Tides are turning against those who instigated the war on drugs under the previous administration. Despite President Marcos’ pronouncement that he will “not lift a finger” to assist the International Criminal Court in its probe on former president Rodrigo Duterte’s crimes against humanity, recent events have pointed to growing apprehension in the Duterte camp. The ongoing rift between the Dutertes and Marcoses further creates a fragile situation that will keep the drug war instigators constantly on their toes.

Undoubtedly, the arrest of Duterte and his ilk would be a big step toward justice for the drug war victims and their aggrieved families. But beyond Duterte’s arrest, there are critical issues fundamental to moving past the war on drugs. First, we must have a thorough accounting of the harm caused by this war; second, a progressive drug policy alternative must be laid out, and finally, we need to change the narrative toward a more humane approach to substance abuse.

Any effort for reform must start with a clear and honest assessment of what happened previously. The death toll is a common way to start. The number of deaths alone is enough to trigger outrage, although as the corpses piled up, the staggering numbers slowly lost their shock value. Near the end of Duterte’s term, only the organization Dahas continues to keep tabs on the death toll. Sadder still is the fact that the killings are just a sliver of the harm done. Children have to bear the trauma of seeing their fathers shot. Distrust prevails in barangays where neighbors and local officials listed “drug suspects” in their own community. Professional groups who were expected to push for an evidence-informed health policy fell silent, with some subscribing to the hegemony on substance use.

Philippine drug war won’t end with Duterte in jail

OPC info is a resource with analysis and a database of papers published on overdose prevention centers (also known as: safe injection sites, safe consumption sites, drug consumption rooms). Users can sort by year and category or use search function to find a specific paper.

Overdose prevention centers (OPCs) (sometimes called safe consumption sites, safe injection sites or drug consumption rooms) are safe, monitored spaces where people can use their own drugs. In OPCs, trained staff can use naloxone (an overdose reversal medication) and oxygen to reverse an overdose and save a life, without needing to call 911.

These sites also provide new, safe supplies (pipes, cookers, etc.) to reduce the risk of infection and disease, by preventing the need to share or reuse equipment.

People can also test their drugs here to find out what may be in them. People can also get connected to services like healthcare, drug treatment, recovery programs, and housing at these sites.

Importantly, OPCs provide people with a supportive and safe environment, safe from stigma and judgment.

Why do we need overdose prevention centers?

Since 2017, more than 400,000 people have died of a drug-related overdose. The COVID-19 pandemic made the overdose crisis worse, with more than 100,000 people dying of an overdose in 2021. 

 Many overdoses are caused by powerful synthetic opioids like fentanyl. Fentanyl is often mixed into other drugs, including pills purchased off the street, cocaine, and meth. 

The overdose crisis impacts everyone in the United States. Whether you live in Baton Rouge or Los Angeles, you likely know someone who has been affected by this public health crisis. Overdose deaths affect us all regardless of race and ethnicity, age, gender, or location. The crisis is getting worse for everyone.

Still, death rates can vary and groups are affected differently. In the last few years, for example, overdose death rates have increased the most for Black men. Indigenous people also face some of the highest overdose death rates in the country.

For over 50 years, we have tried to arrest our way out of this problem through the War on Drugs. We have spent 

 for possessing drugs in the United States. In 2019 for instance, there were more arrests for possession of drugs than for any other reason and these arrests have significant racial disparities. Yet deaths continue to climb. Why? 

It’s because this approach makes it harder for people to get help and access services because they are afraid of being arrested. 

 This means people might not call 911 if they see someone overdose, or they may use drugs in ways that aren’t safe. We also know incarceration increases the risks of overdose. People are continuing to die. We need new approaches. 



OPC info: A new online resource on overdose prevention centres

Indonesia appears to have chosen an authoritarian-minded former general with a harrowing human rights record as its next president. Preliminary results of the February 14 election gave Prabowo Subianto a commanding lead over his rivals, with an outright majority of votes. Counting continues, but if official results confirm this in March, he will take office on October 20 as the eighth president of the word’s fourth most-populous country.

Prabowo quickly declared victory. The other two candidates have not conceded, but have asked the Indonesia’s legislature to investigate electoral irregularities or potential fraud.

Prabowo is the son-in-law of former President Suharto, whose dictatorial rule from 1968-1998 was characterized by systemic human rights abuses. As a senior military commander under Suharto, Prabowo was implicated in a number of atrocities. He has also made comments suggesting he would like to rule Indonesia as a dictator. His rise to power could have devastating consequences for the diverse country’s most marginalized people—including people who use drugs, even given a brutal current drug war.

