European Union: the EU and its member states are committed to the implementation of the three un drug conventions. The EU and its member states welcome the opportunity to reflect on drug control and human rights. Successful drug control intervention needs to be evidence-based approached in line with the drug control convention. The protection of human rights is integrated into our programmes. We support the INCB and the reference to proportionality. the international drug control conventions provide states with the possibility to apply alternative methods such as social reintegration of society for persons affected by drugs. We encourage the INCB to update the 2007 report on the matter. The death penalty undermines human dignity and peril made in its application are irreversible. We appreciate the INCB collects important data. The lack of data in many parts of the world leads to suffering. We agree the situation should be substantially improved. The EU and its member states remain concerned about the report in a negative trend; including the trend of new psychoactive substances. There needs to be effective exchange and awareness raising.
Prevention measures include early detection and intervention. It should include prevention targets aimed at families and young people. People who use drugs need to be reintegrated into society. the EU launched a new EU policy cycle on serious and international crime to ensure close cooperation amongst all actions. We would like to express the importance of bilateral and regional cooperation. The EU and member states carry out regular dialogues with third parties and their regions. We would like to encourage member states to further develop a dialogue with the INCB.
European Union on the control of precursors: We welcome the INCB report as it gives a good overview of Article 12. The report is very useful for the competent authorities in charge of precursor control. The EU continues to promote considerable resources. In 2018 the EU started with an in-depth evaluation of the functioning of the drug precursor in the EU. Customs authorities in the EU play a major role in drug precursor control. Last year we agreed on concrete actions which will be continued this year. We support customs with scientific expertise with drug controls. We recently launched the border sense project with the aim of developing a wireless device capable of detecting various precursor in drugs within 45 seconds. We focus on:
- Better control of courier service
- Prevent misuse of labeling.
We have a continued commitment to work with the board, government and other organisations on the prevention of drug precursor. Both tools are extremely important for monitoring scheduling substances.
Georgia: I am sure we all here share a sense of urgency because of the magnitude and harmful effects of drugs. It is important to take stock of our commitments particularly in light of the 2019 target date. We reaffirm our commitment to the 3 conventions; our priorities are to the UN common position adopted in November 2018 to put people and human rights at the center of our work. On the national level, our anti-drug commission handles our coordinated efforts – we will talk about this in detail at our side event tomorrow. Our anti-drug strategy of 2013 integrates human rights principles and is targeted at reducing demand, supply and harm. We are mainstreaming human rights into the national strategy. Another hallmark is stepping up our data collection. As to the effectiveness, we promote democratic law and policy processes by making sure civil society, academia and other stakeholders are involved on all levels.
China: The latest INCB annual report gives a comprehensive view of the current drug situation and countries responses. The report expresses concern about the legalization of Cannabis and its negative impact on public health, particularly to the welfare of youth. It undermines the legal framework that is set out by the 3 treaties and compromises the international order. We concur with this statement. We appreciate and highly value the efforts undertaken by INCB. We will continue to support the INCB’s work and hope that it will play an even greater role within its mandate. The criminalization of certain substances is beyond it’s mandate.
Japan: We appreciate the INCB for talking on the topics of cannabis and cannabinoids for recreational use. The situation surrounding cannabis is rapidly changing. Cannabis has adverse effects on human health based on scientific evidence. We are talking several; measure to prevent people from using it. Japan has established substantial and deterred systems from preventing the abuse of cannabis. We support the concerns expressed by INCB that cannabinoids can have potentially adverse effects on public health. there are associated perception of the global risk of the use of cannabis we emphasize that obligations under the convention relating the narcotic and psychotropic drugs it is our duty to prevent suffering on human health, peace and security. All regions should cooperate and fulfil this duty. We have just confirmed that the three-drug control conventions are the cornerstones of the international drug control. We have a great concern that some countries have violated these controls. Article 14 of the 1961 conventions mentions the several measures that INCB can take against member states that do not uphold the conventions. We commit to the international cooperation on these drugs conventions.
