: When the cannabis referendum failed despite being so close, my daughter, having watched me over decades fight for health-based, fair drug laws, wrote something on Facebook that has compelled me to write this as the departing chairperson of the NZ Drug Foundation.

My tamāhine, in justifiable, youthful anger, said the laws we have are ‘’racist, because they unjustly criminalise us as Māori, because they’re outdated … I know everyone will be a bit gutted tonight but I just wanted to say ... I’m really really proud of you, Dad …’’

Her words and the outcome hit me hard and made me realise how deeply personal the lack of progress on drug harm in New Zealand is for me and for many Māori.

Like many young Māori men, I obtained drug convictions in my youth that have haunted me my entire life. Even though it’s been 34 years since my last drug conviction, it’s still making my life difficult.

As one particularly ironic example, when I was asked to speak at the United Nations about drug law reform, it took seven months to get permission to enter the US.

New Zealand: Create a new drugs law for the modern world

Andréia Azevedo Soares with Fadi Meroueh / WHO 

Fadi Meroueh talks to Andréia Azevedo Soares about ensuring health equity and harm reduction services in prisons, and the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Q: What are the main differences you have encountered working as a doctor outside and inside prisons?


A: For me one of the biggest differences is the way doctors are pressured into different and often conflicting roles inside correctional facilities. This can make it difficult for the doctor to retain independence and loyalty to the patient. For example, magistrates may ask doctors to certify that an inmate can make a court appearance. In my view such requests should be refused. If a judge or a lawyer wants to know whether a patient is prepared to go to court, he should hire an expert in such matters to make that assessment. Similarly, prison guards have a tendency to ask for information about a prisoner’s health as though the doctor were part of the prison’s security staff, something I find completely unacceptable.


A: Absolutely. It has happened to me when I have called the guards to say a patient needs to go to the emergency room. They ask me what is wrong with the prisoner – usually because they have security concerns. But should I tell them? No. Prisoners may be deprived of their freedom but not of their health rights. Medical privacy and independence of medicine are key principles, and the struggle to maintain them in prison has been going on for 30 years in France. It is a long battle. Another difference is the way doctors and patients tend to relate to each other inside prisons. When someone is incarcerated, they lose contact with friends and family. Their lives become the penitentiary and they are often enclosed in a cell which may measure just a few square metres. As a result, there is a different doctor–patient dynamic in the consulting room.

Fadi Meroueh: responding to the health needs of prisoners

About 20 minutes into a US House of Representatives hearing on the findings of the Western Hemisphere Drug Policy Commission—a body created under Obama and tasked with re-evaluating drug policy in the Americas—its chair made a statement that, heard on its own, could have sparked hope in the hearts of harm reductionists frustrated with the country’s violent global war on people who use or sell drugs.

“The US government needs better metrics and stronger evaluations of what does and doesn’t work,” said Dr. Shannon O’Neil, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and the Commission’s chair. “Counting how many police officers have received training or how many hectares of coca have been eradicated doesn’t necessarily tell us whether we are reducing the harm of illegal drugs for Americans.”

Anyone familiar with the vast scientific literature on effective techniques for reducing the harms associated with criminalized drug use might think O’Neil was on the verge of calling for measuring drug policy in terms of access to naloxone, syringes, gold-standard addiction medications like buprenorphine, and even, simply, quality housing.

But not so. Instead, in a report this month providing drug policy recommendations for the incoming Biden-Harris administration, O’Neill and the Commission set forth a vision for an optimized global drug war that integrates “public health policies” into a more efficient assault on people involved in Latin American drug economies.

A “humane” global drug war is possible, house commission tells Biden

By István Gábor Takács / Drug Reporter

There are much more effective pills today to cure Hepatitis C infection than interferon treatment. Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) medications can treat your potentially life-threatening HCV infection in a few months, without any serious side effects. The problem is that even though treatment with these new types of drugs is available and covered by the health care system in Hungary, marginalised people such as homeless people, people who use drugs, and sex workers either do not know about it, do not have a connection to the care system, or do not contact it due to previous negative experiences. This is what HepaGo wants to change.

