To determine the association between the presence of state medical cannabis laws and opioid analgesic overdose mortality.

 A time-series analysis was conducted of medical cannabis laws and state-level death certificate data in the United States from 1999 to 2010; all 50 states were included.

Medical cannabis laws areassociated with significantly lower state-level opioid overdose mortality rates. Further investigation is required to determine how medical cannabis laws may interact with policies aimed at preventing opioid analgesic overdose.

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

Medical cannabis laws and opioid analgesic overdose mortality in the United States, 1999-2010

这个报告强调了关于国际调度控制受管制药物的失败，并提出确保以健康和证据为基础的体系的重要建议。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

随时掌握与药物政策发展相关的最新信息。

While often viewed as an obscure technical issue, the problem of scheduling lies at the core of the functioning of the international drug control system.

Scheduling – the classification of a substance within a graded system of controls and restrictions, or 'schedules' – must take place in order for a substance to be included in the international control framework, and determines the type and intensity of controls to be applied.

The issue has become a contemporary flashpoint for strains and tensions surrounding the general orientation of the present regime of drug control and the international Conventions which reside at its heart.

The approaching United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on 'the world drug problem' of 2016 may provide an opportunity for the re-examination of current theory and practice in relation to scheduling, and to the elaboration of improved arrangements.6 Amongst the most prominent of present stresses are disputes surrounding the proper role of UN drug control bodies in the scheduling process – especially those of the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) and the WHO. However, we will suggest that the part played by the CND and states parties is also fraught with difficulties.

Keep up-to-date with drug policy developments by subscribing to the

国际药物管制系统的安排

这些简报提供了传统的以减少毒品消费市场的供给或需求为手段的“毒品战争”是无效的证据，并提供政策指导和对新药的法律策略的最佳实践范例。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

The Modernising Drug Law Enforcement project aims to offer theoretical material and examples of new approaches to drug law enforcement, in order to inform the debate amongst law enforcement leaders on future strategies.

This summary is based on six briefing papers that were published in 2013 as part of the project. These briefing papers offer an analysis of the policies and practices in drug law enforcement that have so far been implemented to tackle drug production, demand, trafficking and criminality – highlighting the benefits and drawbacks that such strategies have had around the world. These briefings offer evidence of the ineffectiveness of the traditional “war on drugs” approach to reduce the supply or demand for drugs in consumer markets, and provide policy guidance and examples of best practice on new drug law strategies.

The briefing series focuses on the following key themes:

The role of the police to support harm reduction policies and practices towards people who use drugs

Examples of focused deterrence and selective targeting strategies to combat drug trafficking and organised crime

The application of harm reduction principles to the policing of retail drug markets

The practical policing implications of regulated cannabis markets

Best practices in the area of financial investigation strategies and drug law enforcement

The role of foreign aid in drug law enforcement strategies.

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

现代化禁毒执法出版系列汇总

这个报告提供了今年讨论的内容摘要并试图提供对于关键互连性的讨论的一些分析，争论以及新兴关心的问题和在麻醉药品委员会上反复出现的问题。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

This year’s 57th Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) took place between 13th and 21st March, and included a High-Level Segment (HLS) like that featured at the 2009 Commission, and was intended as a mid-term review of progress made towards the realisation of the Political Declaration and Plan Action agreed in 2009, and to map the path to the 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on the world drug problem. The HLS, following lengthy and often heated discussions, produced a Joint Ministerial Statement (JMS). This statement proved difficult to achieve, with disputes over the use of the death penalty for drugs offences forming the heart of wide-ranging philosophical and political differences. The passages intended to deal with the forthcoming UNGASS were abandoned and included instead in the work of the regular CND, which was left to come up with a resolution accommodating the conflicting positions.

Overall, the outcomes of this year’s events were mixed, reflecting the increasingly complex, and often paradoxical, state of international drug control. It was certainly positive that the important relationship between health, human rights and drug policy was the focus of genuine discussion and that civil society engagement remained largely constructive. Moreover, in terms of open calls for reform of the existing treaty architecture, 2014 broke new ground. On the flip side, however, despite apparent realignment of the treaty system towards the ‘health and welfare of mankind’ the WHO remains marginalised. Moreover, countering increasing calls for reform, many states are set to steadfastly defend the status quo and maintain the separation of human rights and drug policy; a point demonstrated by different country positions on the death penalty in the JMS. As this highlighted, it is clear that the mythical ‘Vienna Consensus’ on drug policy is now irreparably shattered. As we approach the 2016 UNGASS, what is less clear is how the international community will deal with increasing policy pluralism.

This report aims to provide a summary of what was discussed at the HLS and the CND’s 57th session, including at various side events, and attempts to provide some analysis of the key interconnected discussions, debates, emerging issues of concern and recurring themes with which observers of past CNDs will be familiar.

The report is available below in English, with its executive summary also available in Spanish.

