Home » UNGASS Special Segment Day 2 – Interactive Discussion (b) on Supply Reduction and Related Measures

UNGASS Special Segment Day 2 – Interactive Discussion (b) on Supply Reduction and Related Measures

Part (i) Domestic, regional and cross-regional responses to drugs-related crime countering money-laundering including, where appropriate, in the connection with the financing of terrorism, promoting judicial cooperation in criminal matters

(ii) Addressing emerging issues including new psychoactive substances, precursors and the misuse of the Internet

The chairs of the interactive discussions will prepare summaries on the most salient points discussed. These summaries will be presented on Thursday and will not be subject to debate.

UNODC Introduction

The broad topic of supply encompasses many cross-cutting issues. Some issues we see returning repeatedly are:

  • Communication and coordination internationally. Despite investment in regional platforms, there is still something operational missing.
  • Professional capacity building. Traffickers exploit weakest links in the international drug control chain.
  • Addressing the proceeds of crime. More effort needs to be made to address inconsistencies between countries in tackling money laundering etc.
  • Emerging issues such as NPS and use of the internet to purchase drugs.

The internet and cybercrime touches us all, and its use for illegal activities develops daily. This is a challenge for law agencies and legislative bodies everywhere.Panelist nominated by the Asian group, the representative from India

Thank you Mr. Chairman. We are aware that the 2009 political declaration calls for a concerted and comprehensive response from member states to reduce the drug problem by 2019. Today, it’s important to take stock of where we are now in the lead up to this year.

As far as the Asian is concerned, we’re aware that poppy cultivation has risen to 300,000 hectares between Afghanistan and Myanmar; it was half this back in 2009. 2016 discussion must therefore include a frank discussion on the reasons why this has happened so responses can be put in place.

Similarly, Asia is affected by cannabis. This calls for better cooperation at the international level. Meaningful cross-border cooperation is required to combat drug trafficking.

This cooperation should not be limited to trafficking, but all related activities including money laundering and financing of terrorism. I’m happy to mention that pursuant to the recent UNODC visit to India, our government in collaboration with the UNODC has taken the lead in fostering cooperation in the south Asian region on these issues.

On the issue of NPS I’d like to highlight:

  1. There’s huge variance in this issue across the world in terms of how many NPS have been identified in countries across the world. Absence of reporting of NPS in certain areas may not be due to their non-existence, but rather the technical capacity of agencies to properly identify them. This calls for huge cooperation in investment, with guidance from the UNODC.
  2. International responses to NPS so far have been largely reactive. This CND and UNGASS must seriously advise on measures that can be taken to properly combat NPS.
  3. The internet represents a serious concern. There is an urgent need to share experiences in this regard to properly combat the phenomenon.

Panelist nominated by the East European group, representative from Latvia
We have several important issues to discuss, especially taking into account the mandate to review the progress of the 2009 declaration.

UN member states have already agreed on what should be done in the field of supply reduction. Therefore, our main question remains constant, and addresses whether measures adopted to date have been smart enough, consistent enough, based on evidence, and how we if and how we should change our approach. How should we move forward in general?

We should bear in mind that success and failures is not only represented by seizures, eradication, and disruption of money laundering networks, but also other factors. Therefore, we should develop our evaluation of these measures.We should find a relevant, rapid and practical response to these challenges. This is an emergency task for our governments, and established global law enforcement. This is a task for UNGASS. But, if we do not address the root of the main problem, we will see a continual evolution of the drug market as it adapts to our measures.

Our drug control system should protect public health and contribute to integration into society. We should recognise that the 2009 declaration is directly linked to human rights and fundamental freedoms. Therefore, I would highlight the need for the abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances, particularly drug offences.

We should also work toward developing strategies on alternative development that are based on wider interpretations than previous. Also, we should work on restorative justice. Enforcement as a coercive approach to this problem is necessary but it is reactive and doesn’t address the roots of the problem.

Panelist nominated by Latin America and Caribbean states, representative from Panama

Panama agrees with the position presented here, and agrees on the need for an in depth analysis of the three UN drug conventions. Panama has adapted its legislation under the framework of these treaties to combat the drug problem. We have also observed the need to legislate on cyber crime and money laundering. This has meant that we have been able to exchange and share information on tackling organised crime. These crimes affect us nationally and internationally.