Russia: Looking at events of past few years, one cannot fail to note that the international community has entered a new and more complex phase in the fight against the drug threat. Until recently, we had a shared goal and shared understanding, with universal commitment to three drug conventions. Several states have started to openly challenge the fundamental legal principles. Legalization of marijuana in Canada last year opened a Pandora’s box. Cases of violations are beginning to multiply. Violators insist this is a normal event that warrants no special attention. We fully agree with INCB that the legalization of drugs is a serious threat and a violation of international law. Selective implementation of legal obligations is unacceptable. Demonstrably rejecting key provision is hardly compatible with civilized international obligations. Could unleash a chain of reactions. Pleasing that speakers from China and Japan paid special attention to this. Correct for this including by using article 14 in the 1961 convention. Some delegations called into question fundamental aims of the war on drugs, which have to date served as a unifying basis. Specifically, a society free of drug abuse, and the task of reducing supply and demand. High international drug standards are under threat. As the outcome has shown, international community is still capable of finding mutual solutions. Possible to agree on strong and balanced text. Against the backdrop of recent events, there is an increasing need for the INCB to build its collaboration with the CND. Russia has put forward a resolution on the INCB’s work.
Indonesia: Take note of INCB report. Concerns of developments of cannabis for non-medical purposes undermines the drug conventions and their implementation. Wide use of cannabis is a major concern. Conducted an approach including prevention. Involves national agencies. Drug trafficking rings have spread to so many parts of our country. Increased risk associated with cannabis. Balanced information must be taken into account. Reiterate concern on INCB focusing on issues beyond its mandate, such as capital punishment. Underline that INCB should focus on its treaty mandate which is the three drug conventions.
Switzerland: We welcomed the INCB’s mission to our country and welcome their recommendations but would like to know what these recommendations were based on. It is important for us to foster an open and transparent dialogue. We requested an explanation in our mission report and now we reiterate this request again. The ultimate goal of the 3 conventions is to protect the welfare of mankind and to ensure appropriate access to substances for medical purposes. Therefore, the board should support cannabis research. We find it interesting that the board would comment on public perception without any scientific evidence. This is not within their mandate as a quasi-judicial body and neither is the way of administration. It is in the mandate of the WHO. The INCB should contribute to informed decisions of MS based on scientific information on all issues. We are committed to a multidimensional approach and look forward to continue our cooperation and honest and transparent debate.
India: The annual report of the INCB has come to important for those working in the field. We in India closely follow these reports as they include measures and trends of drug use. Located as we are within close proximity of Afghanistan, we support INCB to provide further support the tackle the drug problem in Afghanistan. The government of India has begun a process of participating with business to business providers. In the report it was stated that the illicit cultivation in 2017 exceeded the licit cultivation, we are happy to work with the secretariat to correct this. This report based on report has come out with findings with information that will support out
United States: Seizure date shows that there is a reduce of these in our markets. US law enforcement officials are active in the INCB platforms. Us law enforcement relies on information from other member states we should all avail ourselves of the INCB tools. Their systems can help curve the production of illicit chemicals in to licit markets. We urge INCB to carefully adhere to its treat mandated functions.
Denmark: We support the EU statement. We congratulate the INCB on their excellent report. This constitutes an essential consideration on how we address the challenges we face. We would like to draw your attention to one of the issues raised: medical use of Cannabis. We believe reports on how Cannabis helped patients can not be ignored bearing in mind that medical use differs fundamentally from recreation use and also that medical use is in line with the 3 conventions. We feel obliged to act on the report out of respect to patients. The medial application of Cannabis has to be looked further into. Denmark decided to carry out a pilot project on cultivation for medical reasons 2018-2021. For the sake of patent safety, it is well regulated and monitored by competent national authorities. Prior to the project, we informed the INCB. Ever since, we had a constructive dialogue and we appreciate that. We are thankful for the close cooperation and fully support the collaboration.
Netherlands: We align with the EU statement. We highly appreciate the work and role of INCB with the ultimate goal of health and welfare of mankind. We particularly appreciate the INCB’s emphasis on human rights and SDGs – as the INCB put it, those MS who don’t comply to human rights obligations, also don’t comply to the 3 conventions. We always had a good and open dialogue with the INCB and we appreciate the political guidance, given the growing attention to INCB who support a good balance between health and drug control. I would like to draw attention to the importance of INCB seeking out inputs from civil society – we hope the last hearing on Cannabis was not a one-time thing. The role of INCB could be strengthened by furthering transparency, including processes and positions, choices on country missions and the whys. This will strengthen their role as well as the conventions’.
UAE: INCB is supposed to oversee and follow up on the implementation of the drug conventions. Call on CND to fulfill its duties. INCB should remove the term “blockage” from its report. Not under its mandate. Creating a new piece of terminology. Remarks have been made after reading the report and wanted to state this officially. Call on CND to take our comments into account. Terminology does not reflect the situation in the region.