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2013 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2012 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2011 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2010 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2009 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2008 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

IDPC report of proceedings: The 2007 Commission on Narcotic Drugs

2014年麻醉药品委员会及其高级别会议：会议记录报告

围绕着2015年后的发展议程和2016年联合国大会关于药物的特别会议的讨论将会影响到携带艾滋病毒的毒品注射使用者的未来。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

By Ann Fordham (IDPC) and Khalid Tinasti (Global Commission on Drug Policy)

Two important global policy processes are underway that will shape the future of the HIV response for people who inject drugs (PWID).

The first is the debate around the post-2015 development agenda that is currently in play at United Nations in New York, where member states, HIV advocates, communities, scientists, policymakers, healthcare providers and donors are discussing a specific target towards ending the AIDS epidemic. The current MDG target, to reduce new HIV infections among PWID by 50% by 2015, has sadly not been achieved. A new target should be included that focuses on the decline of HIV incidence, the reduction of stigma against key-affected populations, improved access to antiretroviral treatment and the end of AIDS-related deaths.

The second process, for which momentum is building among drug policy advocates, networks of people who use drugs (PWUD), policymakers, scientists, academics and UN agencies, is the preparation for the UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on the “World Drug Problem” to be held in 2016. These two processes, almost happening in parallel, are complementary. The post-2015 development goal on health will determine the global HIV response architecture for the coming decades, while the UNGASS on drugs will define the global policy environment in which the HIV response for PWID will operate.

Both processes require vigilant and sustained advocacy from civil society and community organizations working in the field of HIV and drug use.

2016年联合国大会关于药物的特别会议，在2015年之后时期，第一个对艾滋病倡导者的挑战

该报告呼吁国际捐助者，各国政府和联合国机构采取具体行动来解决资金危机。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

Funding for HIV-related harm reduction programmes globally is in crisis. There can be no ‘AIDS free generation’ without targeted efforts with and for people who inject drugs. Yet funding for harm reduction falls dangerously short of estimated need. While this has been the case for some time, the situation looks set to deteriorate with changing donor policies and national government neglect.

This failure to invest will bring an exponential rise in HIV transmission which in turn will cause additional costs to government health sectors.

This report investigates international donor commitments, both multilateral and bilateral, as well as national investments in harm reduction. It calls on international donors, national governments and UN agencies to take concrete actions to address the funding crisis.

Watch this video presenting the main findings of the report at the International AIDS Conference, July 2014:

Read this infographic for key data on harm reduction across the world:

用来减少伤害的资金出现危机

The illicit manufacture of methamphetamine has traditionally been concentrated in North America (primarily in Mexico and the United States) and East and South-East Asia (China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand), close to the major consumer markets. The latest UNODC's Global SMART Update study, however, shows that it has recently spread to other countries such as Guatemala, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa.

The Update also reveals that some countries in Africa and the Middle East have recently emerged as important regions for methamphetamine supply, and that methamphetamine manufacture is also spreading across Europe, though at low levels.

New trends and regional differences in the manufacturing of methamphetamine 

科罗拉多州的让大麻合法化的举动是历史性的，做了一些其他国家没有做过的事：合法化大麻的零售。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

In November 2012, Colorado voters decided to experiment with marijuana. Formally, they approved Amendment 64, modifying the state constitution. This move was historic and did something which, to that point, no other state or modern foreign government had ever done: legalize retail (recreational) marijuana.

As part of the amendment, the state was required to construct legal, regulatory, and tax frameworks that would allow businesses to cultivate, process, and sell marijuana not simply to medical patients—as had been happening in Colorado for over a decade—but to anyone 21 and older. This change came despite existing federal prohibition of marijuana and opposition from the governor, state attorney general, many mayors, and the law enforcement community.

At its heart, this report is about good government and takes no position on whether the legalization of retail marijuana was the correct decision. Instead, it takes for granted that Amendment 64 and its progeny are the law and should be implemented successfully, per voters’ wishes. The report examines what the state has done well and what it has not. It delves into why, and how, regulatory and administrative changes were made. Finally, it offers an evaluation of how effective the implementation has been.

科罗拉多州首次展示大麻的合法化成功：国家实施大麻合法化的报告

由于2014年2月提交的公民请愿书的敦促，巴西参议院和众议院最近展开了关于大麻管理问题的讨论。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

The prohibitionist model for combatting drugs has run its course in Brazil, as shown by the violence associated with the drug traffic, illegal trade of adulterated substances, lost fiscal revenues, waste of public resources, diversion of attention from society’s real problems (in favor of a false solution), and lack of clinical studies on the efficacy and effectiveness of currently banned medicinal plants. However, the Brazilian Legislative Branch appears to be aware of the population’s evolving opinions on the issue. The National Senate and Chamber of Deputies recently launched a discussion on the regulation of marijuana in Brazil, urged by a citizens’ petition submitted in February 2014.

