In 2025, the European Union will adopt a new EU Drug Strategy that will define the political direction and priorities for the period 2026–2030.

While the current strategy (2021–2025) recognises the pillars of drug supply reduction, demand reduction, and harm reduction, its implementation has remained disproportionately focused on law enforcement and punitive measures.

This imbalance has not led to improved public safety—instead, it has worsened health outcomes, increased stigma, and deepened the marginalisation of people who use drugs.

Access to essential health and harm reduction services continues to be limited, particularly for vulnerable and underserved communities.

As the next EU Drug Strategy is being shaped, we face a critical opportunity to advocate for a more balanced, health-centred, and human rights-based approach to drug policy.

To seize this momentum, leading European drug policy networks — including C-EHRN, EHRA, IDPC, and HFHR — have launched the European Drug Policy Campaign.

This initiative is supported by the European Drug Policy Alliance, a coalition of civil society and harm reduction experts working to influence the content and implementation of the new strategy.

The campaign will be presented during a webinar on 26 June, the Support, Don't Punish Global Day of Action, bringing together policymakers, civil society representatives, and European drug policy experts to foster dialogue and build momentum for drug policy reform in the EU.

This webinar will feature diverse perspectives from key stakeholders and serve as a platform to mobilise support for a more just, inclusive, and effective EU Drug Strategy.

EU drug policy campaign 2025: A call to invest in a European health-based drug policy-

Drug seizures were perceived by officers as a means to increase safety for PWUD.

Public health recognized an increased risk of overdose for PWUD following seizures.

Public health is concerned about building and maintaining the trust of PWUD.

PWUD understood drug seizures to increase drug market instability.

PWUD saw seizures as removing drug culture knowledge and rupturing social networks

A growing number of studies suggest that police efforts to disrupt illicit drug markets through the removal of illicit drugs can result in unintended harms to people who use drugs by increasing overdose risks. However, little is understood about the perceptions, expectations, or experiences of those who implement, experience, and/or are impacted by these seizure events.

We conducted semi-structured interviews (N = 54) with police, public health and local nonprofit professionals engaged in overdose prevention efforts, and people who use drugs (PWUD) in Indianapolis, Indiana—a city where drug seizures have been associated with excess overdose—to examine how each of these groups perceive these events. We use a journey mapping framework to analyze expectations for each of these personas around the shared scenario of drug seizures.

Law enforcement drug seizures are routine and are perceived by police as interconnected, longitudinal attempts to dismantle drug supply networks. Public health and local nonprofit professionals described potential harms stemming from drug seizures but reported lacking the shared information and inter-agency collaboration necessary to provide a meaningful response. PWUD reported negative health consequences and increased risk of overdose following drug seizure events. PWUD use multiple strategies to reduce perceived harms from drug seizures.

Seizing drugs whenever, wherever, or with whomever they are found has become an accepted policing practice in the United States, ostensibly to reduce risk of drug-related harms. This study offers a new perspective to the growing evidence that this standard practice may result in a myriad of negative public health outcomes for the community. Research, such as this, that engages the lived experiences and perceptions of directly impacted people, is essential for understanding and mitigating these harms. Those most impacted by drug seizures – PWUD – should be at the center of developing, implementing, and evaluating public health and harm reduction efforts to reduce the harms associated with drug seizures.

Journey mapping drug seizures among police, public health and local nonprofit professionals, and community members who use drugs

Delivered at the 5th Brandenburg Forum in Geneva : “Expanding the Conversation on the Human Rights Implications of Drug Policy”

Excellencies,
Distinguished participants,
Colleagues,

It can stigmatize and isolate people, or it can help heal connections with others.

More and more, we see that it’s human connection and evidence-based approaches – not punishment – that transform and uplift the lives of people affected by drug use disorders.

Those same policies reinforce social bonds and create healthier, more resilient communities and societies.

I welcome the growing acknowledgement by States that discussions on drug policy must take into account States’ human rights obligations.