[Panama speaks about its recent seizures of illicit narcotics and assets]


It’s a great honour to be invited to speak here today, and I’ll be speaking on behalf of a technical agency. We all recognise that the challenges and solutions we seek are increasingly global.

I want to make three points:

  1. The problems of the drug market we face exacerbate other societal issues such as unemployment and marginalisation, development and security. We need to recognise the importance of the bigger context when we think about supply reduction.
  2. From a European perspective, it’s fair to say now we have a better understanding of what does and doesn’t work when it comes to supply reduction. Success is most apparent when measures are taken to equally combat demand in conjunction with tackling supply.
  3. Technology, globalisation and social and economic developments are having an impact on the drug market. In Europe, stimulant problems are more apparent, and producers are becoming more innovative. Efforts to control precursors have been countered by new substances. Overall, we face a more dynamic and interlinked, problem. Most concerning is the emergence of a mass market of NPS. Last year, the EMCDDA received reports of over 100 new substances. A new development is that new substances are from increasingly unknown chemical groups. In cases of newly registered substances, many had their pharmacology altered to an extent that has more serious implications for public health than more traditional illicit narcotics.

Civil Society Representative, Ross Bell, NZDF
Thank you Mr Chairman. The CSTF has asked me to act as a representative. However, given the breadth of issues civil society covers, my remarks should not be taken as being representative of the whole.

There is little evidence to demonstrate that supply reduction measures to date have worked.
The 2009 political declaration aims to eliminate or significantly reduce production and use of drugs. As other panelists have noted, we have not achieved these goals. Therefore, we need to change focus to one based on public health, development and human rights. The current approach drives incarceration and in some cases executions. In addition, we are stoking a public health crisis in terms of HIV and hepatitis C among drug users, and are affecting development.

A new civil society campaign launched this week urges member states to shift funding from law enforcement to harm reduction services to properly address the issue. This campaign [by HRI] calls for just one tenth of the $100 billion spent annually on drug enforcement. This would cover harm reduction needs for four years around the world.

More arrests and seizures do little to address the issue as trafficking networks simply shift. As long as there is demand, it will be met. New indicators need to be explored that focus on the impact of health, security and development. These could include strength of organised crime and ease of availability of narcotics.

It’s time to accept and encourage new approaches. The legal regulation of NPS and cannabis are promising examples from which we can learn. When these policy experiments present tensions in the drug control system, these must be openly discussed. The INCB and UNODC should commission a working group in advance of the UNGASS to review these issues.

Urgent attention should be given to funding for aggressive supply reduction programs that result in executions for drug offences. In some cases, these programs operate in countries with the world’s largest figures for people on death row. Funding is often contingent on meeting performance targets such as arrest and seizures which result in the death penalty being utilised for drug offences. We’re pleased to see some EU member states acknowledge the link between funding and executions. However, more could be done to make this funding strictly conditional on the abolition of the death penalty. You have the opportunity to deliver on your human rights commitments and ensure the abolition of the death penalty.

In the spirit of greater civil society engagement, I would invite the Chairman to call on the participation over other civil society members in this room as we debate this issue.

[Chairman opens the floor for speakers]
We are concerned about the issues concerning NPS, and working to provide balanced and effective solutions based on public health. Our parliament passed legislation to control NPS at the border.

As one panelist stated, too often we are reactive to the problem of NPS. One challenge we face is that producers are becoming more innovative. We are particularly worried about the rise of methamphetamine in the country.

Drug supply is a threat to the world. The economy generated by it is one of the main sources of financing for terrorism and is a serious threat to our region. In order to tackle this problem we must tackle it through cooperation.

My country is a victim of narcotics, and people are facing serious problems due to cultivation of illicit crops and drug trafficking. In order to fight this problem we must confront all angles; demand reduction, eradication of illicit crops, and supply reduction. We need a balanced approach.

We must strengthen institutions to fight this problem. We must also provide alternative development and employment options for people currently growing poppy.