Pakistan: Believe the reports of the INCB and UNODC provide great assistance. Welcome INCB concerns about regulation of cannabis in some countries. Agree that regulation for non-medical cannabis presents enormous challenges to implementation of the drug treaties. Use must be limited exclusively to medical and scientific purposes. “Golden Crescent” used. No poppy production appears in Pakistan. This term is thus obsolete. Clumping Pakistan with cultivation countries is unsubstantiated. Pakistan is a victim of drugs produced elsewhere. Fully cognizant of responsibilities to curbing the menace of drug trafficking. Keep these views in consideration when compiling the report.
OHCHR: The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (the UN Human Rights Office) thanks you for the invitation to speak. The UN Human Rights Office welcomes the recommendations on human rights related issues in the International Narcotic Control Board’s (INCB) 2018 annual report (paragraphs 856 and 857). The INCB 2018 report includes two key issues related to human rights. These are: ‘extrajudicial acts of violence’, and ‘the death penalty’. In the following, I will briefly reflect on these two important issues. In the Outcome Document of UNGASS 2016, all States committed to promote, respect and protect human rights in the drug control efforts, and tackle impunity. Despite these commitments, in recent years there has been an alarming tendency towards a deeper militarization in drug control efforts. We have also seen the concerning pursuit by some States of the so called “war on drugs” to counter drug-related crimes. Such approaches have disproportionately affected vulnerable groups and have repeatedly resulted in serious human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, and other serious human rights violations in several countries. The UN Human Rights Office strongly condemns all extrajudicial and other killings, and all other serious human rights violations committed in the name of drug control. In accordance with their human rights obligations, authorities must adopt the necessary measures to protect all persons from targeted killings and extrajudicial executions. It is their utmost duty to protect the right to life of all without any discrimination. The INCB Annual Report 2018 notes with serious concern that in several countries, in particular in South and South-East Asia, extrajudicial acts of violence continue against persons suspected of drug-related activities. Senior officials of those countries often commit such violent acts, frequently at the direct behest of senior political figures or with their active encouragement or tacit approval. The Report also informs us that INCB has communicated with concerned Governments to seek clarification and to remind them of their obligations under the international drug control conventions. Such obligations include the requirement for States to respect the rule of law and due process when carrying out their obligations under those conventions. In the pursuit of its mandate, the Report states that the Board will continue to monitor these developments and to draw the attention of the international community to them. INCB reiterates its appeal to all States to address drug-related crimes through formal criminal justice responses, in accordance with international human rights law, and in adherence with recognized due process standards. The UN Human Rights Office welcomes INCB’s initiatives and recommendations. The UN Human Rights Office calls upon all concerned States, in accordance with their obligations under international law, to carry out independent, impartial, prompt, thorough, effective and credible investigations into all extrajudicial killings and other serious human rights violations carried out in the name of drug control. States should provide full reparation, including adequate compensation and rehabilitation, to the victims of such violations.
The UN Human Rights Office regrets that, despite repeated calls by the international community, States, including some of INCB’s thirty-five States, still have the death penalty for drug offences, in violation of international human rights law. In recent years, most of the executions that were carried out were for drug offences in a small number of countries. In its 2018 Annual Report, INCB once again encourages States that retain capital punishment for drug-related offences to consider the abolition of the death penalty for that category of offence. Our Office would like to note some positive trends that have been reported in the last year. Reportedly, executions for drug offences have fallen nearly 90% since 2015. This decline – a significant positive development – may have resulted from the amendment to the drug trafficking law and recent legislative initiatives on death penalty reforms in several countries. Any death penalty reforms, including its full abolition, are welcome and should be applied retroactively. While removing the death penalty from their laws, States should also revoke death sentences issued for crimes not qualifying as the most serious crimes (such as drug crimes) and pursue the necessary legal procedures to re-sentence those convicted for such crimes. Excellencies, Despite various positive trends towards the abolition of the death penalty worldwide, our office remains concerns about worrying signs of the resurgence and introduction of the death penalty for drug offences in a small number of countries. Considering the death penalty as the model solution to address the drug problem is wrong, and indeed not based on any evidence. On the contrary, all the evidence indicates that the death penalty neither deters crime, not does it provide justice to the victims of crime. Its application also has the potential to become an obstacle to effective cross-border and international judicial cooperation against drug trafficking. In accordance with their international human rights obligations, States around the world adopted numerous national laws that rightly prohibit the exchange of information, mutual legal assistance and extradition in cases where the suspect may face capital punishment. The death penalty undermines human dignity, and its application violates human rights norms and principles. The UN Human Rights Office, once again, calls upon all States to abolish the death penalty in all circumstances, including for drug offences.