Prabowo entered the picture during the most notorious events of recent Indonesian history. From 1975 to 1999, Suharto’s regime invaded and occupied the island of East Timor, perpetrating torture, extrajudicial killings, massacres and sexual crimes in what is widely considered genocide.

Prabowo took part in this genocide when commanding Indonesian forces. According to journalist Allan Nairn in the 

 who interviewed Prabowo, the future president participated in a 1983 massacre in Kraras, and personally tortured people. Nairn, himself a survivor of another massacre in East Timor, also relates how in 1998, Prabowo tried to suppress protests in the last days of Suharto’s rule, by abducting and “disappearing” 13 democratic activists, while also encouraging killings and other crimes against ethnic Chinese Indonesians.

Fears for drug users and many others after Indonesia’s presidential election

KUALA LUMPUR: A total of 5,791 people were arrested for various drug offences following a three-day nationwide special operation codenamed Ops Tapis Khas, says Comm Datuk Seri Mohd Kamarudin Md Din.

The Bukit Aman Narcotics Crime Investigation Department (NCID) director said suspected drug addicts accounted for the most arrests at 3,226, including four civil servants and two students.

"A student was among 534 drug pushers detained.

"We also detained 247 wanted persons as well as 1,784 individuals for other offences," he said in a statement on Thursday (Feb 1).

The special operation from Jan 29 to 31 also saw the seizure of 128.3kg of drugs worth RM610,071, he added.

"Among the drugs seized were 4.1kg of heroin, 4.02kg of syabu, 23.7kg of ecstasy powder and 8.7kg of ganja.

"The drugs seized could have been supplied to 287,530 addicts," he said.

More than RM900,000 of assets belonging to syndicates were also seized.

"Among them were vehicles worth RM876,500, jewellery worth RM18,600 and RM34,872 cash," Comm Mohd Kamarudin added.

He said the operation focused on Felda and Felcra areas, People's Housing Projects (PPR), jetties and suspected drug dens.

"Our objective was to track down and detain drug pushers and destroy drug dens.

"We also targeted hardcore addicts and those wanted for drug offences," he said.

Malaysia: Almost 6,000 detained nationwide in three-day anti-drug op

“The recent national election has seen a change in administration where the party of the prime minister had campaigned for much stricter drug policies,” says Gloria Lai, regional director of Asia for the International Drug Policy Consortium said. “The government has since announced that new laws regulating the cannabis market are expected to pass in mid-2024, which will aim to support only medical use of cannabis, with restrictions on the sale of certain cannabis products and related equipment.”

As Lai explained, this is highly likely to have an impact on the thousands of businesses that have made weed their income over the past 18 months. She has concerns that it will shut out small business owners and local farmers who have been able to make a livelihood from this. The market, she fears, will instead be left to elite or large organizations to profit.

In addition, potentially millions of Thai people, who may not be able to obtain a prescription, could either lose access or face harsh criminalization once again.

With economic factors no doubt a key factor in the initial decriminalization decision, the past year would have been the perfect opportunity for the government to study health and social outcomes of the policy, obtaining data to inform its next steps. However, Lai is unaware of any such studies being carried out.

The motives behind this re-regulation are as murky they were for the initial decriminalization, though Prime Minister Thavisin told 

 in September 2023 that drug problems had been “widespread lately.”

Inside Thailand’s U-Turn on cannabis decriminalization

Cutting-edge treatments don’t mean much if patients can’t access the

The logistical and ideological obstacles to treatment are, of course, tied to the kinds of people who bear the brunt of the epidemic — those who exist, in one way or another, on the margins of society. Addiction is one of a cluster of interconnected crises unfolding across the country: homelessness, poverty, mental illness, untreated trauma, an epidemic of loneliness. Opioid overdoses spiked in 2020 during the onslaught of Covid-19, in part because people were isolated from each other as well as from treatment. Racism plays a major role in limiting access to treatment, too, as does mass incarceration. There’s a shortage of addiction care providers, particularly in rural America, where the scarcity of basic primary care for all types of patients is increasingly dire.

Until recently, nearly 60 percent of rural people lived in counties without a single doctor authorized to prescribe buprenorphine. (That changed last year, after a law requiring providers to obtain a special waiver to dispense the medication was eliminated.) In Madison, Wisconsin, where Elizabeth Salisbury-Afshar practices addiction medicine, it’s not unusual for patients to travel one or two hours each way to her clinic “for an appointment that’s maybe 30 minutes long,” she says. “It’s a full-day endeavor. But folks don’t have another choice.”