This forum is an important part of our efforts to exchange views and best practices, and demonstrate how human rights offer us a path towards a more humane and effective approach to drugs.

Distinguished participants, dear friends,

That new path is desperately needed, because the so-called war on drugs has failed. It has neither reduced drug use, nor the illicit drug trade, nor the production and consumption of a growing range and quantity of illicit substances.

Some 292 million people around the world used narcotic drugs in 2022 – the latest year for which we have figures. That represents a 20 per cent increase over a decade.

New, increasingly potent drugs are emerging in several high-income countries, resulting in an increase in overdose deaths.

Not only has the war on drugs failed; the militarization of drug control continues to lead to many unnecessary deaths, and to the excessive and disproportionate imprisonment of certain groups, including vulnerable people.

Some of those deaths are state-sponsored killings. Thirty-four countries still retain the death penalty for drug offenses, killing hundreds of people every year. More than 40 percent of state executions in 2023 were for offences related to drug offences. This proportion has also risen sharply over the past two years.

Punitive and militarized drug policies are also linked with corruption and illicit financial flows. The profits from drug trafficking may be used to finance violence, terrorism, and armed conflict.

Economies based on illicit drugs are also having a large and growing impact on our climate and environment, from water stress to deforestation and the dumping of toxic waste.

This forum’s focus on the negative impact of drug policy on economic, social and cultural rights is a very important one.

It is increasingly clear and documented that the war on drugs is harming public health, and people who use drugs are not getting the help they need. Though an estimated 64 million people worldwide suffer from drug use disorders, only one in 11 is in treatment.

Women are particularly affected. Only one in 18 women with drug use disorders is in treatment, compared to one in seven men.

Fear of arrest and widespread stigma have deterred people from seeking drug treatment, healthcare and support, including medical care for HIV/AIDS.

Homelessness is both a cause and consequence of drug use, and contributes to poor health among people who use drugs. Programmes such as Housing First that prioritise stable housing as the basis for recovery have proven their value in a number of countries. I encourage States to share their experiences and explore how such initiatives can be established and expanded.

Poorly designed drug policy also harms other human rights. In some countries, evidence of drug use or a criminal record for drug-related crimes can disqualify people from social benefits or restrict access to education or employment.

Blunt, punitive approaches have disproportionately affected some of the most marginalized communities, and perpetuated cycles of exclusion.

For example, States often overpolice Indigenous Peoples who cultivate drug crops to make a living.

The illicit drug economy also undermines the rights of people who are vulnerable to exploitation, including farmers, women, minorities, people of African descent and Indigenous Peoples. As States make efforts to curb the illicit drug trade, they must invest in viable and sustainable economic alternatives, in consultation with those affected. I welcome the recent resolution on alternative development by the Commission on Narcotic Drugs which supports this approach.

Excellencies,
Distinguished participants,

Looking forward, we must continue pursuing humane drug policies that advance all human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights.

This requires concerted action by all – primarily by States, but also civil society, and the United Nations system, among many others.

First, I encourage all States to integrate the International Guidelines on Human Rights and Drug Policy into their national laws and policies, including with regard to housing, employment, harm reduction and protecting marginalised communities.

I welcome the decision by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to prepare a new General Comment on States’ legal obligations around drug policy. This should provide important additional guidance.

Second, harm reduction measures, such as needle exchange programmes, safe consumption sites, and access to information and healthcare, are crucial. States need to tackle shame and stigma around treatment for drug use disorders, and remove legal and policy barriers to access these services. We must show that they save and improve lives, for people, communities and societies at large.

Third, decriminalising drug use – accompanied by harm reduction measures and support for social reintegration - is another key element. Criminalizing people with a drug use disorder deters them from seeking treatment and creates further stigma and isolation.

Fourth, there is an urgent need to abolish the death penalty for drug-related offences. Executing people for these offences does not comply with international human rights law, which specifies that the death penalty can only be imposed for the most serious crimes involving intentional killing. The United Nations, as a matter of policy, opposes the death penalty in all circumstances.

