means, younger people and people with prior convictions,’ Alice said.
From 29 February to 11 August 2024 the diversion rate for the state was 6.4 per cent according to an assessment of the program by the Drug Police Monitoring Program, How is the Early Drug Diversion Initiative going? via University of Sydney. That saw a 8.2 per cent diversion rate in the Tweed/Byron Police District and a 2.7 per cent diversion rate in the Richmond Police District that covers Ballina and Lismore regions.
Race, age or privilege shouldn’t determine diversion options
‘A fairer diversion model should also have no or low fines and no limit to the number of times a person can be diverted. A limited number of ‘strikes’ could exclude a person experiencing drug dependency – someone who is more likely to benefit from a health and welfare response.
‘Let’s be clear, everyone, no matter where you live, your race, which drug is in your pocket or your life circumstances, should have access to a health and welfare response. They should be able to be diverted away from the criminal justice system through the EDDI scheme for possessing a small amount of drugs for personal use.
‘The vast majority of the community, as revealed in survey after survey, supports this approach,’ Alice said.
‘We are hopeful that the NSW Drug Summit report will, amongst other important measures, recommend that the government address the inequity of access to EDDI.
‘It will also look at whether the penalty for drug possession should be changed to either a caution or diversion to an escalating health and welfare response should the circumstances indicate that this could be helpful,’ Alice said.
Samantha Lee, Supervising Solicitor at Redfern Legal Centre said: ‘Just a week after the NSW Drug Summit, I had two clients charged with minor drug possession. They were issued with Court Attendance Notices, even though they had no criminal record and the amount of drugs involved was so low that a diversion should have been the first course of action.
‘Instead, my clients face a lengthy and stressful court process.
‘I hope that, in the end, they can avoid a conviction and a criminal record, which could have detrimental consequences for their work and travel opportunities, ‘ Samantha said.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