We must better identify the traffickers and their routes, and confront money laundering which is a significant concern. We must confront these problems together and coordinate an international approach.


I would like to thank the panelists for their thought-provoking points. I will speak on behalf of the EU and touch upon the key points we have prepared concerning supply reduction.

The EU has its own drug strategy which has among its objectives reducing supply through cooperating with international partners. We are also focused on controlled precursor chemicals used in the production of illicit drugs.

The strategy endorses alternative development to address the issue in source countries. The EU welcomes increasing interest in this approach and the increasing number of countries engaged in this.

The EU are long standing partners of UNODC drug project focused on both demand and supply reduction measures. Within the latter, we are involved in capacity building, training, and alternative development, among other issues.

I would like to stress that the EU is committed to the protection of human rights when engaged in dialogue with partners concerning implementation of project on drugs. The EU is opposed to the death penalty as it is a gross violation of the right to life. We call for its abolition.


Our country has become one of the largest drug markets in the region due to the rise of amphetamine-type substances (ATS). Crystal meth has become a particular concern in Indonesia. Cannabis is also a pressing concern for our country. [gives seizure numbers concerning cannabis].

With regard to money laundering, we have worked to combat the issue. Taking into consideration the transnational nature of the crime, we have established partnerships with other agencies around the world. Our efforts on this issue has resulted on the removal of Indonesia from the financial black list.

NPS has become a worrying challenge. Today, we have 35 NPS in our country and we are currently monitoring this and are willing to learn from others’ experiences.

We want to draw attention to maritime drug trafficking. We’ve witnessed the new trend of smuggling by sea. The routes come from out neighbouring countries and traffickers use Indonesia maritime space.

I would like to thank all the panelists.


A brief overview on our country’s smart on crime initiative that was introduced in 2013 by the Department of Justice. This approach reduces mandatory minimums for low level drug offences and works to improve access to treatment for drug users.

We are trying to yield more of a focused scalpel than a broad hammer. Long sentences for non violent and low level drug offences do nothing for the improvement of public health.

Smart on crime should improve the allocation of our federal resources and free up money to fight organised crime.

Among the principles developed to guide our initiative are; reforming sentencing so that it is proportionate; alternatives to incarceration, particularly for offenders affected by substance use disorders;

We’re also committed to developing reintegration initiatives for people who have served time.

Smart on crime is already yielding results. Federal incarceration is decreasing, for one. However, there is no doubt that we will have to evolve as we move forward. The US is happy to share our experiences with others who wish to learn.

NPS are being developed at an alarming rate. If we are to control them via the international drug control system, we will need to rethink how we do this as we simply can’t keep up.

Two ideas we propose – provisional listing of the substance to determine if it has capacity to produce dependence. Second, enactment of legislation that can prosecute those engaged in the distribution of these substances.


We want to address the complex issue of NPS. I was particularly drawn by the US comments on NPS and the need for further cooperation internationally.

NPS are dangerous and are likely to affect all members states, and are concerned about their impacts on public health. We’re developing controls at the national level and working to produce evidence-based programs. One of these is Project Neptune, a program for clinicians to develop tools to identify and treat use of NPS.

We must also act internationally, and in the last three years the UK has taken global leadership on NPS. We’re working with partners around the world to develop a balanced response to this issue.

There are three priorities:

  1. We must enhance international information sharing on NPS to properly develop an early warning system.
  2. We should implement action points from 2014 expert consultation on NPS. With rapidly changing international market, we should prioritise the most harmful substances.
  3. We should schedule the most harmful substances internationally providing it doesn’t impact on medical access.

The UK welcomes the vote on Friday to schedule a new substance internationally, and calls on all member states to attend. The UK wishes to see the international control of mephedrone, a drug with no recognised medical use.

It’s important to underline the fact that this fight should be based on a balanced and comprehensive approach that fosters international cooperation.  We would like to point out that the production and manufacture of drugs has considered at a considerable level around the world. More assistance should be provided to producing and transit countries.

We are concerned about the securitisation of the drug problem and repeated focus on links between drug trafficking and financing terrorism.

We must benefit from the legal and political platform that exists through the drug conventions.