Fifth, responsible regulation should aim to take control of illegal drug markets, eliminate profits from illegal trafficking, criminality and violence, and protect the environment.

Sixth, it is essential to include those most affected by drug use disorders in all decisions, policies and laws. The Scottish Charter of Rights for People Affected by Substance Abuse is an example of a policy developed through a multistakeholder process, reflecting the unique needs of different groups, including people who use drugs. I hope it can serve as inspiration to other countries around the world.

My Office and I personally will continue to do everything in our power to ensure coherence across the United Nations system on this issue, which affects hundreds of millions of people around the world.

Together, with your support, we must - and will - keep human rights at the centre of global drug policy, as we work for dignity, justice and equality for all.

'We must continue pursuing humane drug policies that advance all human rights' - UN Human Rights Chief

Full-day event (exact schedule to be confirmed)


 Free for all NNEF members (Not a member yet? No problem! Membership is free)

This event is all about open discussion, learning, and collaboration, bringing together people passionate about harm reduction and improving services. Whether you’ve been involved for years or are new to the field, this is your chance to hear from expert speakers, share experiences, and shape the future of needle exchange services in the UK.

Speaker information coming soon! Stay tuned for updates on our fantastic lineup of speakers and sessions.

We can’t wait to see you there—register now to secure your place!

National Needle Exchange Forum (NNEF)

International drug policy is shifting—thanks in no small part to the tireless efforts of the harm reduction movement. This new primer in the

 series unpacks a major advocacy win: the first CND resolution on overdose prevention in over a decade, which recognises key harm reduction measures after years of campaigning and resistance. The publication explains what was agreed, why it matters, and how you can use it to demand stronger, evidence-based responses in your country.

Translating UN commitments into action - An advocacy primer on CND resolution 67/4

In 2025, the European Union will adopt a new EU Drug Strategy that will define priorities for 2026–2030. As this critical moment approaches, we call for a shift towards a balanced, health-focused, and human rights-based approach to drug policy.

To support this effort, we are launching the 

, coordinated by C-EHRN in collaboration with the 

Eurasian Harm Reduction Association (EHRA)

International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC)

Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (HFHR)

. The campaign is accompanied by the publication of a new 

Support Don’t Punish Global Day of Action

 outlines urgent recommendations for the EU and Member States, including:

Ensuring a balanced EU Drug Strategy 2026–2030

Establishing dedicated EU-level funding for harm reduction

Prioritising decriminalisation and responsible regulation

This toolkit supports civil society and national stakeholders to engage with policymakers at both the EU and national levels. It includes:

A Canva template for translating the policy paper

Ready-to-use social media content and visuals

Customisable email templates for outreach

Advocacy tips and ideas for national action

We will present the campaign’s goals and share ways civil society organisations and allies can get involved.

EU drug policy campaign 2025: A call to invest in a european health-based drug policy

Thirty-five years since the first International Harm Reduction Conference in Liverpool, United Kingdom, in April 2025 we as a global collective of front-line health workers, academics, advocates, policy-makers, politicians, UN representatives, people who use drugs, sex workers and people working in the criminal legal justice system, gathered in Bogota, Colombia to build momentum towards a more just, fair and rights-based drug policy architecture that protects lives and restores dignity for all. Over four days, we platformed thought leaders, amplified advocacy for change and shone a light on local innovations in harm reduction.

This year’s conference theme ‘Sowing Change to Harvest Justice’ draws inspiration from Colombia’s efforts to reform drug policy and from the region’s shift towards addressing drug-related issues through public health, social justice, and environmental sustainability. HR25 spotlighted the ways in which prohibitionist drug policies drive and are derived from racism, patriarchy and colonial control, whilst elevating Global South leadership and the decolonization of drug policy.

Colombia’s courage in speaking out against a drug policy system that engenders violence and harm has created a fracture in the once seemingly intractable prohibitionist agenda. This, along with its efforts coordinating a 

coalition of member states and civil society organizations that are pushing for a review of the international drug control regime

, has created the conditions for change. On 14th March 2025, Colombia and its allies secured the adoption of an unprecedented resolution at the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), initiating the first ever independent external review of the international drug control system. The Independent Expert Panel is tasked with developing a set of recommendations to enhance treaty implementation and international obligations of relevance for drug policy. 

