After the office was raided and computers were seized, the members of the staff and the Steering Committee announced their resignation from EHRN. Is this the end of the network? No, it is only the end of EHRN as an organisation but the network is alive and well. Another NGO has been registered to provide a new organisational framework. This is the story from the former co-chair’s perspective!

I received many questions after I resigned as the co-chair of EHRN. I know it must be frustrating for many members and allies to receive news that contain limited, sometimes conflicting information and don’t let them to see the whole picture. I am not a staff member and I was not involved in the day-to-day management of the network so I don't know all the details - but I feel it is my duty to tell you the story from my perspective.

When I was elected as the co-chair of the Eurasian Harm Reduction Network in 2014, I did not expect that the network will undergo the most serious organisational crisis during my term. It was a challenging period, with changing drug markets, new outbreaks of HIV, rising political populism, budget cuts, and retreating international donors all over the region. But the network itself was fit for purpose, and it seemed we had everything needed to face the problems: committed and capable staff members, stable financial resources, a vibrant and colourful membership. I thought the main challenge we had to focus on would be how to mobilise membership more effectively to implement our two main strategic goals, that is, to push national governments to reform repressive drug laws, and to provide resources for harm reduction programs.

Keep up-to-date with drug policy developments by subscribing to the IDPC Monthly Alert.

What happened with the Eurasian Harm Reduction Network (EHRN)?

The apparent extrajudicial executions by Philippine police of two children over a three-day period underscores the need for a United Nations inquiry into President Rodrigo Duterte’s abusive “war on drugs,” Human Rights Watch said today. While several dozen children under 18 have died in drug war-related killings since June 2016, circumstances suggest that the Philippine National Police (PNP) deliberately targeted the two children.

“The apparent willingness of Philippine police to deliberately target children for execution marks an appalling new level of depravity in this so-called drug war,” said Phelim Kine, deputy Asia director. “These killings demonstrate that Duterte’s rejection of the rule of law has made all Filipinos potential ‘drug-war’ victims, no matter how young.”

On September 6, 2017, a passerby spotted the body of Reynaldo de Guzman, a 14-year-old Grade 5 student from Pasig City, floating in a creek, 20 days after he was reported missing. A pathologist report indicates that de Guzman died from at least 30 stab wounds after his assailants wrapped his head in packing tape. Packing tape has been a gruesome hallmark of many drug-war killings under Duterte. De Guzman had last been seen alive on August 18 in the company of his friend Carl Angelo Arnaiz, 19, who the police shot to death later that day after they accused him of robbing a taxi driver in Manila’s Caloocan City.

Philippines: abusive drug war targets children

Michelle Thiessen of the Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy and Nazlee Maghsoudi of the International Centre for Science in Drug Policy react to the Ontario's pot policy.

Is government control of marijuana sales the right way to approach legalized pot?

The Global Fund recently announced a list of priorities for multi-country funding for the 2017-2019 cycle. Of the $260 million available, some is ear-marked for pre-identified applicants and some will be open to competitive applications, though the eligible regions and objectives of the grants are prescribed by the Global Fund (see GFO article).

Noticeably absent from the list is any funding for multi-country approaches for HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa – the region hardest hit by the disease. The Global Fund has indicated that the decision was based on technical partners’ guidance and information. Activists have called it “frustrating” and “irresponsible.”

(Aidspan invited Seth Faison, the Global Fund’s Head of Communications to comment on a draft of this article. He provided a statement which we have included at the end of this article.)

Currently, the Global Fund is investing $59.3 million in eight multi-country HIV grants in Africa (see table), the majority of which end in 2018 without possibility of renewal.

Activists stunned by Global Fund decision to end funding for regional HIV programming in Africa

Heroin Assisted Treatment involves supervising prescribed pharmaceutical heroin self-administration with intensive psycho-social help to a minority of people with severe heroin dependence who have not benefitted from multiple other treatments.

The signatories of this letter include senior clinicians and researchers, major health organisations, peer based organisations and people with long standing experience and expertise in the fields of law enforcement, drug policy and drug treatment.

We support the urgent introduction of Heroin Assisted Treatment in Australia.

Twenty years ago this month in August 1997, the then Federal Cabinet decided against notifying the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs of an intention to conduct an Australian trial of Heroin Assisted Treatment. Consequently, the proposed trial had to be abandoned.

Since then, trials of supervised heroin assisted treatment in seven countries with a combined total of more than 1,500 people using street heroin have found that this treatment was more effective than high quality methadone treatment for people with severe heroin dependence who had not benefitted from multiple other treatments.

Heroin Assisted Treatment, as well as more recently treatment with other injectable opioids, has been demonstrated to improve physical and mental health, reduce the use of street heroin, reduce criminal activity and improve social functioning. This treatment also saves a lot more money than it costs to provide or the current cost to the community of not treating people with severe heroin dependence.

