Plenary: Item 5. Implementation of the international drug control treaties

(b) Challenges and future work of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, the World Health Organization and the International Narcotics Control Board in the review of substances for possible scheduling recommendations
(c) International Narcotics Control Board
(d) International cooperation to ensure the availability of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes while preventing their diversion
(e) Other matters arising from the international drug control treaties


(b) Challenges and future work of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, the World Health Organization and the International Narcotics Control Board in the review of substances for possible scheduling recommendations

Chair: We will consider the items B to E. In terms of Agenda Item 5.B, in terms of the work of WHO, INCB, CND and INCB in scheduling recommendations. This was added to assist member states in applying scheduling processes. In the MS2019 document, Member States committed to continuing to facilitate informed scheduling decisions. Under the sub-item, the CND is expected to address the challenges in identifying and detecting dangerous psychoactive substances. Bearing in mind the need to accelerate changes in scheduling.

Justice Tettey, Laboratory and Scientific Section, UNODC: These are substances not under control but that produce the same effects as those under control (NPS). One new substance appeared on the global market each week at the peak of the problem. Since 2019, 150 unique substances were reported in over 100 countries. The substances have been associated with adverse effects, such as fatalities and hospital admissions. Recently, the emergence of substances have slowed down, but particular categories, such as synthetic opioids and benzodiazepines are rapidly proliferating. More than 70 synthetic opioids were reported by early warning systems to UNODC. Benzodiazepines are following the same trend. Prioritising the most harmful, persistent and prevalent substances is a key aspect of drug control. The UNODC early warning advisory, which incorporates data on toxicology, fully operationalises this approach. Enables the identification and dissemination of information about the use of these substances in a timely manner. UNODC will continue to share details of such analysis with WHO, including through UNODC expert consultation on NSP. There have bene significant progress in identifying needs of changes in scope. 48 substances have been controlled by the CND in recent years. Tomorrow, WHO recommends an additional 12 harmful substances under international control. This means 60 new substances between 2015-2020. While this has reduced the presence of these substances in markets, significant challenges remain. Illicit manufacturers continue to attempt to circumvent controls by designing new uncontrolled substances. Last week, UNODC published its latest SMART report. It documents the use of non-scheduled and designer precursors substances in the manufacture of amphetamine, methamphetamine and fentanyl. It outlines how these developments pose challenges. Tomorrow, the commission will have before them an INCB recommendation to control one of these precursors. It’s a complicated issue. Measurable success will depend on timely detection and agile response in illicit manufacturing of synthetic drugs. It requires identifying additional measures to enhance control to response new phenomenon. The SMART programme and EWS will continue to aid the work of the Commission.

European Union (and North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Albania, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, San Marino): The World Drug Report 2019 shows that the international community has had some successes in tackling NPS. The emergence of new substances has reduced. Policies related to NPS appear to have had some impacts. Especially those reduced in source countries. The international community has reacted in a timely manner to assess the harms and schedule those guaranteeing international control CND has scheduled the most harmful and UNODC early warning advisory has contributed to keep the international community abreast in new developments. Nevertheless, make no mistake, despite this, NPS are a serious threat to health due to potent opioid, benzodiazepines associated to deaths and harms. Problems related to synthetic cannabinoids increase due to high potency, easy availability and accessibility; particularly among the homeless and prison population. New synthetic opioids are great cause of concern. Associated with fatal poisoning. Second most important group of substances after synthetic stimulants. 21% of new NPS identified. Strengthening national, regional, and international action is fundamental. In terms of precursors, controls are more challenging than ever due to the increase of designer precursors. They have no legitimate use and are designed to circumvent laws. The EU is evaluating the situation but it’s clear that this is the most important challenge in the field. Our current legislative framework focuses on preventing diversion of traditional precursors but designer precursors are different. They fall in a grey area between traditional drug policy and traditional precursor controls.  Offences are usually punished with administrative penalties. We have started discussions on how to more effectively address these challenges. All options are considered. Some options are about generic or extending scheduling, strengthening coherence within drug legislation, etc. In view of the complexity, need to include experts from police, customs, judiciary, chemists, academia, industry, etc. This is what we intend to do in the coming months. Of course, drug precursor diversion and trafficking, particularly designer precursors, is global and requires global action. The EU supports the board in calling all parties to the 1988 convention to reflect on establishing a legal basis to enable authorities to disrupt supply more effectively without creating burden on legitimate industries.