Delegates of HR25, and as part of a global community of harm reduction and drug policy reform advocates and practitioners and of communities most impacted by punitive drug policies:

We recognize this independent review as an historic opportunity to critically assess the impact of current drug policies, that have included devastation and destruction, on people, communities and ecology. Such an opportunity cannot be wasted or left to wither away.

The strong calls from the international community to actively listen to the Colombian experience with the war on drugs, need to be matched with clear commitments and funding for reform opportunities. We request that the Colombian government, in reaffirming its leadership, provide funding for the setup, establishment, and operation of the Independent Expert Panel. We strongly urge other member states to co-sponsor the Panel, which must be fully funded to succeed in its mandate.

We stress the importance of ensuring that the Independent Expert Panel is diverse, transparent, interdisciplinary and technically robust, and that it centres the voices and experiences of the most affected communities, serving as a turning point for global drug policy transformation.

We affirm our commitment, as communities, civil society, academics and researchers, to work productively with the Panel, as well as with member states and other relevant actors, to ensure that the review process is meaningful, transparent, substantive and powerful.

We reaffirm our commitment to fight for a rights- and evidence-based drug policy framework that is fair, equitable and just; for a system that empowers people whose lives include drugs and facilitates innovative harm reduction approaches that are people-centered, respect autonomy, are fit-for-purpose and free from morally driven prejudice and discrimination.

On behalf of HR25, we thank Colombia for its unwavering courage, its commitment to drug policy reform, and for hosting HR25. Let HR25 be a pivotal chapter where words are translated into action, and where we, all together, make the most of this historical, once in a lifetime opportunity to change the course of drug policy: from prohibition to liberation, from enacting harm to restoring justice, from generating destruction to empowerment and community-building.

The Harm Reduction International Conference has come to an end: what happens next?

Harm reduction has long been a cornerstone of European public health, minimising drug use risks like overdose deaths or preventing the spread of infectious diseases. These interventions have been instrumental in improving the health and wellbeing of people who use drugs (PWUD).

However, in the last few years, the financial sustainability of many harm reduction initiatives has been under serious threat. A growing funding crisis, driven by shifting political priorities and a 

 to drug policy within the European Union (EU), is threatening to dismantle decades of progress. 

This shifting landscape in harm reduction funding has hit at a critical time. Europe is facing an increasingly complex drug landscape, with hundreds of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) and synthetic opioids 

Speaking to TalkingDrugs, Alexei Lakhov, Executive Director of the 

European Network for People Who Use Drugs (EuroNPUD)

 highlighted that “this complexity often increases the demand for specialised harm reduction services”, further straining service providers.

European harm reduction has historically been financed through national health funds, international aid and EU-wide grants. Yet, a 

 from Harm Reduction International (HRI) into harm reduction funding has underscored how national and international donors have scaled back many of their financial commitments to harm reduction. European countries, particularly those classified as high or upper-middle income, are 

 for key international funding sources such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS. While understandable, this shift has left critical harm reduction programmes struggling with severe budget shortfalls.

Political shifts toward right-leaning governments across Europe have further amplified this crisis, as policymakers shift their focus to drug-related security concerns and supply side interventions over harm reduction. While the 

 continues to support harm reduction, national concerns around drug-related insecurity have prioritised law enforcement-based approaches, leaving many harm reduction services with reduced resources.

pioneer of European harm reduction since the 1970s

, is one of the many countries facing funding cuts that threaten its services’ stability. For over 35 years, 

 has played a key role in conducting research on harm reduction and providing updated information on drug trends and alerts to PWUD across the Netherlands through their 

. Now, however, they are facing serious cuts.

