Drug use can be dangerous but prohibition makes them more dangerous even deadly. We’ve had 60 years of prohibitionist drug policies in Australia in yet drug use is at an all-time high. Surely it’s time to try alternative approaches to drug policy that reduces the damage that prohibition does to our young people.

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

Drug prohibition isn’t saving our children, it’s killing them

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein appealed to Iran to halt executions for drug offences until Parliament debates a new law that would remove the mandatory death penalty for drug crimes.

Five men were hanged last weekend, three of them on charges of narcotics trafficking. The other two men were convicted of murder. In at least one of the cases, that of Rashid Kouhi, there were serious concerns about the fairness of the trial and the denial of his right to appeal. Kouhi was sentenced to death in 2012 after he was found in possession of 800 grams of crystal meth. He was executed on Saturday, 9 April in Gilan province in northern Iran.

Last year, at least 966 people were executed in Iran – the highest rate in more than two decades – the majority for drug offences. At least four of those executed in 2015 were juveniles.

However, in December last year, 70 Members of Parliament presented a bill to amend the existing mandatory death penalty for drug offences. The bill, which was introduced in Parliament in January this year, provides for life imprisonment in such cases. It remains to be seen whether it will be taken forward in the new Parliament.

Zeid calls for an end to executions for drug offences in Iran

Governments across the world have invested in the war on drugs for decades. The complete eradication of drug crops and prohibition of their consumption has been the only goal. In this process, terrible pain and suffering has been inflicted around the world in the name of pursuing the fantasy of a drug-free world.

The United Nations has been the primary international mechanism upholding the prohibitionist approach for the past several decades, but this month they are convening a Special Session on drugs (UNGASS) in New York – the first such worldwide meeting since 1998. While many such gatherings have rubber stamped the status quo, the drugs UNGASS is an opportunity to reconsider current policy and to give space to voices who urge a new approach that prioritises health, social inclusion, development and human rights over interdiction, prohibition and punishment.

The clamour for change is growing louder, from former heads of state in South America and Western Europe to rural farmers in Southeast Asia and Afghanistan. Rather than demanding drug crops be destroyed, attempts are being made to manage production. Instead of insisting people quit using drugs entirely, ways are being sought to reduce the harm drugs can cause. In place of using criminal justice as an ineffective deterrent, information and social support is offered.

International drug policy: an engine for social injustice

In the year of our 10th anniversary the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC) is seeking ‘expressions of interest’ from individuals to join our Board of Directors. These are voluntary, non-executive positions. We are seeking to recruit two to three new Board members to join us from July 2016. As part of this recruitment process, we are looking to ensure robust succession planning for the positions of Chair and Vice Chair.

IDPC is a global network of over 140 civil society organisations from over 60 countries. We come together to promote objective and open debate on the effectiveness, direction and content of drug policies at the national and international level, and we support evidence-based policies that are effective at reducing drug-related harm. Our advocacy positions are based five core policy principles that prioritise human rights, civil society engagement and reducing the harmful consequences of the illicit drug market, rather than on reducing its scale.

The Board is responsible for the oversight of finances, management and performance of IDPC’s small but dynamic secretariat (based in London and Bangkok). The IDPC secretariat is a UK-based non-profit company limited by guarantee and the Board of Directors retain the financial and legal liability as per our Articles of Association. The Board is supported by a Members’ Advisory Council made up of representatives from the network.

In return for these responsibilities, new Directors would be joining the Board of a highly visible, diverse and growing network with a motivated, effective and committed staff team at the secretariat. IDPC has developed strong financial and administrative systems and processes since it became an independent legal entity in 2011. New Board members will be instrumental in further supporting IDPC as it moves into its next stage of organisational maturity and delivers on the new 5-year strategy that runs to December 2020.

The Board meets quarterly, with three out of four meetings being held by conference call and one annual face-to-face meeting which also serves as the Annual General Meeting. All meetings and documentation are in English only. Successful applicants will be expected to attend the next face-to-face Board meeting in London from the 6th to 8th July 2016. Meetings of the Directors, and all documentation and communication, are in English. Directors need to be available for the annual two-day face-to-face meeting each year in London. Good telephone and internet access is essential. Directors are also expected to be available to provide advice and comments between meetings. Board members will be appointed for one three-year term, with the ability to renew for one further three-year term.