Japan: With regard to NPS, we appreciate the decisions taken by the Commission, which will help prevent the trafficking and abuse of substances. And we hope that the international community will more actively cooperate to prevent the abuse of these substances. International measures against NPS have progressed. Information sharing concerning new NPS, counterdrug measures are also highly important. In this context, WHO scientific review are very important mechanisms to explore whether substances need to be scheduled. IT is also important that taking legal measures, border control, education of people and other measures to avoid negative impact of NPS. Sharing scientific expertise among members and strengthening domestic measures. We further appreciate CND scheduling new precursors under the treaties. Precursors for the clandestine production of illicit drugs, including methamphetamine. Japan reaffirms the importance of cooperation with members states, WHO, INCB, UNODC and the private sector to tackle these problem.

United States: We strongly support the process in the conventions for placing new substances under control, bringing together legal, diplomatic and law enforcement community, relying on accurate information. However, the collection and analysis of data takes time. The system struggles to respond to emerging threats. One is about NPS, including synthetic opioids. This concern is mentioned in the MS2019. The existing platforms facilitate cooperation between law enforcement authorities. We appreciate the work of UNODC and INCB in controlling precursors and NPS. We should take full advantage of the available mechanism in protecting health and welfare humankind within the framework of the conventions. We share the concerns of INCB regarding non-scheduled chemicals. In the US, we suffer from fentanyl and opioid crisis. CND controlled the two main substances precursors. Traffickers are using 4AP and others. In response to this, US is controlling new precursors. Designer precursors are specifically made to circumvent the laws. They are not regularly traded and have no other legitimate users. Some are derivatives of controlled drugs. We cannot regulate our way out of the problem so need to cooperate with industry and other stakeholders.

WHO: Hundreds of thousands of people die from psychoactive drug use through overdose, accidents and drug related illnesses like HIV, Hepatitis C and TB. WHO is carefully assessing the cost to human health of the most harmful and most prevalent of those drugs. 1961 and 1971 conventions mandate the WHO to undertake assessment of psychotropic substances with potential to abuse and dependence and those that cause harm to health. Assessment of psychoactive substances are taken by the ECDD on the best scientific evidence. The WHO ECDD work is at the core of the international drug control system and is guided by strict scientific independence, transparency and integrity. The WHO makes recommendations in appropriate levels of international control to avoid harm to health and improving medical and scientific use. NPS which have potential for abuse and dependence, have harmful health effects  and can cause deaths and have no therapeutic use. NPS can be rapidly developed and produced. However, for most NPS scientific data for potential abuse and dependence and harm is threadbare or not available. Lack of scientific valid data is currently the main obstacle for reviews by ECDD. In order to improve information available WHO engages with international states. The Early Warning System has been important for the generation of comprehensive and reliable information on the NPS, WHO has also established a network of 100 focal points as part of its alert system. WHO is very concerned of the harm caused by NPS, and is committed to addressing this important public problem. Since 2014 WHO has increased the number of NPS reviews and pays particular attention to nonmedical synthetic opioids. The ECDD has also undertaken reviews of synthetic opioids and their associated risks, including benzodiazepines, which were recommended for control at the 42nd drug expert meeting. WHO collaborates with UNODC and INCB to jointly tackle the opioid crisis. As part of this a tool kit on synthetic drugs has been developed to support countries. The 42nd ECDD meeting has carried out  a review of preparations of opioids including codeine. The review of cannabis was conducted in response to CND resolution 52/5 requesting us to carry out further reviews on cannabis and cannabis related substances. This is the formal review of the WHO. The composition of cannabis and its components on the central nervous system had not been established. These member states acknowledge the growing interest of the medical use of cannabis and its preparations and urge intentional regulations to ensure safe use. The ECDD review can and has been carried out within international recommendations. Together with INCB and UNODC, WHO has worked with member states. WHO is committed to intensify the amount of reviews of psychoactive substances and their harmful use and in particular opioids as mandated within the international drug control regulations. Transparency and integrity are central to UNODC work. 