The website of the National Senate provides a mechanism for citizens’ participation called the e-Citizenship Portal, established by Ruling no. 3/2011 of the Senate Steering Board. Legislative Ideas is the link in this portal that offers citizens the possibility of petitioning for bills to create new laws, amend existing ones, or improve the National Constitution. The ideas are analyzed according to the portal’s terms of usage, verifying the wording’s consistency and coherence, absence of inappropriate, disparaging, or offensive terms, and non-violation of inalterable Constitutional provisions.

巴西参议院关于大麻的规定：一个公共卫生问题

这个研究暗示单一管理型的氯胺酮不论是对单极性还是双极性的抑郁症都能进行快速而有效的治疗。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

Interest has been growing in ketamine as a treatment of depression (Aan Het Rot, et al 2012; Diamond et al., 2014) and there is some genuine excitement among some of the elvish bloggers.

Mainly used in veterinary surgery, ketamine has been discovered to rapidly improve even the most severe cases of unipolar and bipolar depression. However, as yet there are still many questions left unanswered before ketamine can become a licensed treatment alternative.

For one, there needs to be more clarity about the safety and effectiveness of the drug before an informed weighing of pros and cons is feasible. In addition, in order to stay on top of the immense interest ketamine has spurred, it is essential to have an updated overview of all studies out there. To this end McGirr et al have provided the most recent systematic review of methodologically sound studies (McGirr et al, 2014).

氯胺酮抑郁症：新的回顾凸显了对RCT的需要

审前羁押在全球的过度使用是一种普遍的，深深的伤害，但是它却经常被忽视。 英文版本拥有更多信息，请阅读下文。

The arbitrary and excessive use of pretrial detention around the world is a massive form of human rights abuse that affects in excess of 14 million people a year. The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty is well established. Yet this right is violated widely and often—in the developed and developing world alike—and the violation goes largely unnoticed. Few rights are so broadly accepted in theory, but so commonly abused in practice. It is fair to say that the global overuse of pretrial detention is one of the most overlooked human rights crises of our time.

Given that the presumption of innocence is universal, detaining arrestees pending trial should be rare. However, many jurisdictions around the world violate the principle that pretrial detention should be used sparingly, as a last resort. Instead, it has become the default setting of criminal justice systems.

One out of three people behind bars has not been found guilty of a crime. In some parts of the globe, pretrial detainees outnumber convicted prisoners. At this moment, 3.3 million people are in pretrial detention worldwide. And that is a conservative estimate, because official data ignore the tens of thousands of people detained in police stations. Cutting the number of pretrial detainees could resolve prison overcrowding, limit the spread of disease, reduce poverty, and spur development.

有罪推定：审前羁押的全球过度使用

Protection of the human rights of People who Use Drugs (PUD) is important, not only because the rights of these people must be respected, protected and fulfilled, but also because it is an essential precondition to improve their health (Jürgens et al., 2010). Therefore it is important that harm reduction organisations advocate for the human rights of PUD (Beyrer et al., 2010). Organisations working on harm reduction, however, struggle in advocating for human rights, which is a major problem, according to experts such as Friedman et al. (2012). Studies and guidelines are written about how to advocate for the human rights of people who use drugs (Kaplan et al., 2009). However, it is unclear to what extent small organisations succeed to implement these guidelines in advocating practices and make use of a human rights framework. Therefore this study examines how and to what extent advocacy for human rights of People who Use Drugs is currently used and how human rights advocacy can further improve the effectiveness of harm reduction strategies and services.

Qualitative explorative methods were used, in addition a survey. Fourteen semi‐structured interviews were done Interviews where done with respondents from harm reduction organisations and national advocacy organisations based in eight countries: Ukraine, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Georgie, Nepal, Indonesia and Kenya. These interviews where complemented with three interviews with experts from international advocacy organisations in the field of drug use. The survey was handed out during a meeting including representatives of organisations based in the eight countries: sixteen surveys where obtained. The interviews where recorded and transcribed afterwards. The transcripts were analysed by using coding techniques in three different steps; open coding, axial coding and selective coding. The results of the analysis where when possible compared with the results of the survey.

The results of this research show that all organisations included in the research do advocate for the human rights of PUD. However, some organisations are not aware of practising advocacy and most organisations do not plan advocacy activities as being advocacy activities. Organisations reckon face to face communication and organising workshops as the most effective ways of bringing the advocacy message. Most organisations see (social) media as important tools as well, but do not know how to make use of these tools properly. In addition, important differences were found between organisations. For example, the expertise level of advocacy differs between organisations. The main difference in expertise was found in the application of human rights theory, which is seen as an important tool for advocacy according to international advocacy experts. Most organisations have little knowledge of human rights. Next to this, most organisations have difficulties in documenting human rights violations.

Publications