The European Union has created a common plan regarding narcotics use and abuse within the European member states. The aim here is to reduce the supply and demand for drugs among the citizens of the Union. However, the opinions on how to achieve these goals greatly differ among member states. The range of attitudes varies from the strictly restrictive attitudes of countries such as Sweden, to the complete decriminalization of personal possession of all narcotic substances in Portugal. The purpose of this paper is therefore to study the underlying attitudes and approaches that these two countries have, and hopefully to give some light to how come there is this big difference in legal frameworks regarding a rather delicate political question. A review and analyze of the current proposition for each country regarding drug policies is the method for the paper. By interpreting the content and quoting parts of these two propositions an ideology analysis is made. The theory chapter consists of the two different philosophies of Rousseau’s theory on the social contract and the general will, as well as objectivism. These theories are used in order to make a distinction in the empirical research between attitudes towards the states’ as well as the individuals’ role in the drug policies of Sweden and Portugal. A model with the most important features of these theories is constructed and works as a base for the analysis. Overall, the results from the empirical research show that while both countries initially share the same general value towards the narcotics situation, Sweden devotes their policies more frequently towards the Rousseauian values up until the point of treating drug addicts, where they change directions and instead argue in a more objectivistic manner. On the contrary, Portugal reason in a more individualistic and objectivistic way, but change ideological paths into Rousseauianism when starting to set up aims for the treatment of addicts and offenders.

Trafficking in human beings and prostitution is an increasing occurrence within the EU. However, vast differences in legal frameworks regarding prostitution can be detected among member states.The Netherlands is an example where prostitution is regarded a legal activity. In other member states legal standings toward prostitution remain ambivalent, where Sweden here serves an example. Finally, Lithuania is among member states where prostitution is considered illegal.The purpose of this paper is therefore to study underlying attitudes and approaches that these three countries have in this rather delicate political question. By interpreting the content and quoting parts of propositions, an ideology analysis is constructed.The theory chapter consists of Rousseau’s theories, Objectivism, Radical Feminist Theory, and Sex-positive Feminist Theory. A model with the most important features of these theories is constructed and works as a base for the analysis.The general results suggest that the Government of Lithuania consistently uses arguments pending towards Radical Feminist Theory and Rousseauan values, with catholic morality as an additional important feature in the argumentation against prostitution. The Government of Sweden also views prostitution with predominantly Rousseauan and Radical Feminist theories. The Government of the Netherlands arguments greatly differ from these viewpoints. Instead, individualistic and sex-positive arguments remain dominant here.