The rented van of HepaGo. This new outreach project rolled onto the streets of Budapest in May 2020, with the aim of reaching out to these populations and providing them with various low-threshold services.

They provide free screening for HCV, HIV, and syphilis. Where there is a positive diagnosis, they provide counselling, and start arranging medical care. They visit the doctor together at Szt. László Hospital, and support people throughout the whole treatment procedure.

The program seeks funding to continue their important work. You can contact them here!

HepaGo – Supporting people living on the streets during the pandemic

Interview with Rūta Marcinkevičė, Project Manager at “Young Wave” / EHRA

“Young Wave” is a non-governmental organization, established by young people who use drugs and who are affected by harmful drug policies in Lithuania, to embrace each other and be a respectable and constructive part of drug policy formation. Mission of the organization is to create society where people using psychoactive substances have universal access to health and social services without a fear of being stigmatized or discriminated against.

Could you please share, how drug checking started in Lithuania and how you are implementing it?

It all started with a strong desire to create a better society. Harsh drug policies haven’t just failed to reduce the availability and use of drugs; however, they have created a whole set of problems. So, few young Lithuanians were actively involved in international drug policy issues. They were members of various international organizations, traveled worldwide, and saw inspiring harm reduction practices in other countries. One day, in 2017, they decided to unite and create the “Young Wave.” So now it’s the third year we are promoting humane drug policy and providing harm reduction services. Drug checking became a natural part of our services.

What was the reason that you started to implement drug checking as part of your harm reduction services?

As I’ve already mentioned, this was quite a natural decision that was based on evidence and the acceptable practices in providing drug checking in other countries. It’s vital to say that drug checking gives us a unique opportunity to reach a group of primarily young people who do not come to us otherwise. We seek to enhance their experience by providing information and sup¬port, which helps them stay safe and make safer and healthier choices. Moreover, drug checking is often the first point of contact with the social support system for many users.

First hand story: Drug checking in Lithuania

When it comes to ‘forever wars,’ few can rival the longevity of the U.S. War on Drugs. President-elect Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will now inherit this war, first proclaimed in 1971 by President Nixon, and waged at home and abroad for nearly a half a century since.

Absorbed into myriad government agency missions over the decades, the drug war will not be easy to unwind. But new urgency to reform domestic criminal justice and drug policy can help Biden and Harris start reining in the U.S. drug war in the Americas. Doing so will require being candid about why the anti-drug crusade has failed so badly.

Washington escalated this law enforcement campaign in the 1980s, with bipartisan passage of draconian sentencing laws such as the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, co-sponsored by then-Senator Biden. The same bill created the “drug certification” process, requiring the President to judge whether other nations were cooperating on drug control and threatening sanctions for countries deemed unhelpful. Also in 1986, President Reagan named drug trafficking a national security threat, formally engaging the Pentagon in drug interdiction.

Can Biden-Harris ‘just say no’ to the endless war on drugs?

By Dewey Sim and Jitsiree Thongnoi / Asia One

The issue of cannabis legalisation around the world was once again thrust into the spotlight this month, following a vote by the United Nations’ Commission on Narcotic Drugs to reclassify it one that is less dangerous and has medical or therapeutic benefits.

On December 2, the commission’s 53 member states voted to remove cannabis from Schedule IV of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. There were 27 nations in favour – including the United States , India, Nepal and Thailand – while among the 25 in opposition were Russia , China and Japan , as well as one abstention.

Experts said the result could prompt greater medical research and legalisation efforts around the world. But it also illustrated a separate issue: Asian nations are starkly divided on their views towards marijuana use, a not entirely surprising outcome given the efforts made to recognise its benefits in countries such as Thailand and Malaysia.

Why is Asia divided on a green light for medical marijuana?

The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) chief prosecutor said on Monday that there is “reasonable basis to believe” the Philippines has committed crimes against humanity in connection with President Rodrigo Duterte’s so-called war on drugs operation.

Fatou Bensouda’s office, in its annual report, said those crimes included murder, torture, infliction of serious physical injury and mental harm. They took place between July 1, 2016 and March 16, 2019.

