Press briefing materials
on the work of the Pompidou Group

the co-operation group to combat drug abuse
and illicit trafficking in drugs

Pompidou Group
Ministerial Conference 2006
27 – 28 November 2006
Council of Europe

“Drug policies can only be effective if they are based on a realistic assessment of day to day practice, making use of the available research and the right policy tools. There is today, a worrying widening gulf between government drug policies and the reality of drug abuse. We believe that the unique role of the Pompidou which unites theory, policy and practice can make a vital contribution to how drug policies are made and how they are implemented.”

Bob Keizer, Chair of Permanent Correspondents, Pompidou Group

“Most drug programmes across Europe are problem centred. That is to say the problem is the central feature of approach - the problem of heroin trafficking, the problem of drug deaths, the problem of drug related crime and so on. The unique approach of the Pompidou Group is that it puts the individual as the starting point in looking for solutions to drug abuse. People take drugs so drug use and misuse is about ‘people’: That's where the Pompidou Group starts from. That's not to say the Pompidou Group says it has all the answers, just that where they start to look for them is a bit different from the norm. Within this document there are many story possibilities which will give you concrete examples of what that means to real lives.”
Bob Wylie, News Correspondent, BBC Scotland

This document has been prepared by Bob Wylie who works for the BBC in Scotland.

The Pompidou Group
the Pompidou Group works to prevent drug abuse and illicit trafficking in drugs. It provides a multidisciplinary forum at the wider European level where it is possible for policy-makers, professionals and researchers to discuss and exchange information and ideas on the whole range of drug misuse and trafficking. It is in its 35th year of operation.

Pompidou Group, Council of Europe, F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex, France
Tel: +33 3 88 41 29 87

The most important body which governs the working of the Pompidou Group is the group of Permanent Correspondents. Each of the 35 countries in the Council of Europe, which are members of the Pompidou Group, appoints a Permanent Correspondent. They meet twice a year to consider current trends in drugs issues and monitor the work of the Group. (See Appendix 1 for a list of member states and Permanent Correspondents.)
The Bureau of Permanent Correspondents is the executive committee which manages the day to day work of the Pompidou Group outside the dates of the twice a year meetings of the Permanent Correspondents.

The Ministerial Conference
This is attended by the ministers from each member country of the Pompidou Group who have principal responsibility for the questions covered by the Group. A specific decision is taken before each conference as to possible invitation of non-members.

The conference is organised once every three years by the country that holds the presidency. In October 2003, under the Irish presidency, the Ministerial Conference was held in Dublin. Between 2003 and 2006 the Netherlands took over the presidency. The next Ministerial Conference will be held at the Council of Europe headquarters in Strasbourg on 27th and 28th November 2006.

The platforms for the operation of the Pompidou Group have developed the efficient working of the Group. They are six in all – defined to make clear divisions in the work of the Group – Prevention, Treatment, Criminal Justice, Airports, Research and Ethics. The platforms exist to make the aims of the Group more realisable in the exchange of information on drug trends for policy makers, professionals and researchers across the Council of Europe.

This Document
It is not the policy of the Pompidou Group to make open comment on the drug policies of member states. This document is a summary of the report on the work of the Group which will be put before the November Ministerial Conference. It aims to provide information on the trends, issues and policy questions in the six platform areas.
The document aims to provide this information mainly for news and features journalists. Thus where appropriate there are storyline ideas defined at the end of the platform summaries.

NOTE: In the appendix is a list of the main contact points for the 36 member states. These contacts would be able to discuss specific policies, initiatives and projects in their own member states. These contacts have a wealth of information about the work of the Pompidou Group and knowledge about country policies – so why not ask?


It’s time that we recognised that most young people live at the edge of the information technology revolution. Information for them is the world of the mobile phone, the internet and the blog. Drug agencies across Europe need to acknowledge that and have to make prevention programmes available in a way that the young are most likely to access them.

What we have learned
Current messages about drug prevention are often designed to please politicians and voters but don’t always register with the kids we need to reach.
Some of the most effective messages are delivered by young people being trained to give other young people advice about drugs. Informed advice from parents comes next.
Kids want to know about the effect on their mental health if they take drugs and are not convinced about warnings that taking drugs will kill you. Their own experience is that alcohol and tobacco are more dangerous than many soft drugs.