In rural areas, Salisbury-Ashfar said, many of the primary care doctors who would be the first line of addiction treatment are too overwhelmed to provide it. “The providers that we have, we’re just trying not to burn them out, because we are short-staffed on every front,” she said. “We would love to have enough primary care docs to be doing this, but primary care docs can’t keep up with primary care.”

It’s not enough to have a breakthrough treatment like MAT if the people who need it can’t get it — or can’t stay in it. Among the “compounding mistakes and failures” that led to the current crisis is the fact that “our health care system is not set up well to accommodate people who are vulnerable or marginalized,” a group that includes most of those with addiction, said Joudrey, the Pittsburgh addiction doctor. “In the United States, we’ve become so focused on innovation and looking for technological solutions, we can end up neglecting the sociological and economic contributors of the overdose epidemic.”

US: We have treatments for opioid addiction that work. So why is the problem getting worse?

Human Rights Council
Intersessional panel on human rights challenges in addressing the world drug situation
5th February 2024


High Commissioner, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, colleagues,

It is a privilege to be part of this distinguished panel today. It has been over a decade since United Nations human rights bodies began breaking down the silos that separated drug policy and human rights. Through tireless efforts, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rightsand other human rights entities have had a truly transformational effect on global drug policy debates. They have shone a spotlight on the catastrophic impacts of the so-called ‘war on drugs’ which can no longer be denied or downplayed. And I feel confident that, sooner than later, this critical work will transform the global approach to drugs.

It is my honour to represent the International Drug Policy Consortium, a global network of over 190 NGOs from over 75 countries who come together to promote drug policies grounded in human rights and social justice.

For decades, the unrealistic goal of achieving a ‘drug-free society’ has driven drug policies based on prohibition, criminalisation and harsh punishment. The harms caused by these policies can only be repaired by making sure that civil society and community organisations play a central role in bringing forward evidence and lived experience to inform and shape drug policies. Member States and UN bodies have a responsibility to honestly listen to civil society and affected communities, including people who use drugs, as well as subsistence farmers, producers, people who have been incarcerated and all those who have been disproportionately impacted, and to reflect on how to reform a global system that has so clearly failed.

I begin on a sobering note. As we have heard today, the United Nations is in the midst of conducting the midterm review of the current global drug strategy, the 2019 Ministerial Declaration on Drugs.

In December, IDPC launched a Shadow Report to evaluate the progress made by the international community in addressing the 12 challenges identified in the 2019 Ministerial Declaration.

The conclusion is that little to no progress has been made, and the situation remains grave. Despite billions spent every year on drug law enforcement, the illegal drug market is thriving, and militarised responses are fueling violence and conflict. Drug-related deaths remain at historical highs – over half a million deaths per year, driven in many places by a deadly, toxic and unpredictable drug supply - while access to harm reduction, treatment, and other support services falls dramatically short of what is needed. Access to controlled medicines for pain relief and palliative care also remains low to non-existent in many parts of the world.

Our report also highlights that, in all regions, the human rights impacts of drug control have either worsened, or remained unchanged. These abuses are widespread and range from the ongoing use of the death penalty, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detention, mass incarceration, and cases of torture masquerading as ‘treatment’. There is also widespread discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age and socio-economic status.

In sum, we absolutely concur with the High Commissioner’s finding that the world drug situation has a major impact on the enjoyment of human rights. The United Nations system - both in Geneva and in Vienna - needs to recognise this reality, and initiate a process of institutional transformation that brings an end to the current paradigm.

The good news is that global drug policy is posed to change. For instance, this panel has been convened at the request of the historical 2023 Human Rights Council resolution on human rights in drug policy, which broke the taboo on harm reduction, and recognised the centrality of gender, Indigenous Peoples rights, and racial justice in drug policy debates. Such progress would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

The resolution also requested the preparation of the report on human rights challenges in drug policy presented by the High Commissioner today - a truly ground-breaking document that presents a clear blueprint for global reform. At its release, the report was welcomed by a joint statement by 134 NGOs, urging Member States to take on the High Commissioner’s recommendations. And the report is already being used by advocates for reforms all over the world.