Heroin Assisted Treatment is only needed for a small minority of the heroin using population. However, research in Switzerland, the Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Canada, Belgium and the UK has shown its benefit for individuals, families and communities is often quite profound.

Australia should start providing heroin assisted treatment

A commentary on a draft bill recently proposed at Parliament

Myanmar is better known for its serious drug problems - including large-scale illicit drugs production and trafficking and high rates of heroin use - than for implementing progressive drug policies that prioritise the health of its population. However, this could change in the near future.

Myanmar is better known for its serious drug problems - including large-scale illicit drugs production and trafficking and high rates of heroin use - than for implementing progressive drug policies that prioritise the health of its population. However, this could change in the near future. Last year, Police Colonel Myint Aung, head of the International Department of the Central Committee for Drug Abuse Control (CCDAC), commented in an interview that legislative changes were being considered to “make [drug use] a health issue, rather than a criminal one”. More recently, Major General Aung Soe, the military-appointed deputy Minister for Home Affairs, declared to a Member of the Parliament that “prevention and judicial strategies are not enough to solve drug problems,” and that “the economy, social affairs, health and development must [also] be taken into consideration”.

This changing approach to tackling drug issues is reflected in a draft bill that was approved by the upper house of the Parliament (“Amyothar Hluttaw”) on the 16th of August. The text proposes to introduce several amendments to 1993 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Law and, most notably, to eliminate prison penalties for drug use. In a country where failing to register as a drug user can lead to 3 to 5 years imprisonment, and where up to 74% of all inmates are in prison for – mostly minor – drug-related offences, the step is significant. However, if Myanmar policy makers really want drug users to be seen as people who need help and support, rather than as merely criminals, it is fundamental that they also extend the exemption from prison penalties to include the possession of small amounts of drugs for personal use.

The decriminalisation of drug use has long been advocated for by numerous organisations, including several local and international NGOs and UN Agencies. In February this year, the Drug Policy Advocacy Group – Myanmar (DPAG), a civil society platform, also released a briefing that recommended ending the criminalisation of drug use and increasing access to health, harm reduction and voluntary treatment for drug users, among other interventions. Indeed, extensive evidence from around the world shows that, while the fear of prison penalties is not an effective deterrent against drug use, it does have a substantial negative impact on the health of drug users and the community at large.

Thumbnail Flickr CC United Nations Photo

Will Myanmar lead drug policy reform in Southeast Asia?

Several attempts at reviewing the current Ghanaian PNDC Law 236 were made from 2006 to 2015. The latest attempt, despite a second reading of the bill in parliament, was unfortunately unsuccessful due to the 2016 parliamentary and presidential elections. Fortunately, giving the momentum and extent of the discussion on the bill before of the election, as well as the stage it had reached in the parliament, the new government has prioritised the passing of the new law. It is within this context that the Narcotic Control Board (NACOB) held a stakeholder meeting as a key component of the process.

The overall objective of the 2- days consultative meeting was to discuss the proposals contained in the bill as well as to take the views of various stakeholders to ensure that the new bill responds to national and regional realities. The meeting was held at Alisa Hotel, Accra, Ghana from the 19th to 20th July 2017. Law reform processes in the sub region have been hindered by claims from civil society organisations and the public for being left out of the conversations although they form part of the primary beneficiary of the law. So therefore, any sustainable and efficient law should encompass the views of all entities and individuals who gain or lose in its implementation or enforcement. By holding such a meeting, Ghana provides an excellent example to other African countries, demonstrating best practices in the law reform process. The stakeholder meeting gathered a wide range of participants made up of representatives from the Police, the judiciary service, psychiatrists, civil society groups, the international partners (USAID, Rep of US Embassy, The German Embassy, UNODC, etc) , the national law enforcement agencies, students associations, West Africa Drug Policy Network (WADPN – Ghana Chapter), International Drug Policy Consortium African Consultant in Ghana, Recovery Ghana Consortium and Ghana Education Service. Before the clause by clause discussions, civil society representatives were given the opportunity to make a presentation on their position on some key aspects of the bill. The Africa Consultant for International Drug Policy Consortium and a member of the West Africa Drug Policy Network started her presentation by noting that the punitive approach to the war on drugs have caused lots of damage to society and families. She therefore called on stakeholders to see drug use as a public health issue in line with the global call for a paradigm shift from the heavily punitive approach to a humane approach as outlined in the outcome document of the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) 2016.

Ghana in the process of reforming its drug law

People who use drugs are dying in increasing numbers. There are more than 200,000 drug-related deaths a year. Overdose deaths contribute to between a third and a half of all drug-related deaths. Last year, in the United States alone, overdose deaths exceeded 59,000. Overdose is the principal cause of death of North Americans younger than fifty years old. Not cancer; not heart attack or stroke; not vehicular accidents. Overdose. Avoidable overdose.