INCB: Later this year we will mark the 30 years of the 1988 convention. In these 30 years the iNCB has exercised its mandate under this convention to assess chemicals and collect information from member states, chemicals which are used in the illicit manufacture of drugs and to make scheduling recommendations to CND accordingly. In these 30 years our recommendations have been effective and contributed to the significant decline in the diversion of chemicals from the international trade to illicit channels due to scheduling. Overall the international precursor control framework has been working well and continues to fulfil its purpose. However, over the past decade the use of non scheduled chemicals, particularly designer precursors, has started to proliferate. The board examined the matter in the 2018 precursor report and called for a wider policy discussion at the global level to see how to get ahead of the problem. ‘Mapa’, the precursor of amphetamine and mephatempeine is a case in point. The board is observing cause for concern. With few exceptions all recent reasons for scheduling have involved designer precursors, which began with APAM, coinciding with the emergence with with APA, an intermediate substance schedule in 2017 and now we have MAPA, a close precursor  relative. A similar development has begun in the area of fentanyl precursors, MPP and AMPP were scheduled in 2018 but now there is an emerging pre precursor in the drug manufacture. The process of intl scheduling of precursor chemicals one by one, substance by substance is no match to the speed of the innovation of drug traffickers, who shift swiftly. This is known to the international community. The fact that most of these substances are designed on demand for the specific purpose of evading controls and therefore are not traded widely or have legitimate uses, exacerbates the problem. The back bone of the intl control framework is the monitoring of international trade- but is this framework fit for purpose when monitoring designer precursors, as trade is not significant. Is there scope to devise mechanisms to get a better grip. With these designer precursors the global drug problem is changing and it is important to reflect where the UN conventions we have sufficient and appropriate methods to deal with this challenge or whether we need alternative or additional tools. What could be done in addition. The board has prepared a conference room paper on precursors as recommendation. The paper summarizes the challenges but also presents a menu of options for considerations and to address this problem. Some more immediate, some more of a long term vision. The board is well aware that efforts are already undertaken at national and regional levels. The board reached out to govts last year and has factored them into its analysis. While some approaches involve generic or group scheduling of precursors, ie Canada’s and EU scheduling of analogues and derivatives. Others countries have identified stricter control of known existing substances. Inevitably non scheduled chemicals and designer precursors are likely to redefine the landscape of precursor control. The Board’s expertise remains at the international communities’ disposal and will continue to work to consult and to advise in line with the mandate and operations responsibility that the board has in this area.

WHO: Hundreds of thousands of people die from psychoactive drug use through overdose, accidents and drug related illnesses like HIV, Hepatitis C and TB. WHO is carefully assessing the cost to human health of the most harmful and most prevalent of those drugs. 1961 and 1971 conventions mandate the WHO to undertake assessment of psychotropic substances with potential to abuse and dependence and those that cause harm to health. Assessment of psychoactive substances are taken by the ECDD on the best scientific evidence. The WHO ECDD work is at the core of the international drug control system and is guided by strict scientific independence, transparency and integrity. The WHO makes recommendations in appropriate levels of international control to avoid harm to health and improving medical and scientific use. NPS which have potential for abuse and dependence, have harmful health effects  and can cause deaths and have no therapeutic use. NPS can be rapidly developed and produced. However, for most NPS scientific data for potential abuse and dependence and harm is threadbare or not available. Lack of scientific valid data is currently the main obstacle for reviews by ECDD. In order to improve information available WHO engages with international states. The Early Warning System has been important for the generation of comprehensive and reliable information on the NPS, WHO has also established a network of 100 focal points as part of its alert system. WHO is very concerned of the harm caused by NPS, and is committed to addressing this important public problem. Since 2014 WHO has increased the number of NPS reviews and pays particular attention to nonmedical synthetic opioids. The ECDD has also undertaken reviews of synthetic opioids and their associated risks, including benzodiazepines, which were recommended for control at the 42nd drug expert meeting. WHO collaborates with UNODC and INCB to jointly tackle the opioid crisis. As part of this a tool kit on synthetic drugs has been developed to support countries. The 42nd ECDD meeting has carried out  a review of preparations of opioids including codeine. The review of cannabis was conducted in response to CND resolution 52/5 requesting us to carry out further reviews on cannabis and cannabis related substances. This is the formal review of the WHO. The composition of cannabis and its components on the central nervous system had not been established. These member states acknowledge the growing interest of the medical use of cannabis and its preparations and urge intentional regulations to ensure safe use. The ECDD review can and has been carried out within international recommendations. Together with INCB and UNODC, WHO has worked with member states. WHO is committed to intensify the amount of reviews of psychoactive substances and their harmful use and in particular opioids as mandated within the international drug control regulations. Transparency and integrity are central to UNODC work. 