Drug policy itself is shifting. By the end of 2023, 66 jurisdictions in 40 countries had decriminalised drug use and possession for personal use - a measure endorsed by the UN Common Position on drugs, and described by OHCHR as ‘‘ a powerful instrument to ensure that the rights of people who use drugs are protected’’.Over 300 million people live in legal systems that have regulated drugs like cannabis for recreational use, thus checking the power of organised crime and the pressure of the police on people who use drugs, and marginalised populations. Many other jurisdictions will follow soon. At the request of Bolivia, the WHO recently initiated a critical review of the status of the coca leaf under the drug control conventions - a measure that could end the global prohibition on the coca leaf, thus reinstating the rights of Indigenous Peoples that have used the plant for centuries.

The role of Geneva in fostering change and call for a special mandate

Human rights bodies have been indispensable in building this global moment for change, and their contributions are not ending anytime soon. To put only two examples, the UN special rapporteur on the right to health will release this year a much expected and much necessary report on harm reduction within the framework of the right to health.And the Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights continues to make progress towards the adoption of the General Comment on drug policy, which already started in 2022.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights must be praised, not only for the landmark 2023 report, but also for tirelessly supporting advocates and civil society seeking reform at both international and national level. Its presence in Vienna has been consequential, and it needs to be continued and strengthened through regular reporting and interventions at the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs.

In spite of this progress, the contribution of human rights mechanisms has been limited in scope, and inevitably depends on the personal interest of each mandate holder. If we want to ensure a genuine understanding of the human rights dimension of drug policies and to generate recommendations that will change the system, a further step needs to be taken.

In that regard, we urge the Human Rights Council to move towards the creation of a special procedure mandate on human rights and the world drug situation. A special mandate - either a special rapporteur or a working group - is necessary to provide evidence on the broad range of dimensions in which the drug phenomenon impàcts human rights, shed the light on the situation of affected communities, and most importantly to develop in a coherent and systematic way the international standards necessary to bring a new drug policy paradigm to reality.

A quick look at the themes of the over 50 special procedure mandates already existing today makes clear that the scale of the human rights impacts associated to the world drug situation - over half a million drug-related deaths per year, and 20% of the global prison population - warrants the creation of a mechanism. I hope that this is a recommendation that we can discuss today and in the coming days.

Finally, I wanted to reiterate that the High Commissioner’s report is a historical moment that builds on the encouraging momentum that we’ve seen over the past decade in firmly centring human rights in UN drug policy debates.Our hope is that true transformational change is coming that heralds a genuine paradigm shift away from repression and punishment towards drug policies that truly prioritise human rights, andthe health and welfare of humankind.

Transforming the UN drug policy paradigm: IDPC statement at Human Rights Council intersessional panel

The Drug Enforcement Administration has confirmed it is reviewing the classification of cannabis under the Controlled Substances Act, just days before the first public acknowledgement of its medical use by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Amid an “unprecedented” situation, speculation is rife around whether the U.S. is finally heading for a shift in policy at a federal level. But one thing experts do agree on is that any decision on cannabis policy is likely to be based on politics, rather than public health.

And yet, it will do little to address the harms caused by decades of this hard-line approach, according to Ann Fordham, executive director of the International Drug Policy Consortium.

“The devastating harms of U.S.-led global cannabis prohibition, such as the criminalization and incarceration of millions of people for cannabis-related activities, would remain entirely unaddressed by domestic rescheduling,” she says in an email.

“Furthermore, advocates for drug policy reform within the U.S. have called on President Biden to take steps to completely remove cannabis from the domestic schedules, noting that a move to Schedule III does not mean cannabis is decriminalized, as per his campaign promise, or lessen the harms of federal prohibition.”


DEA considers rescheduling cannabis: What this means for U.S. and global policy

Are you passionate about global drug policy and want to support reforms that promote social justice and human rights? IDPC is looking for a dynamic and motivated volunteer to support our communications and campaigning work!

The selected candidate will help us enhance the visibility of our work and our network's, service our website with the latest developments in global drug policy, and contribute to the organisation of the Support. Don't Punish campaign's 2024 Global Day of Action.

The duration of your volunteering opportunity, time commitment, and workload will depend entirely on your availability and capacity. That said, we suggest that volunteers consider a minimum period of three months, so as to ensure that they fully familiarise with our communications systems, platforms, and style; gain experience and skills in campaigning work; and that there is space for feedback and progress.

For more information about the position, have a look at the 

 and then please send a CV and 1-2 paragraphs outlining why this experience is of interest to you (to the attention of Juan Fernández Ochoa - jfernandez[@]idpc.net)

The deadline for applications is 23 February 2024. 

Please note that this volunteering experience will take place remotely.