European harm reduction is facing a funding crisis

Between 24 February and 4 April 2025, the Human Rights Council held its 58th session. This briefing highlights key debates, decisions, and documents in which drug control and its impact on human rights were analysed and addressed.



BIENNIAL HIGH-LEVEL PANEL ON DEATH PENALTY


This high-level panel analysed the contribution of the judiciary to the advancement of human rights and the question of the death penalty. Providing examples of good practices, the panel explored how the judiciary has contributed to reducing the application of the death penalty and discussed how the Council and its mechanisms can support states to abide by their international human rights obligations regarding the death penalty.

There was consensus among the speakers about the incompatibility of the death penalty with human dignity and rights and about the key role that the judiciary can play in limiting the use of the death penalty as a key step towards abolition. In his opening remarks, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, expressed his concern over the surge in executions over the years, largely driven by drug offences, and urged states that have yet to adopt a moratorium on capital punishment to take decisive steps toward its full abolition. Türk also encouraged members of the judiciary to “redouble their efforts towards abolition of the death penalty in practice, by using their discretion to impose alternative sentences.”

Panellist Ramkarpal Singh (member of parliament and former Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department of Malaysia) provided insights into the 2023 legal reform that resorted to judicial discretion in death penalty cases, and the resentencing of people on death row (most of whom were convicted for drug offences). After the reviewing process, 860 out of 936 resentencing applications were approved, including all drug-related cases, with death sentences replaced by imprisonment and whipping.

The panel discussion was followed by an interactive dialogue. The majority of member states recognised the crucial role of the judiciary in upholding human rights and limiting the use of capital punishment. Delegations from Australia, Belgium (on behalf of the Death Penalty Core group), European Union, Iceland (on behalf of Nordic Baltic countries), Sierra Leone, among others, expressed their concern for the use of the death penalty in cases that do not meet the legal threshold of most serious crimes; including drug crimes. Malaysia reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring the implementation of safeguards in capital cases in line with human rights obligations.

Civil society made valuable contributions, including HRI, which emphasised that drug offences are driving executions globally and that drug policy reform is instrumental to achieving total abolition of the death penalty. HRI expressed concern over drug control laws restricting judicial discretion by prescribing mandatory death sentences or legal presumptions; and called for a coordinated international response to halt executions, promote moratoria on capital punishment for drug offenses, and protect civil society’s role in the reform.


58th Human Rights Council: Drug policy highlights

The present report follows the structure adopted by the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment at its fifty-fourth sessiona and contains a description of the work that the Subcommittee undertook in 2024.

Following a brief introduction, the Subcommittee provides an update on matters relating to the system of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, including the number of States Parties, the Subcommittee’s sessions and membership and the operation of the Special Fund established by the Optional Protocol (sect. II).

The Subcommittee also provides substantive information concerning its visits, visit reports and follow-up dialogues (sect. III), national preventive mechanisms (sect. IV) and engagement with other bodies in the field of torture prevention (sect. VI). The Subcommittee dedicates a specific section of the report to the adoption of its first general comment (sect. V).

The Subcommittee concludes by describing its plan of work for 2025 (sect. VII) and sharing reflections and future challenges (sect. VIII).

The annexes contain the Subcommittee’s submission to the Committee on the Rights of the Child on its general comment No. 27 on children’s rights to access to justice and effective remedies and its submission to the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief following the call for input for a report on religion or belief and torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Excerpt: Advice to national preventive mechanisms: impact of drug policies on the effective prevention of torture and ill-treatment

Mindful of the numerous reports emanating from the United Nations human rights system on the negative impact of drug policies on the full implementation of human rights, the Subcommittee deems it appropriate to reflect on its own experience regarding the impact of drug policies on effective strategies to prevent torture and other ill-treatment. Throughout the two decades of its mandate, the Subcommittee has considered the impact of drug policies on strategies to prevent torture and ill-treatment and the effective implementation of the obligations undertaken by States Parties to the Optional Protocol as well as on the full realization of the mandates of national preventive mechanisms worldwide.