We are particularly seeking individuals with the following skills and experience:

Experience of advocacy and/or campaigning work

Experience of advocacy engagement towards governmental and/or multi-lateral agencies

Successful track record of fundraising and ability to support resource mobilisation for IDPC

Experience from outside of the drug policy ‘field’, ideally in a related field such as health, human rights, development

Experience of working within government settings

Experience of financial oversight and management of organisations like IDPC

Experience of human resource oversight and management

Interested individuals should send a CV and a short cover letter outlining why they are interested in joining the Board of IDPC, and highlighting their relevant skills and experience for the Board position. These expressions of interest must be sent to Juan Fernandez (jfernandez@idpc.net) by no later than Friday 20th May 2016.

Call for expressions of interest for new members for IDPC’s Board of Directors

A French junior minister has sparked controversy by calling for renewed debate over the decriminalisation of cannabis.

"Prohibition is not effective", Jean-Marie Le Guen told France's BFMTV.

Other lawmakers - including fellow Socialists - dismissed the call, and a government spokesman said there were no plans for decriminalisation.

A recent WHO report found more French 15-year-olds smoked cannabis than in 41 other developed nations.

The study cautioned that "cannabis is a dangerous and harmful substance, especially for children and young people who use it regularly... Cannabis use is a risk factor for mental disorders and may trigger psychosis".

Mr Le Guen, who is secretary of state for relations with parliament as well as a medical doctor by training, said he opposed cannabis use and was a public health advocate who had always "fought against consumption of cannabis among the young".

But he said that approach had failed. Young people needed to be reached out to and taught that cannabis was dangerous, he said: "It is a health-based approach that I propose, not a moral or legal one."

French minister Le Guen reignites cannabis debate

At about two o'clock in the morning on March 23rd, after tense negotiations in Vienna, the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) reached a disappointing compromise. The hard-bargained draft of the outcome document of the UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on drugs taking place in New York from 19-21 April was adopted by ‘consensus’. Although its key features are by no means a surprise the draft is disappointing nonetheless.

A statement in the name of some 200 civil society organisations on the opening day of the CND warned that “the UNGASS is now perilously close to representing a serious systemic failure of the UN system … an expensive restatement of previous agreements and conventions”. Will the UNGASS 2016 go down in history as another wasted opportunity or have the debates leading to it laid a solid groundwork for systemic changes in the near future?

UNGASS 2016: Watershed event or wasted opportunity?

We are glad to present the five best posters submitted to 

's poster contest targeting the UNGASS on drugs this year!

We are especially delighted that all these five posters were produced by young artists from different parts of the world - please have a look at the posters with the short intro sent by the authors!

1. The Winner of the Contest: "A Useless War" by Flavio Velluti, Uruguay

Prohibitionism is failing, leaving nothing but damage and waste of resources. This allegorical illustration explains the simplistic and ridiculous character of the prohibitionist system. Aiming for a critical view, an almost childlike drawing emphasises the simplicity of the system and ridicules its methods, represented by the monotonous and far-reaching arms. The current situation does not allow society to continue on this path, and requires the regulation of the market as an alternative to defeated prohibition.

This is how young artists see the war on drugs: the winners of Drug Reporter's poster contest

SAO PAULO — Next week the United Nations is convening the largest gathering on drug policy that the world has seen in two decades. It was the brainchild of three Latin American presidents — from Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico — who wanted to end decades of poorly conceived and executed counter-narcotics programs. Their hope was that the General Assembly Special Session, or UNGASS, would stimulate new thinking on ways to reverse the political, social and economic wreckage of a failed war on drugs.

The hopes of these presidents — and like-minded governments and civil societies — were scuttled from the start. Part of the problem is that the framing of UNGASS is backwards. Rather than focusing on the “world drug problem” as prohibitionists are want to do, we should instead be addressing the “problematic way we deal with drugs.” Formulated this way, it is then possible to have a genuinely “people-centered” approach to drug policy that actually improves lives rather than destroys them.