INCB: Later this year we will mark the 30 years of the 1988 convention. In these 30 years the iNCB has exercised its mandate under this convention to assess chemicals and collect information from member states, chemicals which are used in the illicit manufacture of drugs and to make scheduling recommendations to CND accordingly. In these 30 years our recommendations have been effective and contributed to the significant decline in the diversion of chemicals from the international trade to illicit channels due to scheduling. Overall the international precursor control framework has been working well and continues to fulfil its purpose. However, over the past decade the use of non scheduled chemicals, particularly designer precursors, has started to proliferate. The board examined the matter in the 2018 precursor report and called for a wider policy discussion at the global level to see how to get ahead of the problem. ‘Mapa’, the precursor of amphetamine and mephatempeine is a case in point. The board is observing cause for concern. With few exceptions all recent reasons for scheduling have involved designer precursors, which began with APAM, coinciding with the emergence with with APA, an intermediate substance schedule in 2017 and now we have MAPA, a close precursor  relative. A similar development has begun in the area of fentanyl precursors, MPP and AMPP were scheduled in 2018 but now there is an emerging pre precursor in the drug manufacture. The process of intl scheduling of precursor chemicals one by one, substance by substance is no match to the speed of the innovation of drug traffickers, who shift swiftly. This is known to the international community. The fact that most of these substances are designed on demand for the specific purpose of evading controls and therefore are not traded widely or have legitimate uses, exacerbates the problem. The back bone of the intl control framework is the monitoring of international trade- but is this framework fit for purpose when monitoring designer precursors, as trade is not significant. Is there scope to devise mechanisms to get a better grip. With these designer precursors the global drug problem is changing and it is important to reflect where the UN conventions we have sufficient and appropriate methods to deal with this challenge or whether we need alternative or additional tools. What could be done in addition. The board has prepared a conference room paper on precursors as recommendation. The paper summarizes the challenges but also presents a menu of options for considerations and to address this problem. Some more immediate, some more of a long term vision. The board is well aware that efforts are already undertaken at national and regional levels. The board reached out to govts last year and has factored them into its analysis. While some approaches involve generic or group scheduling of precursors, ie Canada’s and EU scheduling of analogues and derivatives. Others countries have identified stricter control of known existing substances. Inevitably non scheduled chemicals and designer precursors are likely to redefine the landscape of precursor control. The Board’s expertise remains at the international communities’ disposal and will continue to work to consult and to advise in line with the mandate and operations responsibility that the board has in this area.