Dear Chair, In concluding, our office strongly encourages the ICNB to continue to address human rights issues in the implementation of the drug control conventions. The UN Human Rights Office stands ready to cooperate with INCB in this regard.
Uganda (NGO): Despite the current trends to achieve a drug-free world through the criminalisation of people who use drugs, there are now more people in the world who use drugs. Targets to abolish drugs are unachievable and the global drug policy metrics have failed. More than 27000 people have died due to extrajudicial killings in one country alone. Overdose death accounts for up to 100000 deaths each year. The vast majority of deaths come from the unregulated marketed and the unpolitical support for harm reduction. We welcome the UN common position that calls for the decriminalisation of drug use and possession for personal use. The way forward must be defined by a commitment to the human rights and dignity of people who use drugs which cannot be pursued in the convention of a drug-free world.
Network Foundation: The board report to develop conflicts with the WHO expert. It includes that THC is included in its conventions, but it says it is in schedule 2 and not 1. The convention does not address such details. In addition, for the question of clinical trials the WHO have specific processes for herbal medication that is disregarded by the INCB. These are only a few of a long list of examples. The board should continue to increase its work with civil society.
INCB: All comments and suggestions will be a guide for our future reports.
Chair: We will now begin agenda item 9d.
INCB: States have agreed to ensure availability of narcotic drugs for medical purposes while preventing diversion. Recommendations from UNGASS represented a political commitment to ensuring availability. INCB committed to support your government to ensuring national control measures are fit for this purpose. Treaties enjoy near universal adherence. Virtually no diversion from licit international trade. Situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating. Article 14bis invoked for urgent support. Need to address illicit supply of drugs. Effort to prevent abuse in the first instance and provide human and evidence-based treatment must be stepped up in all parts of the world. Cannabis regulation is a real concern and contrary to treaties. State parties have made a legal commitment to restrict access to medical and scientific purposes. Any divergence poses a threat particularly to young people. Must address all these challenges without resorting to capital punishment. Similar challenges overcome through international cooperation. Encourage you to invoke the same spirit.
UNODC Health Branch: Increasing access for medical purposes while avoiding misuse in line with 2009, 2016, 2019. WHA: palliative care, cancer control, noncommunicable disease. Over 80% needs increased access to essential pain medication. We are past the time of resolutions, it is time for actions. Since 2013 since we started our joint program, only 3 countries provided countries provided to this work. With that, we worked in Ghana, DRC and Panama. Additionally, EU provided finding to Nigeria as a catalyst to significant work needing to be done in the region. With the funding, excellent work has been done but the challenge looms large. Lack of availably of medication is not corrected by one government leader deciding to support local manufacturing, fear and stigma is not resolved by one or two meetings a year. Stronger health care systems and higher level of medical care with rights passed approach putting patience first is needed. Most time people who ask me what to do expect me to provide a few step solutions, but similar to gaining weight, it will not take a week, a month or even a year to provide sufficient medical support of all. We launched an international guidance that demonstrates the complexity of the issue it shows how all MS are unique. It is a tool to identify gaps and priorities areas for change. Systems change – regulatory and health system. Building Capacity and increasing awareness. Responsive supply-chain. cross-cutting areas to Enhance strategic actions: patient centered; realistic understanding of economic structures; consistent messages driven by health care; quality prevention and treatment services; data and research. Ghana was our first country and 2018, they hosted the first national meeting fully organized and financed by local leaders particularly about pain management and palliative care; spoke at international events. Timor-Leste works together with UNODC, WHO to train nurses to meet key focal points to firm up their actions. Congo worked with the union of international cancer control development a national training curriculum as well as working with a strong civil society partner, they organized an awareness week. Panama’s strong network of palliative professionals’ work with the government. Nigeria stands as a model how to leverage a network of stakeholders that is not limited but focused on national guidelines and curriculum. As data shows, very few persons can access regulated medicines in Nigeria, but they access cough syrup with Codeine and Tramadol though the black market that impacts the supply-demand and the affordability of regulated medicines. From the beginning, we worked in close cooperation with INCB, WHO and enjoyed support from the civil sector. The heart of this work is an urgent need to address the stark disparities among over prescription and low access. We thank to our partners, now is a critical time to take action. With your support, we are ready to continue our work to increase access while preventing diversion.