The ICC prosecutor’s office has been examining the Philippines’ case since 2018, focusing in particular on allegations that Duterte and other government officials have actively promoted and encouraged the killing of suspected drug users and dealers, as well as claims that law enforcement officials and unidentified assailants have carried out thousands of unlawful killings in the Philippines.

A final decision on a formal ICC investigation could come in the first half of 2021, the report said, attributing the delays to the coronavirus pandemic.

Duterte, who assumed office in 2016, has promised a relentless war against drugs – an issue he campaigned on during the presidential election of that same year. On several occasions, the Philippine president had told police officers to “shoot and kill” drug suspects, saying in 2017 that “I will kill more if only to get rid of drugs”.

The ICC report noted that law enforcement officials were involved in the deaths of more than 5,300 people during their anti-drug crackdown.

ICC prosecutor sees ‘crimes against humanity’ in Philippines

2020 has been a year like no other – but GDS remains the same. The Global Drug Survey exists to promote honest conversations about drug use and helps to keep people safe, regardless of the legal status of the drug. 2020 has been year where honest conversations and keeping people safe should have been every government’s priority. But sadly, that has not always been the case and issues related to the use of alcohol and other drugs have, frankly, been pretty much ignored.

For many of us 2020 is not a year we want think about ever again. But we need to. COVID-19 provided an opportunity for communities to learn and to consider how to make things – including drug use – safer for everyone. In our COVID-19 Special Edition, we highlighted how changes in drug use impacted people differently with increases in alcohol use more likely to negatively affect those with pre-existing mental health conditions. We identified which drugs were consumed more frequently (weed, benzos and opioids) and which drugs were consumed less frequently (MDMA and cocaine). And some drugs, such as psychedelics, were a mixed bag (aren’t they always?). However, we did not capture how people, with respect to drug use, have adapted to COVID-19; we want to know how people have changed how they use and share drugs, how people try to party and what people might be willing to accept in night-time entertainment environments when clubs and bars get back to opening on a ‘regular’ basis. We also want to find out more about how people use online support platforms and how people use digital pleasure mediums (like ASMR and binaural beats) to help them find ‘zen’ within these times. Finally, at a time when the medical use (and legalisation) of cannabis and medical use of psychedelics is breaking through regulatory and evidence barriers, we want to look at whether people who use medical cannabis are at risk of dependence and how and why people microdose with various psychedelics.

We will leave you with this question. How often in the last 9 months have you been bored and just wanted something to do? Go on… hit the link, take the survey. It’s anonymous and confidential. Your experiences will help inform others and influence change: www.globaldrugsurvey.com/GDS2021

Professor Adam Winstock, Dr Monica Barratt, Dr Emma Davies & Associate Professor Jason Ferris, on behalf of all at GDS

Global Drug Survey 2021: Why you should find 25 minutes this year to take part

By AIDS and Rights Alliance for Southern Africa

After the first COVID-19 case was detected in the SADC region in early March 2020, countries imposed restrictions or lockdowns of differing intensity and duration as an urgent response in dealing with the health crisis posed by the pandemic. These measures disrupted social and economic life and access to health services, many of which were reconfigured to manage COVID-19 cases. In the SADC region, national responses to COVID-19 occurred in a context of systemically weak and under resourced health systems and high burden of HIV, and other chronic illnesses among the populace.

Community-led or outreach activities play a key role in mobilizing communities, combatting stigma, holding government accountable in policy and practice, and supporting health systems as well as have unique reach to populations who are disproportionately burdened by the HIV epidemic. Community-led HIV responses are the cornerstone to the HIV response in the region but little is known about the impacts of the COVID-19 measures on the gains the region has made in the provision of HIV prevention, care and treatment.

This brief presents the findings of a rapid assessment amongst 25 civil society organisations involved in the HIV response across the SADC region and provides recommendations for sustaining the community-led HIV response in the face of ongoing and future health crises.

Rapid assessment on the impact of the COVID-19 on community-led HIV responses in the SADC region

Latin America continues to face a profound crisis in its prison systems, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this context, trans women 

have faced a disproportionate impact on their human rights as compared to other groups in situations of vulnerability, due to their distinct lived experiences

. Hence, the signatory organizations urge countries to 

decriminalize and provide alternatives to incarceration, particularly for trans women, and incorporate intersectional perspectives and a differentiated focus that protects the rights of LGBTI+ persons.