The variety of approaches to combat drugs adopted by different States has a significant impact on the rights of persons deprived of liberty, including the freedom from torture and other ill-treatment, in a wide variety of settings of deprivation of liberty. In the criminal justice context, such approaches include “zero-tolerance” and “war on drugs” policies, implemented through widespread arrests, mandatory pretrial detention and sentencing, which all contribute significantly to overcrowding in detention. However, prisons, as well as police and other criminal justice detention facilities, are usually ill-equipped to offer the specific healthcare services required by detainees who use drugs, including medical assistance for acute and extremely painful withdrawal symptoms. The Subcommittee has documented the absence of effective detoxification and treatment programmes within detention facilities, the lack of independent and specifically trained medical personnel responding to the needs of detainees who use drugs, especially for withdrawal symptoms, and even deaths in custody as a result of methadone overdose.

Consequently, while urging States to address the negative impact of drugs in detention facilities, including inter-prisoner violence and corruption, the Subcommittee has also made recommendations on providing effective treatment to detainees who use drugs. These recommendations include the provision of specialist treatment programmes, equivalent to those available outside prisons, respecting the principle of equivalence of care, appropriate testing, to be carried out by medical personnel only, detoxification programmes, medication and immediate medical assistance for withdrawal symptoms, effective reintegration programmes following release to guard against relapses and assistance with social reintegration. The Subcommittee has emphasized the need for detainees with substance use disorders to be moved to specialist healthcare facilities where appropriate treatment can be provided.

Moreover, the Subcommittee has been mindful of institutionalization approaches to the drug problem worldwide and has made it clear that effective drug strategies must include prevention, including harm reduction, and the provision of effective outpatient treatment, with appropriate follow-up to treatment and the provision of care and treatment in communities to minimize reliance on the deprivation of liberty as part of the response to drug use.

Recalling article 4 of the Optional Protocol, the Subcommittee has emphasized that deprivation of liberty may take place in a wide variety of contexts, including healthcare and treatment for drug use. In this regard, recognizing that drug treatment centres, including compulsory drug treatment centres and private facilities, as well as any other settings, including unofficial ones and/or those operating under different national social, cultural and/or religious traditions, fall under the mandate of both the Subcommittee and national preventive mechanisms is paramount. Equally, the Subcommittee has underscored the importance of any treatment in such facilities being evidence-based, holistic and carried out solely by specifically trained interdisciplinary medical personnel, with emphasis on the therapeutic and voluntary nature of the treatment, ensuring that patients in such drug treatment centres are not subjected to coercive techniques, corporal punishment or punitive regimes. Lastly, the reintegration into society of persons treated for drug use should be prioritized, including through the effective provision of education and vocational training.

As the Subcommittee continues to implement its mandate as required by article 11 of the Optional Protocol, it will retain and reinforce its focus on the negative impacts of drug policies on effective strategies to prevent torture and ill-treatment. It urges all national preventive mechanisms to ensure that they include national drug policies in their mandates to prevent torture and ill-treatment at the national levels and monitor in particular the effects of the practical implementation of any such drug policies on the rights of all persons deprived of their liberty, be it in criminal justice, administrative, healthcare or other contexts.

18th annual report of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture

“The so-called war on drugs has destroyed countless lives and damaged entire communities. These policies are simply not working, and we are failing some of the most vulnerable groups in our societies,”

 said UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk during a recent speech on global drug policies.

For decades, governments have adopted a largely punitive approach to controlling narcotic drugs. UN experts say the results have been catastrophic, citing harmful consequences such as mass incarceration, increased drug-related crime and violence, record numbers of drug-related deaths, growing illegal drug production, and the stigmatization of entire communities.

However, there have been important shifts in recent years. From the Philippines to Ghana, Pakistan, and Colombia, countries are moving away from punishment and criminalisation, embracing more humane, public health- and human rights-based approaches.

In December 2024, Scotland launched a Charter of Rights for People Affected by Substance Use. This first-of-its-kind document aims to ensure that people who use drugs know their rights, receive necessary support, and are treated with dignity.

