Swiss Ambassador for Global health. It is a pleasure for me to be here with you and welcome you to this side event organised by Switzerland and cosponsored by a number of Member States and other stakeholders. We continue to promote human rights and a public health centred approach to drug policy. This event comes 10 years after the 2016 UNGASS Special Session on the world drug problem. It is not a coincidence. The UNGASS was a milestone. The UNGASS spurred reforms at national level, it shaped key developments in internationally. In Vienna, it shifted the narrative away from purely punitive approaches, in Geneva it led to several HRC resolutions. It encouraged dialogue across Vienna, Geneva and NY, including with the Common Position on drug policy. This dialogue remains essential. Human rights and health must remain central to the CND’s work. In the last 10 years, we have seen meaningful reforms, we felt we could move beyond decades of punitive approaches. But the UN is under pressure. We are here to reflect on what has been achieved, what we have learned, and what needs to be done. We want to ensure that health and rights based drug policies can withstand. Switzerland welcomes the independent expert panel established by resolution 68/6. We don’t have much time. But the recommendations will offer recommendations on the future of international drug policy, and offer an opportunity for the CND to take health and human rights as central pillars of its work.

Ann Fordham, IDPC. I thank all cosponsors for this event, and I want to mention Switzerland for your support for this report and for your unwavering commitment to human rights and civil society. I am pleased to present our latest report, which assesses drug policy developments over the past decade. 10 years ago, the UNGASS brought an unprecedented focus on health, development and human rights at the centre of drug policy. But the UNGASS promise is largely unfulfilled, with the global response being overwhelmingly punitive. These policies have not reduced drug markets nor have they protected communities. Since 2016, the global drug situation has become more complex and volatile, while the number of PWUD has risen significantly. 1 in 5 people globally is incarcerated for drugs. In parallel, health systems are under strain, for people who use drugs, and for access to controlled medicines for pain relief. The current drug control regime is misaligned with the UN goals of promoting health, human rights and sustainable development. Yet, our report identifies areas of progress: decriminalisation, harm reduction services expanding, legal regulation of cannabis in a number of jurisdictions. Change is possible. But many of these advances have occurred despite the constraints of the international drug control system, rather than because of it. We have four recommendations:

• Protect civil society and meaningfully involve them and fund them in a context of shrinking civil society space.
• The drug control treaties require modernisation to respond to new realities and policy divergences.
• Drug policy must be fully aligned with human rights and health policy frameworks, including more coherence. Accountability should be prioritised – impunity is no longer an option.
• The working methods of the CND should evolve to be able to address new realities. It should facilitate open, wide ranging and evidence-based debates.

We also welcome the independent panel. The world is at a crossroads, this is a rare opportunity to reflect on what works, what doesn’t and what needs to change.

Ambassador of Uruguay. Uruguay is honoured to take the floor today, we thank Switzerland for this event and its commitment to human rights. The partnership between our countries shares the conviction that we must protect health and human rights. I share the experience of a country that has been aiming to reflect on our national drug strategy. Our National Drug Board has just adopted our new strategy 2026-2030, it included the participation of civil society, academia and affected communities. It reaffirms human rights and harm reduction. 10 years after the UNGASS, evidence-based rights centred drug policies produce meaningful results. Regulated access frameworks were established, and markets responded. The illegal market for cannabis has dramatically fallen. Uruguay’s approach combining market regulation, harm reduction, treatment and enforcement has enabled a rights-based approach towards drugs. We have worked in partnership with civil society and communities. We welcome the panel of experts and an important opportunity to review evidence. We are proud that Milton Romani of Uruguay has been appointed to serve on this panel. We hope the panel is informed by the experiences of countries that have led on reforms. But we also need to assess gaps and challenges. Our strategy commits to addressing those, including criminal justice proportionality and social issues. We have committed to review criminal justice strategies to ensure alternatives to incarceration, in particular to address the female prison population. Progress since 2016 has been real but fragile. IDPC’s review of the UNGASS decade is clear. The answer is not to retreat from the health agenda but to build on institutions. In the next decade, we have 3 orientations: 1- coherence, drug policy cannot be effective if one area of policy undermines another, we need an integrated system; 2- evidence, our drugs observatory will continue to generate national data; 3- dialogue, through participation processes including with people who use drugs. Effective policy cannot be designed without the people most affected by it. Our commitment is to place people, their health and rights into drug policy. This is now embedded in our national strategy for the next 5 years. We look forward to the discussion ahead.