Acción Técnica Social: Best regards distinguished chair, to all the people who are part of the national delegations, to the people of the civil society, to the consumers of the whole world, and to the press. This seemed to be a normal year and without much emotion as it usually happens in the CND, without major changes and without radical debates about international architecture to address the drug phenomenon, however, many facts have drawn significant attention, such as the Coronavirus that has removed many delegations from this meeting and has kept everyone who is here afraid of any flu or contact, this has reduced the volume of the meeting but not the intensity of the debate. The postponement of the vote on the change in cannabis control, following WHO recommendations, would have been a recognition of the public health approach. We hope that it will not be postponed any more but that if it is resumed in a later session. The right to health of many people in the world depends on these recommendations. This situation, as well as the emergence of New Psychoactive Substances and the diversification of crypto markets in the Deep Web, imply great challenges that will not be solved with the war on drugs that their speeches highlight with discretion and diplomacy in recent years. From Colombia we make a clear and vehement call to advance more decisively in the legal regulation of drug markets with a social justice approach. Current markets change rapidly and the state does not have the possibility to adjust so quickly. We have seen that it is impossible to stop the legal regulation of the markets that each country is doing through its own interpretation of international treaties. The regulation of medical and adult cannabis, medical heroin as a replacement treatment, and the proliferation of psychedelic therapies are just some of the examples. A social justice approach would be innovative for our producing countries; recognizing the dynamics of privilege and oppression; recognizing the communities that have been historically violated, generating affirmative actions to level the balance of power and finally designating resources to repair the damages of the prohibition. Putting substance users and farming communities at the center is our priority. And only then will we move forward in the development, justice and peace agenda. From Colombia, with all the legitimacy given to us by 50 years of failed war on drugs, we ask you to advance in the regulation of the illegal cocaine market, but not to satisfy the appetite of developing countries, but to solve a problem of poverty and violence of the Colombian countryside. The year 2019 was the most violent year in Colombia since 2014 when the peace process began, the United Nations Human Rights Office has just said. Most of the 36 massacres that occurred in Colombia in the last year occurred in drug trafficking contexts and a large part of the 108 social leaders killed according to the UN, were leaders committed to the illicit crop substitution program, the same as the Colombian government has recognized does not have how to finance. It is incomprehensible that the US government yesterday pressed here in Vienna the flexibility of the regulation of marijuana to continue with the expansion of its market, but at the same time President Trump is requesting Iván Duque, president of Colombia , in Washington, which must return to the fumigation with glyphosate, which has already been proven ineffective in eradication and harm to human beings. We ask the world to press a radical change in drug policies, to make progress in the regulation of cocaine, because we already know that it kills war and its prohibition more than the substance itself. We ask for a regulation with social justice, which thinks about the farmers and not about pharmaceuticals, that helps us to return to the short peace we had a few years ago and the one we already missed. In Colombia, Mexico and throughout Latin America, the fuel of war, corruption and authoritarianism of the governments we live in today draws heavily on illegal drug trafficking money. In a month in Colombia, we will present to Parliament the first bill for the regulation of the illegal cocaine market, we know that it will not go far, but it will open the debate so that in the not too distant future you can buy us cocaine from the fair market and sustainable, that is friendly with the environment, fair with the farmers, generous with the economy of Colombia, but above all, that it is a bloodless cocaine, without the blood of the poor of our countries. 

Turkish Green Crescent Society: We would like to focus on crucial points. With a hundred years of experience behind TGC’s struggle against all kinds of substances and behaviors which may have addictive characteristics, we engage in public health and advocacy activities. Green crescent believes that achieving UNGASS targets may only be achievable by effective collaboration between states and civil societies. We believe in early prevention and keeping youth away from any addictive behavior. We strategize our work on this policy area. In line with evidence bases, green crescent follows the rescheduling of cannabis with caution and significant concern. It is not clear in the recommendation what the criteria was for rescheduling, and may have a negative effect by making a scientific discussion into a political one. Recommendations must be backed by scientific evidence. We underline the fact that the experiences from these substances should be well evaluated. When it comes to substances with addictive characteristics, policy should be public health orientated not market orientated. Regarding cannabis policies normalising adult use may have negative effects on the use of youths. We believe in early prevention with evidence based backgrounds. We think that the majority of the world believe early prevention is best prevention for you. We can talk on behalf of silent majority who are against the scourge of tobacco, alcohol and drugs.