IDPC recruits campaigns & communications volunteer

The nature of the trans experience for me, and many, is of being forcibly politicised from a young age. Our existence is debated by people with little understanding of it, and often with no consideration for our lived realities. This is especially relevant now, as we find ourselves in the midst of a culture war that none of us asked to be part of. I find it important to share my own experiences and those of my community.

There is a significant lack of research into our community’s use of drugs. My own experiences as a queer person have always impacted what, how, where and why I use drugs. When I first came out as a transgender woman and made my first, formative steps into the world, drug-using spaces and people who use drugs were among the first to accept me as a woman.

My initial experiences of using drugs were that of immense joy, not just because of the substances, but also because I was so welcomed and loved, something I rarely experienced before. This experience also gave me the confidence to be unapologetic about my existence and live life as I am now.

The intersections of my experience as a trans woman who uses drugs also had negatives. The joy and acceptance are impacted by intensely traumatising elements of the trans experience which reverberate across my life. Harassment and assault have led me to change the way I use drugs, using them with far less regard for my own wellbeing, and instead to treat the intense dysphoria I have felt for many years.

Gender dysphoria is something with a very effective and direct, if often inaccessible, treatment. The denial of access to this treatment (which has a 

) led me to self-medicate with drugs to cut through the intense fog of dysphoria from being forced to live in a body I felt a disconnect from and active hatred towards. Since accessing gender affirming healthcare, my drug use has changed drastically: I no longer need to self-medicate. I’ve developed a sudden connection with myself, my body, and a renewed sense of care for my own wellbeing. I can now use for enrichment and joy, maximising benefits while minimising harms.

The communities of trans people and people who use drugs are very similar. They provide for each other in ways that state structures either refuse to or simply cannot. We share controlled substances with one another, be they illicit drugs or hormone replacement treatment, disseminating injection advice and safe equipment. Through all of the joy and the devastation, including the bereavement – a feature of both communities – the community is always there for one another. This is an immensely important facet of our existence.

How gender affirming care Is harm reduction

aulo picks up a lighter from the table in front of him, holds it beneath the foil-encased bowl of his thin metal pipe for a few seconds, and then inhales. For a brief moment, he falls silent, head slumped forward. Then the 47-year-old is back to his usual chatty self, conversing with the seven other drug addicts who, like him, are making the most of their 30-minute slot at Porto’s new “shoot-up” centre. “It beats getting stoned on the street, where, you know, anyone can come along, kids or whatever,” he says. “Here, we can just do our thing and no one hassles us.”

Lack of interference is not the only reason that Paulo and 400 or so other regulars visit the centre. The government-funded service also provides them with clean needles, strips of aluminium foil, and other materials to facilitate their drug-taking and prevent infections.

The overarching ethos of the centre revolves around harm prevention. A list of rules by the entrance contains no strict injunctions; it simply invites users to be courteous and preferably not leave litter on the floor. Even the free sachets of citric acid, which addicts use to dissolve heroin or crack cocaine for injection, come with a health warning on the packaging: “Can damage the veins if used in excess.”

Housed in a nondescript portable cabin in Pasteleira, a low-income neighbourhood of Porto, the centre, which opened in August 2022, serves as a highly visible flagship of Portugal’s long-standing policy of drug decriminalisation. The scene is far from salubrious. Set beside the road on a patch of scrub, the temporary facility faces out to featureless blocks of social housing. Behind is a small encampment of makeshift tents – home to some of the centre’s users, 75% of whom are unhoused. Just up the hill, smartly dressed pupils file through the gates of the elite Lycée Français.

Yet the centre offers a rare ray of hope in the scourge of drug addiction, locally and perhaps globally. First, its target users are alive and, if not exactly well, then at least using safely. Three decades ago, it was a different story. Heroin addiction in Portugal affected an estimated one in every 100 adults, and death by overdose or drug-related disease was commonplace.

‘It beats getting stoned on the street’: how Portugal decriminalised drugs – as seen from the safer consumption site

Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema has called for the regulation of the sale and use of cocaine to undermine the economics of criminal enterprises that she said are racking up “billions” in profit.

The mayor, who has also sought to curtail 

 vacationers from visiting the Dutch capital city, has organized a public debate on the matter on Jan. 26 in Amsterdam.

“Let us conclude that hundreds of years of discouragement and repression have achieved very little,” Halsema said in an interview with Dutch newspaper Het Financieele Dagblad. “Apparently people have a need for stimulants. There is a market for that.”

News