We remain committed to the three UN drug conventions. The goals pursued by the 2009 declaration have not been fully realised. Progress has been achieved in different parts of the world, but not consistently.

Drugs that do not fall under the UN conventions are emerging. With the growing trend of electronic communications, drug production and illicit money transfers have evolved.


I would like to thank the UNODC for their efforts in assisting countries to combat the drug threat. This threat has different faces in different countries. However, the response to this scourge should be international.

UNGASS should have different approaches and include all stakeholders, including the scientific community. One of the starting points to reduce availability is to monitor the cultivation of illicit crops. We know it is complex, but we can reduce the availability and supply of heroin.

It’s important to know that cannabis cultivation should be more accurately estimated in our country and we need the help of the UNODC to do this.

The 2009 action plan took into account money laundering which is extremely important. However, we need better international cooperation. This is fundamental to detecting the combating money laundering related to drug trafficking.

Regarding NPS, we need electronic information sharing systems. Some companies make chemical precursors and don’t always comply with the treaties in terms of labelling their products. I would like to call on countries to tackle this issue to a greater degree.


Some panelists refer to conventions and international treaties and mention that there are new modalities involved in fighting drug trafficking. They mention that the international market is changing quickly.

My question to some panelists is – has there been consideration of revising the treaties in relation to these new threats given the upcoming UNGASS?

CELS, Argentina (Civil Society)

I would like to thank you for the inclusion of civil society in this discussion.

We have identified that many supply reduction measures have had a detrimental impact on public health and human rights of the most vulnerable people, particularly in Latin America where drug policy has been securitised.

The forced eradication of crops causes great harm to farmers and their communities and impoverishes these poor communities further. The rapid destruction of farmers engaged in coca cultivation, for example, only increases their dependence on these crops.

It’s time to recognise the human rights impact of supply reduction measures on human rights in Latin America.


Turkey believes that law enforcement efforts to combat supply can only be successful with preventive efforts alongside.

NPS is a growing challenge. We have identified 340 NPS in our country. We believe the global smart program of the UNODC provides adequate guidance to states on combating this issue.

Implementing balanced policies to address the drug problem nationally is a step, but we need greater international cooperation. We invite member states to work toward closing off connections between drug trafficking and the financing of terrorism.


Colombia has had a successful policy to eradicate coca crops, particularly in the last 10 years. What we’ve observed is that alongside eradication there must be investment in alternative development, otherwise we will not truly eradicate the issue.

We need to focus on fostering intelligent cooperation to ensure that in combating supply, we are not attacking the farmers caught in cultivating illicit crops. Rather, we need policies based on public education and health.

We need to recognise that we are opposed to a strict focus on penal sanctions for drugs. Punitive laws have simply not worked. We’ve incarcerated more drug criminals but not seen a reduction in the amount of drugs trafficked. Punishment, or direct penal measures are not the solution. We must foster a debate as to the proportionality of punishment and sentences in cases related to drug trafficking. The penal code must be reserved for key links in the supply chain. We need an intelligent strategy.

At this time, the market is controlled by criminals. Unless we recognise the vulnerability of the people and territories involved, we will not resolve the issue. We must go to UNGASS based on our experiences and the current realities in countries.


We would like to have a forward looking outcome of the UNGASS.

We have seen that the issues we are tackling have become increasingly complex, for example involving cybercrime and the financing of terrorism. Are all elements of the current landscape being considered in countries’ approaches?

There is a clear link between production supply and demand. We support alternative development.

The UNODC global container program is extremely important and efficient and we support it.

I don’t want to repeat what we said on the death penalty yesterday, but to remind everyone that human rights are for everyone.


We have had for many years examples of successful alternative development programs. However, there is too much of a limitation as UNODC is only a small organisation. Therefore, we must engage with other UN agencies to push this issue forward and ensure alternative development programs receive funding.

We think that supply reduction could be used to reach people to stop the demand for drugs. We have prevention programs, within which when young people are caught by policy we offer social workers in police stations to support the families. Using supply reduction efforts to reach people and prevent demand, therefore.

If panelists have experience in trying to integrate supply and demand reduction, I would welcome their thoughts.


Combating drug trafficking involves greater international cooperation, information sharing and the tackling of associated money laundering networks.