Think about it. If drugs alone are treated as “the problem” (as is currently the case), then we are lost. No one disagrees that drugs can be addictive and can negatively impact health and well-being. But drugs on their own are not the right starting point. The better way to think about this is how we, as governments and societies, choose to deal with drugs. The extent to which public authorities prohibit or regulate drugs will determine the problematic impacts — on individuals, families, and communities — that result.

Illicit drugs are not the only problem — It’s outdated drug policy that needs fixing

Former Presidents of Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, Chile, Nigeria, Cape Verde, Switzerland & Poland; Former Prime Ministers of Greece, Hungary & The Netherlands Join With Distinguished Scholars, Jurists, Clergy, Business Leaders, Elected Officials, Celebrities and Others in Calling for Alternatives to Prohibitionist Drug Control Policies

“Humankind cannot afford a 21st century drug policy as ineffective and counter-productive as the last century’s,” Letter says

 – On the eve of the 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on the World Drug Problem, world leaders and activists have signed a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urging him to set the stage “for real reform of global drug control policy.”

The unprecedented list of signatories includes a range of people from Senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and Bernie Sanders to businessmen Warren Buffett, George Soros, Richard Branson and Mo Ibrahim, actors Michael Douglas and Gael Garcia Bernal, Super Bowl champion Tom Brady, singers Annie Lennox and Sting, activists Gloria Steinem and Michelle Alexander, as well as distinguished legislators, cabinet ministers, and former UN officials.

Over 1,000 leaders worldwide call for end to "disastrous" drug war, ahead of UN special session

In less than two weeks a rare United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on global drug policy takes place in New York. Among the issues to be debated and discussed many resonate in Southeast Asia, including the impact of drug production, trafficking and use on vulnerable countries, communities and people. Importantly, preparatory negotiations over the past year have created space for countries and policy leaders to reflect on the traditional "war on drugs" approach, but also prominently featured a debate on the need for justice reform and improved access to health services.

A major challenge for governments here in Southeast Asia is high, and rising, prison populations resulting from sentences for drug-related offences including for minor drug possession and use. Disproportionate sentences for relatively low level drug crime are not only a burden on justice systems and state budgets in the region, but have also proven to be detrimental to human rights -- most correctional facilities in the region simply do not provide a safe and healthy environment for people in custody.

Will the global drug policy evolution hit SE Asia?

The U.S.-led war on drugs and U.S.-shaped international drug policies are being scrutinized and debated this month by governments from around the globe as the world’s countries prepare to gather in mid-April for the United Nations General Assembly Special Session, or UNGASS, to review the world’s drug control regime. It is the first such meeting in 18 years.

The good news is that there are signs that American leaders are beginning to question the wisdom of a four decade-old war on drugs that has caused more harm than good. Increasingly, elected officials and the public are condemning laws that marginalize, criminalize and incarcerate millions of U.S. citizens for using drugs - laws that have helped make the U.S. the world’s leading jailer and have caused particular harm to persons and communities of color.

The bad news is that the U.S. continues to prioritize the use of police, prosecutors and judges to deal with persons who possess and use illicit drugs. Nowhere is this more evident than the persistent push by local and national politicians to implement or expand so-called drug courts, and their encouragement of other countries to do the same. Today, roughly 3,000 such courts operate around the country.

Legal experts urge UN to reject drug courts

Current drug policies which focus on prohibition over public health reinforce the vicious cycle of poverty and ill health by increasing the risk of health harms, and limiting access to medical care for people who use drugs. They also impact on entire communities by overly restricting access to essential medicines. In short, drug policy impacts heavily on health.

Although a number of countries take a public health approach to drug policy, many do not. The so called ‘war on drugs,’ which prioritizes the prohibition of illicit drug use, possession, cultivation, production and trafficking, has dominated since the mid-twentieth century. This is despite serious implications for public health.

The health of people who use drugs are the most obviously impacted by this zero-tolerance approach to drug policy, which restricts their access to medical care and support services for issues directly related to drug use and more generally. The criminalization of people who use drugs, and social stigma which results from this, acts as a barrier that often prevents people who use drugs from accessing health care for fear of legal punishment. Conversely it also results in people who use drugs sometimes being denied access to healthcare because of their status; in particular pregnant women who use drugs.

News