WHO: Controlled medicines are necessary to alleviate the pain and suffering. They are necessary for ensuring comfortable recovering. A vast majority of countries in the world do not have access to these medicines. The WHO approach is to strive for programmes that provide access to controlled medicine whilst ensuring the use of these medicines are not abused. As part of its mandate and engagement for promoting appropriate use of medicine WHO has developed a series of guideline. Additional guidelines have provided guidance for people with opioid drug use disorder. WHO collaborates with countries for best practices on quantities and use of these medicines. We promote access to naloxone and the training of service providers. We are involved in the learning project with INBCB. The world health assembly approved WHOs strategy. the strategy aims:
- Promote health
- Keep the world safe
- Serve the vulnerable
We will continue to foster collaboration between member states and other organisations
China: the Chinese government has always followed the scheme for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance. In 2018 there were export authorisations granted to china. China crack down on illicit manufacture and or narcotic and psychotropic whilst ensuring their availability for medical purposed. We suggest countries tighten the regulation of opiates and alert patient against the risk of addiction. Prevention addiction should be stepped up.
Korea: we recognise that addressing the global drug problem is a great challenge. Until recently the government banned manufacturing and export of cannabis. There has been a growing demand for the medical use of cannabis. The Korean government has revised a lot of its laws and policies to allow the use of cannabis product for medical use. We have operated an information management system which allows us to monitor import export distribution and consumption. The data collected will enable us to obtain useful information and create a system where medical narcotic are appropriately handled. We will continue to comply with the4 international drug treaties.
Nigeria: this is critical in view of the prohibited tramadol affecting the well-being of the public. It is about to commence the local manufacture of medicines to ensure availability.
Sudan: thanks, the WHO and INCB to ensure the availability of narcotic and psychotropic substances. We observe that the prescribers have started to become anxious and may stop prescribing to avoid complications. This might affect the principle of the UNGASS 2016 with respect to the above-mentioned subject. The new trend to reschedule cannabis abuse is approx. behind 80% of the drug abuse crimes – this is a challenge from the medical viewpoints. Sustainable development might be affected. Tramadol should be put under surveillance. My delegation would like to ask for more collaboration that makes control beneficial. National programmes can develop these programs.
USA: No person should suffer unnecessarily. Countries should make substances available for medical and scientific substances. The INCB collects information on controlled substances and we urge member states to provide this information and urge INCB to provide this information to WHO and UN agencies. We urge the INCB to be rigorous in its execution in achieving the aims of the conventions.
Venezuela: We take note of INCBs 2018 report and use it as a tool. We reaffirm the commitment to promote dialogue with the board. The highlighted our programmes of education and awareness throughout the country and our work of trying to combat cross borders trafficking. Venezuela would like to highlight the contributions that have been made notably for countries that import these substances. We call upon these countries to only use data from official institutions. We have reported progress but acknowledge challenges. Those practice are far from strengthening the principles of common and shared responsibilities. These actions are a breach of international law. We welcome the call of INCB to include the gender perspective. We are willing to work with INCB on implementing the recommendations of the report.
Saudi Arabia: We have remarks on item 9c of the agenda. We noted that on page 95 of the 2018 report, the term ‘blockage’ was used. This is not a legal terminology and such a term is outside the mandate of the INCB. According to the INCB’s mandate of the 1971 and 1988 treaty, we ask the INCB to remove this wording of the report. In paragraph 724 it is mentioned that … was mentioned in India. We would like this information deleted, because none of the information we presented indicated this.
Cameroon: We take note of the INCB and WHO reports on the important subject of the non-medical use of cannabinoids and synthetic drugs. We are aware of the problem linked to tramadol and know that it is a burning issue. Abuse of this medicine, which is in effect a pain killer, varies greatly in Africa. We have noted the use of this in Cameroon amongst you people. We want to combat the illicit production of this medicine. Our ministry of health has taken the decision to ban the trade of tramadol in our country. We believe it is necessary to keep an eye on this medication as it is important for pain management; it may need to be placed under international control. The report has enlightened us enough to prevent cannabis from being grown in our country. The WHO highlighted poly-addictions, which is a topic that is often overlooked; we experience this problem in my country. Cannabis is often linked to the consumption of alcohol. Cameroon shares the principle of placing the individual of the fight to combat drug addiction. We need a balanced and multi-disciplinary approach taking into account our national laws and the conventions.