South Africa. I thank Switzerland for your friendship. We are honoured to participate in this side event. We extend our appreciation for the convening of this dialogue and to reflect on the past decade and how we can collectively move forward. In our context, patterns of drug use are intertwined with poverty, unemployment, poverty and social inclusion. It shapes vulnerability. South Africa’ national drug policy is guided by our National Drugs Action Plan, promoting a balanced and integrated approach: demand reduction, supply reduction, harm minimisation and social reintegration. This is a person-centred approach, evidence based. We continue to strengthen prevention initiatives including with young people and vulnerable communities. It’s an important component of our national strategy. Treatment and rehabilitation have also been extended. Community-based programmes are working together to address these challenges. We have also strengthened alternatives to incarceration as prison deepens vulnerability. We divert young people away from persecution and towards social support. We recognise the importance of accountability and restorative approaches. At the same time, we are working with an epidemiological research team to understand patters of use and respond with timely, evidence-based interventions. Following constitutional court rulings, recognising the right for adults to cultivate and use cannabis in private settings, we have reviewed our legislation.  Public health, prevention messaging and law enforcement frameworks are complementary and provide clarity for communities. We continue to embed human rights and principles at the centre of drug policies. We continue to promote humane and effective responses.

Michael Camillieri, OHCHR. There is a 28% increase in PWUD since 2016, 2.6 million deaths since 2016. And we continue to see lives ruined by punitive drug policies that fail to prioritise life. There is a sense of urgency on the need for change. The UNGASS committed to protecting human rights, and the HRC has reinforced this commitment several times. But this commitment has failed to materialise. Punitive drug policies continue to prevail as the main response, people continue to be overincarcerated, executions are carried out with apparent impunity. The impacts are felt by vulnerable communities, including people of African Descent, Indigenous peoples (with the example of the coca leaf), and women (including women who use drugs who face stigma and harsh punishment). OHCHR is preparing a report specifically focused on women and girls. We believe there is a better path, that drug policies can be more humane and effective, promoting health, dignity and inclusion. I want to highlight 5 key paths forward. 1- Effective, practical, evidence-based prevention to protect people from drug use; 2- Decriminalisation to reduce stigma, social barriers and improve the dignity and autonomy of PWUD; 3- Meaningful investment in treatment, harm reduction and health services; 4- ensure access to controlled medicines; 5- address social, economic and cultural rights to break the cycles of marginalisation. The International Guidelines on Human Rights and Drug Policy provide an important guide on rights-based drug policies. We do see progress in many places. We see progress within the UN system. CND resolutions refer rights, and HRC resolutions address drug policy. But comprehensive reforms remain illusive in too many instances.

Jean Clot, GREA (Switzerland). I want to clarify that I’m not speaking on behalf of the Swiss government, it is not an official national position. Switzerland is often represented for its 4-pillar policy, based on different institutional logics that don’t always cooperate easily. But these approaches can operate well together, including in prison settings. In Switzerland, we have continuity of care for people in prisons, including harm reduction and treatment. OAT is continued while in prison, and is not interrupted during incarceration. It helps reduce overdose risks and helps reintegration. In the Canton of Vaux, NSPs have been introduced in various prison facilities, including via protocols and trainings. It started as a pilot programme, and is now rolled out. We also provide prescription heroin for more than 15 years for people with severe opioid dependence, among detainees. Our third example, the Premiere Ligne organisation provides social and educational support among detainees, including access to rights and ensuring links with community services to support reintegration after release. Different policy approaches, health, social and security policies can function together if well-coordinated. This is also central to GREA to foster professional dialogue. At the same time, everything doesn’t work perfectly. There is unequal access to these services across cantons. Release from detention is problematic for continuity of care. There are opportunities for improvement. At international level, reflections on broader problems such as decriminalisation of possession of small quantities is essential. It should benefit from the active participation of PWUD and other affected communities.

