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.

UNAIDS calls on countries to put human rights first to beat pandemics

As we approach the 10th anniversary of the adoption of the United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (the Bangkok Rules), we, the undersigned, express alarm at the increase in the global female prison population by around 100,000 since the adoption of the Rules – which aim to reduce the imprisonment of women – and the continuing discrimination and abuse experienced by women in criminal justice systems.

The number of women in prison is rising at an alarming rate, even though women are typically convicted of low-level non-violent crimes. Women are disproportionately impacted by punitive drug policies and often commit crimes in poverty to keep themselves and their families alive. Many find themselves in prison as a direct result of discrimination.

As a minority in prisons, representing on average 2-9% of national prison populations, women are often not provided with access to programmes and services to support their rehabilitation that address their specific needs and characteristics. There is also a mental health crisis among women in prison, with up to 80% living with an identifiable mental illness, which has been compounded by measures related to preventing and addressing the spread of COVID-19.

Women around the world continue to face threats to their dignity and humanity in detention. They are often unable to access adequate healthcare and are at particularly high risk of sexual assault and humiliation in prison. In some countries, women are even restrained during labour and birth or placed in solitary confinement whilst pregnant or caring for an infant child.

Protect the human rights of women in the criminal justice system - Joint call to action

Welcome to the first episode of our new live online video show, Drugreporter Café, where we will regularly discuss new developments in the world of drug policy with professionals, activists and decision makers. Today our show will feature drug policy reform in a small country in Southern-Eastern Europe, North Macedonia. We will discuss the chances of reform with two guests, two activists from the country, Vlatko Dekov (HOPS Skopje) and Natasa Boskova (Coalition Margins).

 Cannabis legalisation in North Macedonia? – Drugreporter Café

A motion was passed in Parliament today, calling for continued Dutch support for harm reduction. Dutch MPs acknowledge the petition send earlier this year, which was signed by 330 organisations from 95 countries.

On behalf of all these organisations who signed the Global sign-on letter to Minster Kaag we would like to thanks all Dutch MPs who voted in favour of the motion and in particular the Dutch Socialist Party, who stood by us from the very beginning.

Dutch Parliament votes in favour of harm reduction

A cannabis bill to clarify legal reforms was recently presented in parliament. Yet, medical and civil rights groups who advocate rights-based approaches remain wary of the ongoing potential for discrimination. They argue it will benefit the affluent and impact negatively on vulnerable communities, who may not have space at home to cultivate the crop and will be criminally penalised for smoking cannabis outside the home.

With a cannabis industry estimated at over $300-billion worldwide, much is at stake. Already, South African boutique producers are navigating legal loopholes to deliver cannabis products to young, urban middle-class consumers. Some government officials see dagga as a ticket to economic growth. This is through agriculture and medicinal products that can be marketed for pain alleviation, sleep and skin care.

But, would further liberalisation invite “corporate capture” as some development practitioners fear? If so, what will happen to people in rural communities who, for decades, have eked out risky livelihoods by illegally cultivating dagga? History provides crucial insights into the questions of social justice at stake in current policy debates.

Our recent study using police statistics from the mid 1900s uncovers trends in cannabis arrests and seizures, by geographical area. It shows the South Africa apartheid state to have been a pioneer in supply-side drug control strategies, targeting rural cannabis farmers in the most impoverished parts of the country.

What history teaches us about shaping South Africa's new cannabis laws

By John Walsh / Advocacy for Human Rights in the Americas

The first week of December 2020 will witness two of the most consequential sets of votes on cannabis policy since the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs marked the advent of the prohibitionist global drug control regime, which allows for only medical and scientific uses of hundreds of psychoactive substances. Unfolding over the span of just a few days, the voting set to take place at the United Nations and in the U.S. House of Representatives may reverberate for years to come, setting the course of cannabis policy in the United States and globally.

On December 2 in Vienna, Austria, the 53 Member States of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) will vote on a package of six recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO) regarding the scheduling of cannabis in the UN drug control treaties. Cannabis was originally placed—and remains still—in the strictest control schedules (I and IV) of the 1961 Convention, with even medical uses discouraged.

Later in the week, nearly 4,500 miles away in Washington, DC, the U.S. House of Representatives will take up the Marijuana Opportunities, Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act. The most comprehensive cannabis reform legislation to ever reach the floor of the House, the MORE Act would decriminalize cannabis under federal law. The federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) of 1970—enacted as the implementing legislation of U.S. obligations under the 1961 Convention—classifies cannabis (“marihuana”) in Schedule I, the most stringent level of federal control. Beyond removing cannabis from the CSA, the MORE Act would expunge prior federal marijuana convictions and impose a federal tax on cannabis sales, with the revenue to be invested in communities most affected by the “war on drugs”.

A tale of two cannabis votes

Spurred by media panic around a so-called “chemsex crimewave,” the United Kingdom’s independent drug policy advisors are recommending that people involved with the highly stigmatized depressant gamma-hydroxybutyrate and related substances (GHB-RS) be subject to harsher criminal penalties.

But the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) did not make its recommendation to escalate punitive responses unanimously. An unspecified number of ACMD experts on the Technical Committee, which deliberated GHB-RS’s change in classification under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, objected. They warned that intensifying criminalization will only inflict, not reduce, harm—particularly for queer and trans people.

The ACMD was commissioned by UK Home Secretary Priti Patel to investigate GHB-RS at the beginning of 2020—shortly after the conviction of, and ensuing media fixation on, a gay man of color for committing large-scale sexual violence that was allegedly facilitated by GHB-RS. On November 20, the ACMD published its assessment of the harms of GHB-RS and its recommendations in response.

UK Drug Council knows GHB crackdown targets queer people, recommends it anyway

It was "out of curiosity" that Mohammad Limon (not his real name) first took marijuana with his friends nearly two decades ago. But soon he started taking the substance regularly and got addicted.

A few years of dabbling in weed, then heroin and finally yaba, Limon became heavily reliant on drugs. His desperate parents got him admitted to rehabilitation centres in Dhaka and Gazipur several times.

But what he experienced in the centres left a deep scar on his mind. In his own words, he was treated "like a criminal" without any compassion or understanding.

With no proper monitoring by DNC, the responsible government department, the centres are virtually run by unskilled professionals, resulting in many patients relapsing even after getting treatment, they added.

More worryingly, there are reports of deaths at the rehabilitation centres. In the last three years, at least 17 bodies have been recovered from rehabilitation centres across the country, according to police data.

Rehabs in need for revamps

In 2020, according to media reports, five persons were killed in ‘shootouts’ with the police, one while allegedly trying to flee police custody, two when allegedly trying to wrestle weapons from the police when they were taken to retrieve drugs or weapons, and two men died while in police custody at the police station.

The phrase ‘new normal’ is commonly used to refer to the post-COVID-19 context, but even in this new normal there exists a permanent normal we cannot escape, i.e. State violence. State violence against persons thought to be a threat to the State, such as dissenters, human rights defenders, journalists and those arrested for drug offences, has been the permanent normal in Sri Lanka for decades.

I refer to it as the ‘permanent normal’ because deaths in custody and persons being killed in encounters with the police are not unique to a particular political regime, but instead are systemic.

For instance, in October 2016, during the Yahapalana regime, two Jaffna University students were killed when they reportedly failed to stop at a police checkpoint. The police initially denied responsibility and claimed that they had died due to an accident that was caused when they lost control of the motorbike because they were speeding while under the influence of alcohol. The post-mortem report however, discovered bullets lodged in the body of one of the victims and did not find any trace of alcohol in their blood. To date, no one has been held accountable for their deaths.

News