Current problems and what needs to be done
Many drug prevention messages are delivered based on what politicians and adults think are the issues in drug abuse. Just say No campaigns, for example, please politicians and voters but in general only appeal to a minority of young people who have not tried illegal drugs and are irrelevant to those who have. What is needed is developed research among young people to define what their needs are in drug education.

It is popular among drug agencies to set targets for reduction in drug use. Across Europe this target reduction approach has not had great success anywhere. The enduring cycle of new generations trying illegal drugs proves this.

Short term programmes which are over ambitious and under-funded rarely succeed. In contrast social training programmes which give advice to the young are well received. Here’s what you need to know about drugs, and here’s what you need to do about drugs are messages which the young are prepared to listen to.

Look for projects in your country which kids find useful to highlight what they want from drug education.

Find a project where young people get information from other young people about drugs and investigate whether it is success.

Find parents in your area who have done some training in drug advice and you have a story waiting to be done on how they were trained and how that helped them give good advice to their kids and how the kids learned from it all.


There are two distinct groups of young drug users. Those who are heavily addicted and those who regularly use drugs but are not totally involved in a drug scene. Most treatment services are targeted at the first group. Question: is it time to concentrate more treatment on the second group who are 18-25?

What we have learned.
Adolescence is the stage at which most young people will be tempted to experiment with drugs. It is an undeniable fact that most of those who have serious long term problems of drug abuse will have started using in their teens. There is another group of young people who lead seemingly normal lives yet are regular drugs users who are at the start of a journey which could lead to problem drug use.

The first group are the most visible problem in society and create high levels of public nuisance be it in public drug scenes, indulging in petty crime to finance their habit or becoming directly involved in criminal networks supplying illegal drugs. This group comes at a high cost to society and has most treatment programmes directed towards it. But they are already in problem drug use patterns. The second group – those on the way to problem drug use – rarely feature on the radar of drug treatment programmes yet it is that group which needs to be helped if the numbers of problem drug users are to be reduced over time.

Current problems and what needs to be done.
Those who are already severely addicted need to have their treatment programmes maintained but perhaps there needs to be a greater targeting in services to the 18-25 age group who if helped could be diverted from a life blighted by addiction.

If this is to be done the right messages need to be delivered. Public campaigns are very costly and their effectiveness is not established. In contrast many of the young are likely to experience drug use in peer groups – somebody who uses invites them to try something.

It is at this level that some resources need to be targeted. And that needs to be done in a way that the message can be received. Information that is based only on the philosophy of stopping consumption often deter those in need of help seeking it. If we consider the vast amount of publicity in campaigns to stop people smoking and assess their effectiveness we would find that the stop smoking message works only with a small percentage who stop. You need to want to stop first – so how do we get people to that stage.

Most young people who are concerned about their drug use seek advice first from their local General Practitioner (GP). GP services in this area need greater development.

Get in touch with a drug project in your area and find a group of young people who will to talk - maybe anonymously – about the quality of drug services offered to them. Then take their views to local politicians and service providers for comment.

There are a wealth of campaigns advising young people on the need to stop illegal drug use. Highlight one from your area and test out the validity of its messages by getting a group of young people to give their opinions of the campaign.

Tens of thousands of GPs across Europe are actively involved in giving drug advice to their young patients. Find one and get him or her to explain how serious the problem is and how it can be addressed. And if you’re lucky get a young person who has benefited from good advice and get them to tell you why.

Criminal Justice

Unsupported Zero Tolerance (ZT) campaigns based mainly on police action can be effective in a particular area. But whether they have a long term successful effect is open to question. Our research suggests that frequently they move people on from one area to another where they continue to be a nuisance. The most successful ZT campaigns are those which have been linked to a multi-agency approach which involves more than targeting drug scenes and moving people on.

Current problems and what is to be done.
Local action against street level supply of drugs is an absolute prerequisite for successful action against open drug scenes. The involvement of local residents as well as the offer of harm reduction advice and treatment are essential elements if frontline level responses are to have a long term effect.

There is a huge volume of information across Europe on new ways to tackle the problems associated with drug abuse like public violence, acquisitive crime, aggressive begging, street prostitution and the like. Policy makers need to get information on what has worked and what hasn’t. Cross agency co-operation is key.