The vast majority of those who have died in the last several years have overdosed as a result of mistakenly taking fentanyl or carfentanyl instead of heroin and other opiates, with these newer, far stronger drugs increasingly being consumed due to the unregulated drug market under prohibition. Fentanyl is also causing increasing numbers of opiate overdoses and deaths throughout Europe and in other parts of the world. Meanwhile, young people have continued to die the world over as a result of toxic adulterants and contaminants being present in stimulants like MDMA and ecstasy, which are relatively very safe drugs when uncontaminated and when of known strength.

INPUD statement: drug users remembrance day

Our movie gives you an overview of the crisis of harm reduction programs in Bosnia-Herzegovina, where harm reducers don't receive support from the government but they keep doing their work and saving lives.

When we visited the drop-in centre in Zenica, an industrial town in Bosnia-Herzegovina, I could hardly believe what I saw. The centre has an unusual neighbour, a kindergarten, that shares the building with a program that provides clean needles and syringes for injecting drug users. Downstairs, you see children’s drawings on the wall. Upstairs, you see HIV prevention posters. When I asked Denis Dedajic, the head of the program, to explain how can this be possible, he simply shrugged his shoulders. "For all these years, we never had any problems or incidents with them," he said. Good cooperation with the local community is one of the key elements of success for a harm reduction program.

Our clients are our mission - Harm reduction in Bosnia

La regolamentazione giuridica delle droghe è più efficace e giusta del proibizionismo. Ma davvero può risolvere tutti i problemi? No, se non c’è giustizia sociale.

“Fermate la guerra alle droghe e legalizzatele!”. Sempre più persone si identificano con questo messaggio. Io sono un forte sostenitore della necessità di una riforma delle politiche sugli stupefacenti. Ritengo infatti che sia immorale punire qualcuno perché fa uso di droghe. Sono convinto che un mercato legale e regolamentato, a seconda di ogni specifico tipo di droga e dei rischi correlati, abbia molti più benefici per l’umanità che non il mercato nero.

Non mi piace il proibizionismo perché offre una soluzione ipersemplicistica ad un problema complesso. Eppure, io ritengo che il presupposto per cui la legalizzazione delle droghe risolverebbe ogni problema sia allo stesso modo ipersemplicistico. Non mi fraintendete, molti problemi che incontriamo in questo campo sono direttamente collegati alla guerra alle droghe, per esempio l’affollamento delle carceri, le infezioni, l’overdose e il crimine organizzato. Il mercato nero delle droghe è come una bestia nutrita ed ingrassata dagli sforzi che si fanno per reprimerlo. La legalizzazione delle droghe, al contrario, farebbe morire di fame quella bestia.

Mantenere up-to-date con gli sviluppi politici droga iscrivendoti al IDPC mensile Alert.

La legalizzazione delle droghe può risolvere tutti i problemi?

The legal regulation of drugs is more effective and just than prohibition. But does it really fix most problems? Not without social justice.

"Stop the Drug War and Legalise Drugs!" - More and more people identify with this message. I am a strong supporter of drug policy reform myself. I believe that it is immoral to punish someone for using drugs. I am convinced that a regulated legal market, adjusted to specific types of drugs and risky behaviours, is much more beneficial for humankind than a global black market.

I don't like prohibition because it proposes an over-simplistic solution to a complex problem. However, I feel that arguments based on the assumption that legalising drugs will fix most problems are just as over-simplistic. Don't get me wrong, several problems we experience in this field are directly connected to the war on drugs, including over-incarceration, infections, overdoses, and organised crime. The black market of drugs is like a beast which is fed and fattened by efforts to repress it. Legally regulating drugs, on the other hand, would starve the beast.

But simply legalising drugs will not kill all the beasts.

Can legalising drugs fix all problems?

In 2014, the debilitating effects of punitive drug laws across West Africa triggered an urgent need for reforms grounded on human rights and public health. This call for reform was timely as the precarious situation threatened good governance, peace and stability, economic growth and public health in West Africa, a region that is still emerging from decades of violent conflict and economic instability.

The West Africa Commission on Drugs (WACD), in its 2014 report titled, 

Not Just in Transit: Drugs, the State and Society in West Africa

, openly called for the decriminalisation of drug use and possession for personal use. The report provided evidence to show that criminalisation of drug use worsens health and social problems, puts undue pressure on the criminal justice system and fosters corruption.

The 2016 United Nations General Assemblies Session (UNGASS) provided an opportunity for various stakeholders to evaluate and adjust their current drug policies to ensure that it responds to national and regional realities. Before the UNGASS, the West Africa Drug Policy Network (WADPN) supported by the West Africa Civil Society Institute (WACSI) and Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA) organised national and regional multi-sectoral forums to facilitate a candid discourse on drug policy in West Africa.

News