Egypt: I align myself with the remarks of Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The negative effects of tramadol is a significant problem in my country. We encourage the INCB to continue in these efforts and communicate with member states to obtain more information.
Item 9(d): closed.
Item 9 (e)
UNODC: the potentially deadly consequences of the non-medical use of opioids is affecting parts of north America with Fentanyl and Africa with Tramadol. Traffic of global supply chains have transformed this problem into a global phenomenon. National authorities in some countries have reported an increase in seizures. Under the conditions of a globalise controlled market, the risk of this spreading to other countries has never been greater. 75% of the world pop do not have access to pain relief and palliative care. Thematic sessions on key topics relating to reducing the supply of synthetic opioids fostered and increased understanding of the challenges. Most importantly it identified core elements of an international response. The commission has before it the latest issues of psychotropic substances. The dictionary is conceptualised with aspects of international drug control. The competent national authorise publications provides facilitation amongst authorities to regulate and enforce national controls in accordance with international drug control treaties.
Brazil: I would like to highlight brazils efforts to committing the timely scientific regulatory measures to tackle the challenges of NPS. Since July 2016 we have to adopt measures that are used alongside of the scheduling approach. This innovative procedure has allowed Brazil to have some of the substances under control. NSP present a challenge to law enforcement and public health; raising awareness on this is fundamental to reducing the harm. We have been trying to guarantee that regulatory measures allow for the access of these substances for medical needs. Brazil has been a user of the national drug control system. The Brazilian government is using the i2ES and support the wide realisation of this tool; we encourage other member states to use it. We support the activities of the CND. We promote broad and transparent discussion on dependence; it would be ideal if the WHO could support the discussion of member states.
Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to contribute to this discussion regarding the implementation of the international drug control treaties. For more than 20 years, Member States have recognized, in multiple unanimous resolutions of the General Assembly and of this Commission, that “countering the world drug problem” must be carried out “with full respect for … all human rights and fundamental freedoms.” This was reaffirmed most recently in the Ministerial Declaration adopted by this Commission last week. However, too often the reality has diverged—and still diverges—from this important commitment.
We therefore wish to draw the attention of Member States to the International Guidelines on Human Rights and Drug Policy, the result of a three-year consultative process to address this gap. The Guidelines were released here during last week’s Ministerial Segment with the support of Member States, UN entities and leading human rights experts. The Guidelines outline the measures States should take, or refrain from taking, in order to comply with their human rights obligations. The Guidelines do not invent new rights. They apply existing human rights law to the legal and policy context of drug control in order to maximise human rights protections, including in the interpretation and implementation of the drug control conventions. The Guidelines first present foundational, cross-cutting human rights principles, such as equality and non-discrimination, the accountability of states and the right to an effective remedy for violations of human rights. They then set out specific, universal human rights standards and apply them to the specific context of drug policy. These include, but are not limited to, such matters as:
- the right to health, and what it requires in the areas of prevention of problematic drug use, harm reduction, drug dependence treatment, access to controlled substances for medical purposes, and measures affecting the environment with health implications;
- the right to life, which continues to be violated in some settings by the continued application of the death penalty and widespread extrajudicial executions;
- freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, which, for example, continues to be widespread in compulsory drug detention centres where people are subjected to horrific abuses, sometimes in the name of supposed “treatment” for drug dependence; and
- the rights to privacy, to freedom of expression and information, to a fair trial, and to enjoy cultural life, among others.
The Guidelines also address States’ obligations in relation to the human rights of particular groups such as children, women, prisoners and other persons deprived of their liberty, and Indigenous peoples—for which groups there are specific human rights instruments of relevance to drug policy. The Guidelines also recognize that many other groups experience disproportionate harm, inequities and intersecting forms of discrimination which must be taken into account in drug policies, including on the grounds of race, ethnicity, nationality, migration status, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, poverty, and the nature and location of livelihood, including employment as rural workers or sex workers. The Guidelines respect States’ prerogative to determine their national drug policies. But States have also repeatedly and unanimously declared their commitment to ensuring full respect for human rights in law, policy and practice related to drugs. We urge Member States to make use of this new resource in order to fulfil this commitment.
Item 9 (e): Closed
Secretariat: Consideration of item 9 (a) will resume in the plenary tomorrow morning.