Minister for Law and Justice, Pakistan. Thank you to all the panellists from different regions. In Pakistan we had a journey for the past two years which I wanted to highlight here. We have made significant legislative changes within our counter-narcotic laws, including abolishing the death penalty for drug-related offences. We have taken a human rights-based approach, and fairness in judicial practices. At the same time, CSOs have been part of consultations and dialogue, which has evolved into trainings of judges. Aside from that, we improved access to opioid treatment nationally. We are now moving into the implementation phase. The question remains: we are interested in exchange from the very onset, and meaningful consultations between Member States that have gone through reforms too. My question would be – we are all here at this side event, we have likeminded States and civil society organisations present. We are open to learning and exchanging ideas and initiatives on technical cooperation and shared resources. But we are looking for ways to find pathways to improve on this journey we have started walking on. Perhaps we would need an ad hoc working group to support such discussions.

Independent researcher. The drug conventions require modernisation, what legal path could states follow for this modernisation?

Ann, IDPC. I don’t think it’s for me to define. First we need a real discussion among Member States on which elements are no longer fit for purpose. Some Member States are already departing from the treaties and it’s increasingly becoming untenable. There are complex legal pathways, but not for me to define.

Researcher. I want to ask OHCHR that you recommend the International Guidelines. Having read the guidelines, it reflects something that goes around this table: the human rights treaties are the beginning of the discussion, but children’s rights are not reflected. What you promote is legalisation for upper-middle class adults. The only obligation in the treaties that focuses on drugs is article 33 of the Convention on the Child. In that section on special interests, there is a minimum obligation coming from article 33 of this Convention. Instead of children having the right to protection, they have the right to information.

Michael, OHCHR. Part of the question has been answered by you. I mentioned prevention among young people in my remarks. But let’s take a step back: we all share a perspective for people’s wellbeing. The question here is how to go about that. And clearly the drug policies adopted over the past decade do not work. We are all here driven by a concern for the rights of all humans, what is the right drug policy to advance the wellbeing of the greatest number of people. We are benefiting evidence from Uruguay, South Africa and Pakistan to find better approaches that can protect individuals, including children.

Mirtle Clark, Fields of Green for All. Thank you for mentioning policy reforms from South Africa and Uruguay. To what extent does the experience of cannabis regulation inform broader drug policies aligned with human rights? Cannabis is always considered as separate. Will we see this experience inform the rest of drug policies?

South Africa. Reforms take time, and the rest of laws take time to catch up. What has been the impact of decrim in the health sector? Do additional policies need to be adopted within the health sector? We need to continue focusing on the next steps of our policies.

Uruguay. The reference to regulation is quite wide. We have very clear parameters. We look into impacts on all types of consumption, and confirmed that humane and science based policies respecting international commitments are possible and we need more of that. We have an interesting pilot experiment from Switzerland, establishing a social laboratory on the impacts of cannabis in society. These experiences complement each other. Switzerland’s pilot experiment helps to continue evidence-based policy.

Veterans Council from California. Uruguay mentioned inputs from communities. We have frustations in this regard in California and want to ask how consultations were made.

Uruguay. Education and democracy! The national strategy on drugs includes consumers. In the USA, you have 38 States already providing legal cannabis, you have a critical mass. More dialogue, more cooperation is essential.

Moderator. Thank you so much for your diverse views from this panel!