(c) International Narcotics Control Board

INCB: On the Annual Report 2019 and the Report on the implementation of Article 12 of the 1988 Convention (Precursor report). This year’s report presents an overview of the global drug situation and the functioning of the drug control system and shortcomings in the implementation of the conventions. It’s a channel of communication with Member States. It calls on the international community to discuss means to prevent the proliferation of precursor substances and other substances. In terms of the highlights. It includes 4 chapters. First, on Chapter 1, thematic discussion on improving substance use prevention and treatment services for young people. We raise awareness on reducing the adverse consequences of drug use and encourage prevention and treatment and rehabilitation, aftercare and social reintegration services. The Board also urges the creation of data collection systems; capacity building in drug prevention and treatment; to implement evidence based programmes for young people including family, school and wider community interventions; early detection interventions; multisectoral prevention programme; Implement interventions to prevent progression to substance use disorders; and evidence based treatment programmes taking into consideration our chapter on drug dependence. On Chapter 2, we report on the work of the Board to implement the international import/export system, IES. This system relies on competent national authorities using the system. INCB invites countries to contact them to facilitate uptake. INCB urges member states to use the IES and provide resources to INCB to expand its functionalities. Funding is needed with regard to other information technology needs. The current database on analysis of estimates is antiquated. We report on the INCB Learning too, in response to resolutions, the most recent 62/5. The INCB Learning has provided capacity to staff, improve treaty-related reporting performance. 9 regional training seminars. E-learning module to support governments to estimate and asses their needs for controlled substances. We appreciate the contributions of Member States to INCB learning and look forward to more support. Chapter 2 also deals with monitoring of treaty compliance to which I referred in my opening statement. I reiterate: The conventions limit uses exclusively to medical and scientific. This is at the core of the Treaties and it’s an obligation between treaties. This is part of the shared understanding that this is the best way to advance health and welfare of humankind. States have moved to legalise cannabis for nonmedical purposes. This isn’t in line of the conventions. We also highlight the Opioids project. In Operation Fast Forward, a global intelligence-gathering operation on the trafficking of synthetic drugs. An important part of our work are the country missions. The recommendations are strictly confidential. 16 missions in 2018, 15 in 2019. We count on your governments to accept and facilitate these missions. They enable us to engage in dialogue and tailor recommendations. And also to learn of good practice. The last part of Chapter 2, consultations with Afghanistan under Art. 14bis; the INCB and government met to explore areas in which the international community could provide recommendations. Among the areas identified, the representative from Afghanistan: support agricultural infrastructure and alternative livelihood programmes, addressing linkages between terrorism and drug trafficking and corruption; strengthening law enforcement capacity; regional cooperation; trafficking in illicit drugs; enhancing capacity in treatment, particularly for women and youth. Chapter 3 explores global issues. The first is about the linkages between drug control and human rights. The Board notes its great concern in the use of human rights violations to advance drug control. The Conventions are to save the health and welfare of humanity, which together with the UNGASS2016 commitments, must include respect for human rights. To comply with legal obligations under drug control treaties, states must adopt and pursue drug policies in compliance with internationally recognised human rights. The challenges in responding to drug related challenges are exacerbated by repressive and punitive measures. Protecting the rights of people should be fundamental in responding to drugs. Proportional criminal justice responses for drug related offences, including when committed by people who use drugs. Ending extrajudicial responses, which are never permitted. No country is exempt from complying to human rights. Human rights is an integral part of drug policy strategies and policies. Second issue is the link between drug control and the SDGs. Achieving that goal entails access to high quality health services, essential medicines, strengthening prevention and treatment of substance abuse, promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, reducing inequalities, inclusive, safe and resilient settlements. They’re all embodied in the implementation of drug policies. Responses to drug criminal conducts must be proportionate and in line with human rights, the conventions and human rights. Chapter 3 continues with a review region by region. In North America, INCB is concerned by the opioids crises and drug overdoses. (…) The Board also expressed concerns about developments in the Netherlands and Luxembourg with regard to allowing non-medical cultivation and use. Chapter 4 recommendations are about cannabis, human rights, adherence to conventions, reducing adverse public health consequences of use, availability and access to controlled medicines, precursor chemicals, abuse of codeine syrup, non-medical use of opioids, electronic tools and training, and specific recommendations to regions. INCB calls on State parties to examine the report, recommendations and give due regard to the recommendations. When it comes to the Precursors report. The growing evidence of the spread of illicit manufacture of ATS to regions and countries not previously associated to this, including methamphetamine in Afghanistan with ephedra, methamphetamine production in Europe, amphetamine in captagon tablets in the Middle East. As we just discussed, the pace of emergence of new chemicals outside of control is a cause of concern. Traffickers have already sought alternatives to precursors to fentanyls and analogues. For 2019 precursors under international control, diversion has decreased due to use of INCB’s mechanisms (PEN). Joint investigations have benefitted from INCB’s Precursor Incident Communication System (PICS). 64 governments use PEN. INCB activities in the context of article 13 aimed at developing effective cooperation mechanisms to prevent and investigate diversion of illicit drug manufacture. INCB calls for a policy dialogue to address challenge of non-scheduled chemicals and designer precursors. In exploring practical approaches…recommendation on improving reporting of governments to the INCB, including on the circumstances of seizures and methods of diversion as critical means to prevent diversion, and enhancing use of Art. XX to prevent and investigate the diversion of equipment. I trust that the INCB annual report for 2019 will be studied by your capitals and governments, and see to the implementation of the recommendations.

(…)

China: China will continue to support the work of INCB. We hope INCB will play a more active role to its Treaty mandate, like information sharing and facilitating cooperation.