Information sharing is especially important for tackling criminal networks. Criminals are always a step ahead. We must improve cooperation to combat them.

We must also cooperate on extradition, repatriation and asset seizure.

We must strengthen import and export control of precursor chemicals.

Financial investigation is another effective measure to tackle drug-related money laundering. We urge countries and financial institutions to join together and tackle this issue.

As a party to the three drug conventions, we learned that the effective weapon to combat drugs must be based on existing laws.


I would like to draw attention to the following issue — if the drug business weren’t so lucrative, nobody would be in it. How do we highlight the financial flows related to drug trafficking? Which businesses are these proceeds invested in?

The work of law enforcement and financial intelligence is very important in the international arena. Work to date shows that these issues are truly global. Therefore, Russia has submitted a draft resolution in identifying and suppressing drug financial flow and I would call on all delegates to attend.

We know a lot about drug production and trafficking, but what do we know about the financial side? We need to learn more.

The world drug problem will not be solved until we understand all components.

Transnational Institute, Netherlands (Civil Society)

I will speak as a representative for the most affected population. For the UNGASS, we think it is very important that the voice of the farmers who currently grow illicit crops are heard, particularly how they have been negatively affected by supply control measures.

We will organise a global forum in which families of crop producers will be asked for their view on how to best approach this issue in light of how they have been impacted to date.


Identifying high risk air passengers is a key component in combating supply of narcotics in Japan. It is effective for all border control agencies to utilise each others’ information and share their experiences.

Republic of Korea

[Talks about specific measures taken by Korea to combat supply of drugs]

Regarding money laundering, Korea has enacted laws to counter money laundering related to drug trafficking.

We would like to strengthen the full compliance of the UN drug treaties to better combat illicit narcotics.

How do we handle the issue of NPS and share information better on this issue? Yesterday we suggested the establishment of a global network that is based online to properly facilitate information sharing.


Problem number 1 was home made drugs such as krokodil, and some of the key precursor chemicals have been criminalised. Some of them were easily available in pharmacies.

Problem number 2 was that some substances were not controlled. We have established an early warning system at national level, as a result there is a significant reduction in consumption and trafficking of NPS.

Problem number 3 is ongoing trafficking of controlled drugs, and we have made significant seizures of liquid heroin, heroin and cannabis for example.

We concentrate on demand reduction as the most important component of our drug control measures.


Drug trafficking is linked to other crimes such as terrorism and trafficking of other goods.

Cannabis trafficking is still source of concern. In last 3 years we have seized 560 tonnes of cannabis. In 2014, the security services seized 121 tonnes of cannabis. Faced with this situation, we have introduced several measures and made a lot of efforts on prevention and suppression.

Emphasise importance of blocking funding from drug traffickers for terrorism. We carry out investigations into assets of drug traffickers.

Another important issue is cybercrime and links with drug trafficking. Concerned with how drug traffickers are selling over the internet. We have a central department working with locals to identify people who could be involved with this kind of crime.

When countries draft national strategies, they should take into account the existing links and capacity of drug traffickers to finance terrorist activities. I also recall, as raised by another country, the need to strengthen border control and control movement of criminals including terrorist. Need to give priority to operational information including gangs who work via the internet. This information should be monitored and passed on in real time. We need to take into account forged documents used by these criminals, often as a result of corruption. Finally, we need to seize assets of those involved in drug crimes.

Active (civil society)

First we would like to voice our appreciation for the possibility to speak in front of this congregation and for having the opportunity to raise the youth’s perspective concerning the World Drug Problem.

We would like to welcome the presentation made by the Latvian representative on behalf of the EU in which they condemned the rise of the death penalty. We support them in this position.

We also reflect on the presentation by the EMCDDA in terms of the increasing availability of New Psychoactive substances. And we look forward to the new updated EU legislation in this regard and the draft resolution on this topic.

Active – sobriety, friendship and peace, as a NGO with ECOSOC status, has been creating alcohol- and other drugs-free activities and environments for children and young people, as well as participating in policy debates on national, European and international level, over the past 25 years.