“The Charter sets out the key human rights that belong to people affected by substance use and marks a significant change from the previous approach of criminalization,”

 said Alan Miller, human rights activist and professor at the University of Strathclyde. 

“It places people and human dignity at the centre.”

The Charter was developed by the National Collaborative, an independent network chaired by Miller, with input from civil society, policymakers, affected communities, people who use drugs, and their families. It was in part a response to Scotland's high drug-related death rate, the highest in Europe.

“Clearly, the scale of the deaths was a tipping point, but there has been a shift in the public narrative,”

“Families formed support groups and started to speak up. The public now sees the problem as a health issue or about inequality and poverty—not just pushers or traffickers.”

UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk echoed this change in approach:


“The Charter represents a shift away from punishment and towards prevention, treatment, and support for those affected by drug use, in line with the International Guidelines on Human Rights and Drug Policy.”

Drawn from national and international human rights law, the Charter outlines key rights, including:

the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health

the right to an adequate standard of living

freedom from degrading treatment and arbitrary arrest

Niamh Eastwood, Executive Director of Release (UK), emphasised the harm of criminalising people who use drugs.

“Treating people as criminals adds to their suffering, causes stigma and exclusion, and deters them from getting the life-saving health interventions they need,”

“The Charter is a first-of-its-kind and we hope there will be more.”

Zaved Mahmood, Human Rights and Drug Policy Advisor at UN Human Rights, noted a growing shift in global perspectives:

“There is a general acceptance that any discussion on drug policy must take into account States’ human rights obligations,”

UN Human Rights supports Member States in developing and implementing drug policies based on human rights, aligned with the 2019 International Guidelines on Human Rights and Drug Policy.

In the Philippines, where a punitive drug policy led to thousands of deaths and extreme overcrowding in detention centres, the UN has supported a more humane shift. According to Signe Poulsen, Senior Human Rights Adviser in Manila:

“Under the previous administration, a high number of people were killed and the country ended up with one of the world’s most congested pre-trial detention systems.

Through a UN joint programme, the Office engaged government agencies and civil society to promote human rights-based reforms. These efforts include technical assistance for an independent forensic institute to investigate potentially unlawful deaths, and support for widows of victims through psychosocial care and basic services.

The “war on drugs” has also led to a rise in the use of the death penalty, contrary to international law. In 2024, drug offences accounted for 40% of all confirmed global executions. However, progress is underway:

 abolished the death penalty for drug offences in 2023.

 removed the mandatory nature of capital punishment the same year.

 reformed its laws in 2020 to treat drug use as a health issue and now supports harm reduction in 14 districts.

Professor Adeeba Kamarulzaman, member of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, remarked:

“It is always two steps forward and one step back when it comes to drug policy reform.”

Colombia is moving from a repressive strategy toward a development-focused approach to eliminating illicit drug cultivation. With UN Human Rights support, the country is investing in rural economies and addressing structural causes of violence. The 2016 peace accords include a chapter on drug policy reform, and the Truth Commission has called for drug policy to be part of peacebuilding.

Türk has consistently called for a transformative approach that includes voluntary healthcare, harm reduction, decriminalisation, social reintegration, gender sensitivity, and responsible regulation.

“Drug policies that prioritise health and human rights are more effective and more humane.”

An effective and humane approach to drug policies

 Accra International Conference Centre(AICC)

 Catalysing Integrated Sustainable Responses to end AIDS, TB & Malaria.

Catalysing Africa’s progress towards triple elimination and sustainable resilient health systems through innovation and digital technologies.

Promote cooperation among governments, communities, the private sector, and international organizations to enhance health security and improve pandemic preparedness and response.

Strengthen capacity and facilitate knowledge exchange for healthcare professionals, researchers, and policymakers.

Empower communities and promote human rights and gender equality in the context of HIV/AIDS and emerging and reemerging diseases.

Mobilize domestic resources and political commitment to sustain Africa's progress towards achieving the UNAIDS 95-95-95 targets and global health security goals.