The conditions of vulnerability and abuse that trans women deprived of liberty experienced prior to the COVID-19 crisis were elaborated in the collective report, 

Trans Women Deprived of Liberty: Invisible Stories Behind Bars

. The report, by the regional network, 

, highlights some of the harmful impacts that incarcerated LGBTI+ persons in the region face due to the present crisis, and proposes recommendations to protect the rights of this group.

Despite these recommendations and demands by various international organizations, member-states in the region have failed to implement an intersectional and gender-sensitive approach for those groups of people deprived of liberty in situations of vulnerability, such as LGBTI+ persons. For example, the measures announced by various states to mitigate, prevent, and tend to the spread of COVID-19 within detention centers do not take into account pre-existing conditions or the specific needs of trans people.

Therefore, many of our organizations joined others in Latin America in presenting a coordinated response to the Request for an Advisory Opinion by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to express our views on the implementation of differentiated approaches towards key populations in vulnerable conditions in the context of detention. The response advocates for the application of the Inter-American standards on the deprivation of liberty, with a gender and differentiated approach for trans women. Similarly, 

we recommended that the Inter-American Court urge member-states to protect and defend the rights of these people, respecting their identities and ensuring that the use of protective measures do not actively restrict their rights.

 Member-states must also prevent, attend to, and sanction physical and psychological abuses, such as discriminatory measures that include restricting visits, forced use of certain garments, or the refusal to provide access to appropriate medical treatments given the conditions and necessities of trans persons.

As civil society organizations that are led by or work with trans persons deprived of liberty, we note with much concern that 

states continue to violate their international and national obligations to protect high-risk groups

, such as trans women deprived of liberty.

For these reasons, member-states must be reminded of their obligations to:

Promote the implementation of alternatives to incarceration and/ or release from prison of trans women in accordance with the maximum standards of human rights and taking into account a case-by-case basis analysis.

Prioritize, given the current crisis due to COVID-19, releasing trans women deprived of liberty, particularly those at higher risk due to health conditions, old age, chronic illness, and those living with HIV or other immunodeficiency conditions.

Promote the participation of formerly incarcerated trans women in the planning and implementation of public policies aimed at promoting the human rights of trans people, and with regards to prison policies and the justice system, among others.

Collect information and establish a database with a gender and sexual diversity focus to identify how many LGBTI+ persons are currently incarcerated and what specific impacts are felt by those in situations of vulnerability.

Establish an integrated protection system to prevent, sanction and eradicate instances of violence against trans women, in its diverse forms, on the part of prison personnel and others who are in prison, with guaranteed access to protective measures and accompaniment of victims.

Guarantee that trans women have adequate access to basic health and counseling services that address their specific needs, particularly in the case of possible COVID-19 transmission.

Foster spaces and actions within detention centers that guarantee the right of people deprived of liberty to maintain communication with their family, friends, and organizations that provide accompaniment and assistance.

Promote permanent awareness and training to all personnel within the justice and prison systems, as well as for the entire incarcerated population, on sexual orientation, identity, and gender expression.

Support trans women’s reintegration into society once out of prison to guarantee, at a minimum, access to appropriate medical services, a half-way home with secure forms of transportation, financial support, and assistance in securing food and employment, as well as immediate access to official identification documents.

Asociación de Derechos Humanos Cozumel Trans (Honduras)

Casa de las Muñecas Tiresias A.C (Mexico)

International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC)

Reset – Políticas de Drogas y Derechos Humanos (Argentina)

Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

Promoting the rights of trans women deprived of liberty in Latin America

The COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated once again how quickly rights violations can arise in an emergency. Inequalities that have too long been ignored were laid bare and exacerbated during the response to the pandemic. And yet we have learned from the AIDS response that it is only where rights are respected, protected and fulfilled that countries can make progress against an epidemic and build fairer societies.

Sex workers, gay men and other men who have sex with men, transgender people and people who use drugs were often targeted by law enforcement during lockdowns, exposed to high rates of violence, omitted from social protection and financial support mechanisms and denied access to health services because community-led organizations were frequently deemed as non-essential.

News