Yet new campaigns are often based on limited information and pre-judged conceptions. The most effective campaigns are those that draw on previous experience and are based on reachable goals with a defined time target that is attainable.

Before action is taken a plan should be established that involves enforcement agencies, policy makers and stakeholders and even drug users themselves.
That should involve the setting of precise agreed goals without an exaggerated conception of immediate success.

There are too many strategies bound by the misconception that the drug problem can be resolved in a particular area by giving the local police sufficient powers and resources to make the necessary arrests for a clean-up operation.

Investigate action against a local drug scene in your area and, with all those involved, assess its strengths and weaknesses. If it was successful – Why and if not Why?


Some of the most effective anti-drug trafficking measures have been carried out by law enforcement agencies targeting airports. They have been able to develop new means of detection and where there has been international co-operation there has been significant improvement of impact on the import of illegal drugs.

What we have learned
Law enforcement agencies – police and customs – targeting airports for the import of drugs have had significant success in drug seizures. In part this has been improved because of expanded data collection and the sharing of information collected. But “airport crime” still needs to be given a greater priority by all agencies if even better results are to be attained.

Current problems and what is to be done
What has been achieved in co-ordinating action against drug trafficking through airports should be recognised. However that success could be greatly increased if action could be taken in a number of problems areas.

There are problems of co-ordination of law enforcement agencies within member states which need to be tackled. Joint operational teams built across all agencies at major airports would help to overcome this.

It follows that since drug trafficking is an international business that there needs to be far greater international co-operation to tackle it. If that is to be achieved there is a need to standardise procedures for tackling airport crime, reporting airport crime and sharing information about it across member states.

The standing regulation of the European Parliament and Council of Ministers of 16 December 2002 instructs the need for common rules in the security of civil aviation.
That should be copied with a regulation for common rules to fight drug trafficking.

Access for law enforcement agencies to the data bases of airlines to check passenger lists remains an important issue. As current public debate indicates there is still an urgent need for an international agreement to consider this issue.

With the co-operation of law enforcement agencies it should be possible to highlight the issue of airport crime and to present an account of what is being done to tackle it.

This may be best achieved by waiting for a successful case to be prosecuted which involved airport drug trafficking and then producing a background piece about what happened and how the traffickers were caught.

There is an on-going debate about access to passenger lists by law enforcement agencies – what are the issues around this.


Drug testing in schools is the most important issue which has been considered in the last period by the Ethics platform. Most available research indicates that there is little evidence that this is an effective means of preventing drug abuse. In fact the evidence across Europe suggests that where this has been applied it has had detrimental effects in undermining relations between teachers, pupils and parents.

What we have learned and what is to be done.
Drug testing in schools is an extremely controversial subject. There are clear human rights issues involved and clear indications that not only is it not effective in reducing drug abuse it also undermines efforts made by teachers involved in drug education. How are pupils to trust the education offered in drug education by teachers if the same teachers are involved in what is in effect efforts to promote penalties and possible prosecution of young people who might be using drugs.

This is not to say that schools can take a soft approach to drug use or drug trafficking within the school. But the effectiveness of drug testing in this regard has to be fully evaluated – both its positive and negative effects.

Authorities responsible for drug policies in schools, including parents groups and pupil councils must be given the facts for and against for drug testing in schools and other strategies for drug prevention before any proposal for drug testing is implemented.

This subject is a standing controversy awaiting investigation and opinion from all those involved – teachers, parents, pupils and experts in the drug field.


There is no doubt that there is a huge data base available about demand reduction strategies and drug programmes across Europe. There is a need for that to be collated and made available to drug policy makers and practitioners across Europe. But there is also in addition a need to create strategies which allow established research to inform decisions on policy and practice. This does not always happen in current circumstances – in fact it is not uncommon for research findings to be ignored when policy is formulated.

What we have learned and what needs to be done
Drug abuse is an extremely complicated problem. There are no simple cause and effect issues surrounding addiction and the extent of abuse, its enduring nature and in some countries its continuing growth is proof of that. What is needed across Europe is the collation of existing knowledge and research to establish – within limits – a recognised assessment of What Works And What Doesn’t Work in tackling abuse among young people.