Singapore: We appreciate the mention in the Report to prevention. We agree it is the duty of States to safeguard the health of young people, families and communities through prevention and treatment of drug abuse. We note the Board discourages the use of compulsory detention and promotes voluntary detention. With regard to harm reduction, Singapore adopts an evidence-based approach to rehabilitate drug abusers. It’s based on responsibility model, including psychology based interventions to target addiction misuse. As part of rehabilitation, we offer religious services so that drug users can mend relationships with their families. Our rehabilitation is conducted in a supportive environment for the drug abuser to overcome addiction. We require compulsory rehabilitation because a responsible government must take care of other citizens, who have a right to a drug free environment; and not leave it to drug abusers to decide if they want treatment. The evidence speaks for itself. Singapore rate of drug abuse has dropped considerable. Different societies, different norms, values and realities. Every State should implement what is most appropriate. For Singapore, results speak for themselves. Singaporeans support it too, which is the most important.

Japan: Gratitude to INCB and issuing report. In the annual report, the prevention of drug use and treatment for drug use are important activities. We are concerned about the spreading of drug abuse with youths.Important to prevent and protect abusers and teat them. Conducting awareness campaign for youths. There are 8 appropriate programes. It is important to reintegrate them into society through education. We support abusers using treatment programmes using cognitive behavioural therapy. INCB has expressed concern about cannabis abuse for no medical and scientific purposes. WE are concerned about the increase in countries that have legalised the use of cannabis for non-medical use. The number of cannabis users has increased especially the number of youths. We are tackling the challenges faced. There should be concrete rules for using psychoactive substances and cannabis for medical purposes. We recognised the risk of substance abuse and consider laid out in treaties. INCB carried out its mandate per the relevant convention. Appreciate for INCB and support it.

Turkey: background info: 62/1 tabled by turkey whilst adopted in 62nd resolution. Tracking precursors, used in heroin manufacturing art 6 says that INCB with ms and expert working group with expert stakeholders to explore the effectiveness with the view of innovative methods to track precursors to prevent diversion to submit the report . Turkey organised an expert group meeting in  to track precurser methods. With the participation of stakeholders from countries. During meetings, we elaborated on important topics such as practicability, cost and the proportionaliy of taggin. The important topics of meetings can be listed as exploration and assessment of production trades and trafficking, tagging, fight against ied and fertilisers. Having studied expert group came up with list of suggestions. After egm, can find a copy of the report on cnd website. Turkey believes implementing the tracking system is of high importance and will pursue in coming cnd meetings.

Thailand: The Precursors report offers a good contribution to States in terms of recommendations to implement the treaties and address the world drug problem. I would highlight the importance of precursor controls, which faces small complicated situations due to the use of non-scheduled precursors. We’re thankful for the INCB developing tools to prevent chemical diversion and cooperating in investigating precursors, seizures, including IONs. There is much work to be done. The increased production in the Golden Triangle requires regional and global responses. We urge States and relevant agencies to support countries in the Mekong subregion in precursor control and preventing diversion. Given divergence of cannabis policies, Thailand supports the role of CND working in close cooperation with INCB in addressing these matters. This phenomenon needs actions within the remit of CND.

Indonesia: Indonesia is committed to countering illicit trafficking preventing the flow of precursors into the country. Indonesia balances supply and demand reduction and comprehensive and integrated efforts in all aspects in fighting narcotics. Indonesia also thinks the way to tackle these is through shared responsibility. Balance between preventive aspect and rehabilitative measures should be taken into account by the report. Indonesia faces challenges in fighting synthetic drugs. Indonesia believes ASEAN cooperation is fundamental. The drug conventions show a balanced approach between prevention, law enforcement and international cooperation. INCB must carry out its mandate in accordance with the three conventions. We would reiterate our concern on the INCB position on the issue of capital punishment; it goes beyond the INCB mandate. The suggestion that the death penalty breaches international standards is not right. Article 6, para 2, is clear about countries imposing death penalty for most serious crimes. The serious nature of the crime is clear when it comes to drug trafficking, because it affects the health and welfare of human beings and the fabric of society. The increasing trend in this crime also threatens sovereignty. The abolition of the death penalty is not an international customary law obligation. Many countries move towards abolition. But the continued use of the death penalty by many countries should deny the crystallisation of the abolition of the death penalty as part of customary law. So there is no obligation, neither in the Treaties nor in customary law, to abolish the death penalty.

(Item 5.c to be continued and to resume after consideration of Item 5.a)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.