Increasing consumption of drugs which are not covered by the United Nations Drug Conventions, such as New Psychoactive Substances may undermine the goals of the international drug control system to protect health and wellbeing. Adolescents and children are most vulnerable to drug use related harm and are at a great risk to become users themselves.

“Active” advocates for a strong focus on evidence-based prevention programs that targets children and young people. Due to the rapidly changing field of Narcotic Drugs production, preventive measures need to have an increased focus on harmful effects of New Psychoactive substances.

In addition, Active supports a restrictive policy approach, encouraging governments to make use of temporary tools if necessary, in order to tackle psychoactive substances in a timely manner.

For the young users, Active recommends a social rehabilitation approach and emphasizes the necessity for easily accessible treatment possibilities. Setting a focus on inclusion contributes to creating a sense of belonging to a community and helps young users to successfully participate in society over the long run.

Ultimately, Active encourages all member states and the Commission on Narcotic Drugs to actively approach and include Youth Organisations in the discussions leading up to UNGASS 2016

Ladies and Gentlemen, Creating “A Better Tomorrow for the World’s Youth”, as the slogan of the UNGASS 2016 states, is both a challenge and an opportunity. We chose to be optimistic and call it our reality.


Welcome focus on NPS. Under new law, law enforcement are granted powers to destroy substances believed to be dangerous. Ministerial body has authority to prohibit substance for 1 year. Several authorities including law enforcement and tax authority can act in helping to prevent sales of NPS. We can control substances even before they enter the Israeli market.


It is of great importance to have international cooperation because this is a global problem and this is not something domestic policies can target and they will definitely fail. NPS is a real challenge, already 400 of them now. Need efficient laws which respond to this serious problem with suitable, proportionate measures.

Sometimes security council tries to take over competency for drugs. Some also try to link drugs with terrorism, we do not think this is always the case.


Solution for NPS lies in international cooperation. Would like to know perception of panellists and member states on how to strengthen forensic capabilities, including whether to involve health authorities.

On scheduling, we need to implement it in accordance with the international conventions.

Dave Bewley-Taylor (civil society: International Drug Policy Consortium)

Needs to be a shift in outlook for supply reduction, involving a shift in objectives and indicators. Indicators on seizures and areas of crop eradication can be shifted to indicators focussing on security, health and development indicators. Law enforcement resources and tactics should be targeted at most serious harms whereas non-serious harms are tolerated. Targeting most serious criminal actors instead of those involved in low-level side of drug markets.

Need to modernise drug law enforcement based on more sophisticated understanding of drug markets.


World drug response requires interdisciplinary response. We do not yet have enough resources to exploit all the possibilities offered by conventions. We want UNGASS to renew international community’s commitment to fight the world drug problem. All avenues must be explored.

Interception, interdiction, air and naval routes, financial measures to target assets of drug traffickers, and alternative development must continue to be pursued. Alternative development hasn’t always worked well but we need to keep improving it.

Emphasis INCB report that the fight against drug trafficking cannot be won as long as the market is still lucrative.


Seizures, confiscation are amongst the measures implemented. Member states should continue with anti-money laundering measures. While there are connections between terrorism and drug trafficking in some places, it is not established in all cases. Phenomenon such as money-laundering are far more complex.

We need to tackle addiction, deincentivise illicit crop cultivation, and check goods before they leave on sea routes. On opium, chemical precursors which are lifeline of heroin laboratories are now produced in third world countries and exported because of their socio-economic development. Call for more controls on import and export to prevent diversion.

Need to control financial flows too.

Reprieve (civil society – on behalf of IDPC and Human Rights Watch)

I note and welcome the words of the panellists representing Latvia and civil society regarding the pressing need for the abolition of the death penalty for drug offences. I also welcome the INCB’s recent statement encouraging countries to abolish the death penalty for drug offences.

I also note that the UNODC has made similar public statements calling for the abolition of the death penalty, and rarely more strongly than in its own human rights guidance published in 2012. This guidance acknowledges very clearly that in certain cases UNODC supply reduction programmes risks leading to death sentences and executions in countries which maintain the death penalty for drug offences; and suggests that in such circumstances the UNODC consider a “temporary freeze or withdrawal of support”.