Data systems and reporting need to be standardised if relevant comparisons are to be made. But also there is a vast body of already established knowledge which needs to be made more accessible to all at the present time by more active co-operation and sharing of findings.

Finally the clash between what might be termed political ideology and research has to be acknowledged. There is little point in establishing sophisticated research programmes if their conclusions are ignored where they do not meet with pre-conceived political ideologies about drug abuse. Likewise there is little point in establishing research programmes which are pre-determined to establish a particular political ideology about drug use.

Knowledge is only power if knowledge is used to inform accurately which then becomes the basis for future policy and practice.

What are the most recent research findings in your area and is there a story in them?

The Past and the Future

This summary aims to provide information about the structure and working of the Pompidou Group in the period 2003 -2006. It is not an attempt to include every detail of the comprehensive report that will be placed before the Ministerial Conference in November. Rather it is a briefing on what has be done, how it has been done and what needs to be done for the future.

The Ministerial Conference will assess the work programme of 2003-2006 and adopt a new work programme for the period 2007-2010.

Informed journalism can play a significant role in publicising the extent of drug abuse and what are the most important issues to be considered in confronting that abuse. This document is an attempt to assist that process by summarising the work of the Pompidou Group in the past period. Our own representatives in member states will have a copy of this briefing and are ready and willing to assist any journalistic inquiry.

The Secretariat

Executive Secretary

Tél : +333 88 41 21 93

Principal Administrator

Tél : +333 88 41 22 84

Demand Reduction

Tél : +333 88 41 53 19

Supply Reduction

Tél : +333 88 41 29 24

Research and science

Tél : +333 88 41 31 95

Ethics and Human Rights

Tél : +333 88 41 25 97

Assistance programmes

Tél : +333 88 41 22 82


Challenges identified

Concerted efforts: Everybody is advocating cooperation across sectors and between different agencies and institutions to find effective answers to our drug-related problems. But still cooperative efforts remain difficult to implement and are seemingly often cumbersome to manage.

Multi-agency strategies and cooperative partnerships face barriers that make successful operation difficult. Incompatibilities of rules and regulations governing the work of different agencies, mutual prejudices of the stakeholders involved, different communication cultures, varying decision-making hierarchies, are all examples of such barriers.

There is a need for strategic planning and for agencies to work across disciplines and in partnership in designing responses. In particular law enforcement agencies and social and health services need to be able to work together in an effective way to allow for adequate responses and interventions to deal with the pressing drugs-related problems.

Expectations: The notable absence of adequate evaluation is often aggravated by the setting of unrealistic success indicators that frustrate realistic policy approaches and constitute an obstacle in establishing what actually works and has an impact. Successful policies must have realistic expectations and verifiable results. Outcomes need to be measurable to allow for proper implementation, management and assessment.

Realism: Policy making should focus more on taking into account evidence from research and experience from practice and focus less on ideology or unrealistic political visions when deciding on measures to tackle drugs related problems. This includes abstaining from investing in programmes and strategies where evidence or indicators show that they yield little effect or none.

Starting points for action

Implementing Life skills trainings: Life skills training in schools are a prevention tool that has shown measurable results across Europe. A broad implementation of life skills trainings can bring about significant impact in the overall population at a considerably small cost.

Using communication technologies: The use of interactive modern communications technologies have brought about new ways to effectively reach target groups in demand reduction efforts. Internet-based activities such as self-testing, counselling, self help and support can make a significant contribution to reach risk groups that were not reached before.

Checking drug testing: Policy makers should be aware that there is currently no pedagogic evidence of the effectiveness of drug testing in schools as a means of preventing drug use and abuse. In cases where drug testing in schools is implemented all relevant pedagogical and legal issues, in particular ethics and human rights related questions, need to be taken into account.

Promoting qualitative research: In addressing the problem of urgently needed qualitative research to make better use of existing knowledge and data it is important to realign the priorities and guideline for the public funding of research institutions accordingly.


The Pompidou Group and its Member States

The PG comprises 35 Member States. The European Commission is also a member. Technical co-operation also involves other countries which are not members of the group, such as Albania, Latvia and Ukraine. Some countries which are not Council of Europe members participate in the Group’s activities on an ad hoc basis, for example the United States of America, Canada and the Holy See.

List of Pompidou Group Contacts


Year of accession: 1988

Permanent Correspondent:

Mr Raphael BAYER

Federal Ministry for Health and Women

Department III/B/9 (Alcohol, Drugs, Tobacco)

Radetzkystrasse 2

A - 1030 VIENNA

Tel: 00 43 1 71100 4422



Year of accession: 2001

Permanent Correspondent:

Mr Araz Ramiz oglu ALIGULIYEV

Head of Drug-Abuse Clinic

Chief Specialist on Drug Abuse Issues

Ministry of Health

Republic Narcological Center

Zich highway 13

370018 BAKU

tel: 00 99 412 729 188



Year of accession: 1971 (Founding Member)

Permanent Correspondent:


SPF Santé Publique, Service des Stupéfiants

Eurostation II

Place Victor Horta, 40 boîte 10


Tel: 00 32 2 524 83 03



Year of accession: 1995

Permanent Correspondent:


Lagera 37A

BG – SOFIA 1612

Tel: 00 359 2 832 51 67



Year of accession: 1997

Permanent Correspondent:

Ms Bernardica JURETIĆ


Office for Combating Narcotic Drugs Abuse

Preobraznska 4/II

HR – 10000 ZAGREB

Tel: 00 385 1 4878 122



Year of accession: 1989

Permanent Correspondent:

Mrs Tonia BAYADA
Executive Secretary
Cyprus Anti-Drug Council
32 Strovolos Ave Off 21-23


Tel: 00 357 224 429 60/1



Year of accession: 1993

Permanent Correspondent:

National Drug Coordinator
National Drug Commission

Nabřeži Edvarda Beneše 4

CZ - 11801 PRAGUE 1 - Malá Strana

Tel: 00 420 2 961 53 222



Year of accession: 1980

Permanent Correspondent:


Ministry of the Interior and Health
Slotsholmsgade 10-12


Tel: 00 45 72 26 96 00


Tel: 00 45 33 92 48 83



Year of accession: 1998

Permanent Correspondent:


Head of the Department
Department of Health Strategy and Planning
National Institute for Health Development
Hiiu 42

Tel: 00 372 659 3975



Year of accession: 1987

Permanent Correspondent:


Ministerial Adviser

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health

P O Box 33

FIN - 00023 Government Finland

Tel: 00 358 9 160 7 38 50



Year of accession: 1971 (Founding Member)

Permanent Correspondent:

Dr Didier JAYLE

Président de la MILDT

7 rue Saint Georges

F - 75009 PARIS

Mr Patrick SANSOY

Chargé de mission

7 rue Saint Georges

F – 75009 PARIS

Tel: 00 33 1 44 63 20 90



Year of accession: 1971 (Founding Member)

Permanent Correspondent:

Mr Werner SIPP
Ministerial Counsellor
Federal Ministry of Health and Social Security
Head of Division Narcotics Law
International Narcotic Drug Affairs

Am Propsthof 78a
D – 53121 BONN

Tel: 00 49 228 941 33 20



Year of accession: 1981

Permanent Correspondent:

Head of Drug Division

Ministry of Health and Social Solidarity
tel: 00 30 210 5230703



Year of accession: 1990

Permanent Correspondent:

University « Eötvös Lorand »
Institute of Psychology-Department of Psychology and Behavioural Psychology and Health
Izabella u.46

Tel: 00 36 30 976 10 97



Year of accession: 2000

Permanent Correspondent:
Ministry of Justice and Ecclesiastical Affairs


Year of accession: 1980

Permanent Correspondent:

Deputy Secretary
Department of Health -Primary Care

Hawkins House

Tel: 00 353 1 635 41 72



Year of accession: 1971 (Founding Member)

Permanent Correspondent:




Year of accession: 1994

Permanent Correspondent:

Mrs Karin JEHLE

Amt für Soziale Dienste
Postplatz 2

FL – 9490 SCHAAN

Tel: 00 423 236 72 61



Year of accession: 2001

Permanent Correspondent:

Chief Specialist
Drug Control Department under the Government of the Republic of Lithuania
Division of Drug Control Policy Analysis and Strategy

Vilniaus Street 33
LT – 01119 VILNIUS

Tel : 00 370 5 213 88 99

e-mail :


Year of accession: 1971 (Founding Member)

Permanent Correspondent:
Coordinateur "Drogues"
Ministère de la Santé - Direction de la Santé
Allée Marconi - Villa Louvigny

L - 2120 Luxembourg

Tel : 00 352 478 56 25

e-mail :


Year of accession: 1988

Permanent Correspondent:
Mr Richard MUSCAT, PHD
Research Consultant
Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Malta
Msida MSD 06


Tel : 00 356 3290 2053

e-mail :


Year of accession: 1971 (Founding Member and country holding the Pompidou Group’s presidency for the 2004-2006 period)

Permanent Correspondent:
Mr Marcel de KORT
Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport

Directorate of Mental Health and Addiction Policy
Parnassusplein 5 – P.O. Box 20350



Year of accession: 1983

Permanent Correspondent:

Ms Lilly Sofie OTTESEN
Ministry of Health and Care Services
Postboks 8011 Dep
N - 0030 OSLO

Tel: 00 47 22 24 85 53



Year of accession: 1991

Permanent Correspondent:

National Bureau for Drug Prevention
Ministry of Health
Ul. Dereniowa 52/54
PL - 02-776 WARSZAWA

Tel : 00 48 22 641 15 01

e-mail :


Year of accession: 1985

Permanent Correspondent:
Coordinateur National du Combat à la Drogue et Toxicodépendance
Institut de la Drogue et Toxicodépendance
Av. Joao Crisostomo 14
P – 1000-179 LISBONNE
Tel : 00 351 21 111 27 14
e-mail :

Mrs Maria de Fatima TRIGUEIROS
Substitute to the Permanent Correspondent
Advisor to the Administration Board
Institute for Drug and Drug Addiction
Ministry of Health
Praça de Alvalade, 7 - 5th to 13th
PT - 1700-036 Lisboa
Tel.: + 351 21 111 27 14


Year of accession: 2005

Permanent Correspondent:
Principal Questor
President of the Anti-Drug National Agency
Ministry of Administration and Interior
B-dul Unirii bl. A4, sector 3


Tel: 00 021 318 44 00



Year of accession: 1999

Permanent Correspondent:
Mr Nicolaï IVANETS
National Research Centre on Addictions
Ministry of Health of Russian Federation
Malyi Mogiltsevsky Per., 3

121921 Moscow

tel:00 7 095 241 2511



Year of accession: 1991

Permanent Correspondent:
Representation Permanente de Saint-Marin
18 rue Auguste Lamey


Tel: 00 33 3 88 36 09 44



Year of accession: 1993

Permanent Correspondent:
Board of Ministers for Drug Dependencies and Drug Control, General Secretariat
Námestie Slobody 1


Tel : 00 421 2 57 295 764

e-mail :


Year of accession: 1994

Permanent Correspondent:
Institute for Public Health of Slovenia
Trubarjeva 2


Tel : 00 386 1 432 32 45

e-mail :


Year of accession: 1984

Permanent Correspondent:

Mr Francisco PEREZ PEREZ

Government Delegation for the National Plan on Drugs

Ministry of the Interior
C/ recoletos 22
E – 28071 MADRID



Year of accession: 1980

Permanent Correspondent:
Deputy Director
Division of Health and Social Affairs
Fredsgatan 26

S – 103 33 STOCKHOLM

Tel: 00 46 8 405 33 29



Year of accession: 1985

Permanent Correspondent:
Head of the National Prevention Programmes Division
Public Health Directorate
Swiss Federal Office of Public Health
Case Postale
Hess-Strasse 27E

CH - 3003 BERN

Tel: 00 41 31 324 9234

e-mail :


Year of accession: 1980

Permanent Correspondent:
Mr Ahmet Semsettin ARDA
Head of Department - Deputy General Directorate for Security Affairs
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey
Dişişleri Bakanliği


Attaché - Deputy General Directorate for Security Affairs,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey
Dişişleri Bakanliği


Tel: 90 312 292 18 31



Year of accession: 1971 (Founding Member)

Mr Gabriel DENVIR
Head, Drug Legislation and Enforcement Unit
Home Office
50 Queen Anne's Gate
Tel: 00 44 20 70 35 0


Permanent Correspondent:
Unité de Coordination de la Lutte anti-Drogue DG JLS (C/2)
200 rue de la loi
Tel : 00 32 2 295 95 38
e-mail :