Reprieve’s research suggests these supply control programmes have indeed led directly to death sentences and executions. Many of these programmes’ performance indicators call for countries to demonstrate increased numbers of arrest and convictions, as well as larger seizure sizes – all this under penal codes under which the death penalty is recommended once seizures exceed certain quantities.

Despite the UNODC’s recognition of this connection, its Human Rights Guidance does not appear to have made it further than the UNODC’s website. Reprieve’s review of UNODC country programme and project audits covering the three years since this guidance was published suggest that it has never been operationalized – even as countries receiving UNODC supply reduction aid have continued to execute large numbers of drug offenders.

Indeed one five year audit of UNODC programmes in a country which retains the death penalty notes that human rights had been “disregarded” after the UNODC was “strongly advised by the (host Government) to exclude (human rights) considerations from the CP design and to advance with an oblique approach”.

As the UNODC has proceeded with such programmes in breach of its own guidance, countries which receive its support have continued to pursue the death penalty for drug offences. One major recipient state has executed 112 drug offenders since the start of 2015.

Some of the most significant funders of UNODC programmes in countries which continue to execute drug traffickers are European nations which have vocally condemned the death penalty for drug offences, and make its abolition a foreign policy priorities.

In line with their commitments on the death penalty, the UNODC’s European funders have a responsibility to request that the UNODC puts its human rights guidance into practice. Reprieve respectfully calls for the UNODC to follow its own guidance and make its counter-narcotics aid conditional on an end to the death penalty for drug offences and other grave human rights abuses.

Furthermore, we request that this is done in a transparent way that may reassure UNODC donors that their money is not leading to death sentences and executions in contravention of their own human rights commitments.

India (on behalf of Asia group)

We have no implemented principle of balance in supply reduction control measures. Important for drug measures to ensure availability of drugs for medical purposes. Public health objectives are important. There is sufficient scope within drug control conventions to meet public health objectives.

Any financial gain that come from drug trafficking are of an illicit nature. Financial flows from opiate trafficking originating from Pakistan are about USD62 billion. Only a small proportion go to cultivators, majority goes to traffickers not based in Pakistan. Need to have greater exchange of information and training in financial investigation in drug control agencies.

I oversee drug trafficking and financial intelligence work matters, and the link between the two. We have started a South Asia network, with help of UNODC, bringing together drug enforcement and financial intelligence agencies to establish real-time sharing of intelligence and to better train each other in financial investigation of illicit financial flows relating to drug trafficking.

Latvia on behalf of EU – panellist response to Panama’s question about treaty reform

UN system has good evidence that it can offer good solutions, in full respect of human rights. We have abolished death penalty and our policy is to speak and raise awareness of it.

On NPS, it should be discussed in UNGASS for sure but there should be proactive way of finding solutions.

We have solution for NPS, a generic approach with temporary bans, medical legislation, enforced together with law enforcement institutions, passed new law last year. We think this is good solution to NPS. Other colleagues speak about an early warning system. We are discussing more EU level approaches to this.

UNODC – panellist response

We have good colleagues including EUROPOL and INTERPOL helping us to establish networks on financial intelligence and public prosecutors, covering all aspects of controls on trafficking. This approach is inevitable and responds to realities. Encourage countries and regional organisations to support these inititatives.

Panama – panelist response

From 1996 to date, Panama has aligned its legislation with all of the conventions, especially in regard to enforcement of drug-related crime. Fighting corruption, smuggling of migrants too. There is no capital punishment, we align our drug laws with human rights.

EMCDDA – panelist response

Impressed with call for proportionality in supply reduction responses.

Need for toxicology reports in responding to NPS, and monitor diverse range of precursor chemicals. Pace of change is increasing, and requires global join up response.

Ross Bell – Civil society panelist

It strikes me that many member states’ approaches to NPS are simply slightly modified versions of traditional control measures. I urge member states to consider alternative approaches, including comprehensive regulation as New Zealand has done.

More interaction with producers of NPS is encouraged so as to gain a better understanding of what exactly is in these substances and how better to control them.

One behalf of all civil society colleagues I would like to thank the Chair for allowing civil society voices to be threaded throughout the discussion which has set the standard for future discussions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *