Vienna, 10 December - "Our everyday essentials" is the focus of Human Rights Day 2025, which is an opportunity to reflect on global efforts to protect and promote basic human rights, such as food, shelter, education and health. The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) is highlighting the role of the international drug control conventions in promoting and safeguarding human rights, particularly the right to health.

Through the international drug control conventions, States have made a commitment to ensuring the availability of internationally controlled narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes. INCB supports Governments in their efforts to improve such availability, including in humanitarian emergencies through the use of simplified control procedures, and urges opioid-manufacturing countries to increase the availability of affordable oral morphine for pain management.

While the conventions provide flexibility in the adoption of legislative and administrative measures, Governments need to ensure that the drug control treaties are implemented in compliance with human rights obligations, the principle of proportionality and the rule of law.

Noting with grave concern increasing reports of extrajudicial targeting of suspected drug trafficking and extrajudicial killing carried out during drug trafficking interdiction measures, INCB stresses that such actions cannot be justified under international law and the drug control conventions. Extra-judicial responses to any alleged drug-related activities are in violation of the drug control conventions and fundamental human rights, which require that alleged drug-related crimes be addressed through formal procedures adhering to due process.

Human Rights Day 2025 is a reminder of the need to place human rights protections at the heart of drug policies. INCB is committed to ongoing cooperation with Member States to improve the implementation of the drug control conventions in accordance with international human rights standards, with the ultimate aim of the safeguarding health and welfare of all people.

INCB statement for Human Rights Day 2025

London, 2 December 2025 — The International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC) expresses deep dismay at the World Health Organization’s Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD) recommendation to keep the coca leaf in Schedule I of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. The WHO will officially present this recommendation to the UN’s drug-policy making forum, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, in Vienna on Thursday 4th and Friday 5th December.

The coca leaf was placed under international control in 1961 — effectively 

banning its cultivation and traditional use — on the basis of flawed, racially biased studies

 that ignored its cultural, religious, nutritional, and medicinal significance for Indigenous Peoples across the Andean and Amazonian regions. The ECDD’s recommendation follows the first-ever critical review of the plant, initiated at Bolivia’s request, supported by Colombia, after repeated calls to end its global prohibition in recognition of its sacred status.

Despite a year-long scientific assessment, 

the Committee’s decision disregards clear evidence that, in its natural form, the coca leaf poses minimal health risks, sidelining millennia of Indigenous knowledge 

by asserting there is no “robust basis” for its therapeutic use. The Committee also failed to give any weight to the internationally recognised rights of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination, to the use of their natural resources, and to preserve their culture, traditional medicines and health practices.

Traditional coca leaf farmers and consumers, and representatives of Indigenous peoples issued a joint declaration during the process, highlighting how “

The coca leaf has been a fundamental element of our cultures for millennia

. Its consumption is part of our identity, worldview and community practices, linked to rituals, health, nutrition and overall well-being”, adding that “the criminalisation of the whole plant is affecting our culture, human rights and harasses a plant that is sacred for our Indigenous Peoples”.

There is mounting concern that political pressure — particularly from governments alarmed by rising cocaine markets in Europe — influenced the outcome. Yet 

fears that descheduling coca would fuel cocaine production are unfounded. 

Producing cocaine requires complex chemical processing and vast quantities of leaf — approximately one metric tonne of fresh coca to yield just 1.45 kg of cocaine, according to the UN drugs agency. De-scheduling would apply only to the natural leaf; cocaine would remain strictly prohibited. States would still be required to criminalise cultivation intended for cocaine production, while being able to license coca grown for traditional, medicinal, or industrial purposes.

Ann Fordham, IDPC’s Executive Director, stated: “The WHO’s decision is deeply disappointing and profoundly troubling.

 This was not a routine review — it was a critical test of the UN drug control system. 

The Committee has shown it cannot objectively assess evidence or consider the human rights consequences of prohibition. Instead, it has chosen to reinforce the racist and colonial foundations of international drug control. This decision makes clear that the system is broken and resistant to meaningful reform.”

IDPC calls on governments to challenge the ECDD’s recommendation and pursue alternative pathways — nationally and internationally — to uphold Indigenous Peoples’ rights to their sacred plant. Domestically, this includes removing criminal penalties for traditional use of the coca leaf and protecting it as cultural heritage. Internationally, 

Member States could appeal the recommendation to the UN Economic and Social Council, potentially triggering a vote, and explore options to depart from the Convention’s specific provisions on coca leaf prohibition

The international community still has an opportunity to confront and dismantle the colonial legacy embedded in the UN drug control regime. Whether governments are prepared to show the necessary leadership remains an open question.

Marie Nougier, mnougier[@]idpc.net, +44 7807 077617

For additional background, see: IDPC Blog, ‘A historic opportunity: why the global liberalisation of the coca leaf matters on the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples: 

https://idpc.net/blog/2025/08/a-historic-opportunity-why-the-global-liberation-of-the-coca-leaf-matters-on-the-international

“Coca Chronicles” by the Transnational Institute: 

https://www.tni.org/en/article/coca-chronicles-monitoring-the-un-coca-review

Joint declaration from Indigenous groups and individuals on the critical review of the coca leaf: 

WHO upholds coca leaf ban, defying evidence and ignoring Indigenous rights

on the eve and with the occasion of International Human Rights Day. 

9:00 Washington D.C. / 11:00 São Paulo
15:00 Ginebra / 21:00 Bangkok

Organised by Amnesty International, Conectas Brazil, the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), and the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

The concept of ‘Narcoterrorism’ was coined in the 1980s and has long been associated with extreme responses to drugs. In recent months, the term has regained prominence amongst governments in the Americas, raising concerns about a resurgence of ‘war-on-drugs’ policies that have proven both ineffective and deeply damaging for human rights.

The most notable case has been that of the United States. Upon taking office, the Trump Administration 

 several trafficking organisations as terrorist groups. Since September 2025, it has initiated a campaign of military strikes against civilian vessels in the Caribbean and the Eastern Pacific, alleging their involvement in drug trafficking activities. In scarcely two months, this has resulted in more than 80 people killed (see WOLA tracker 

 serious concerns that these attacks may constitute violations of international law and potentially amount to international crimes, whilst the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has 

 for prompt, independent, and transparent investigations. Some Member States have also expressed concern at potential violations of international law.

The renewed invocation of ‘narcoterrorism’ is not unique to the USA. Throughout the Americas, elected officials have employed this label to declare states of emergencies and to justify the use of military and paramilitary forces, often resulting in extrajudicial killings. This is despite clear evidence that conflating drug trafficking and terrorist groups is factually inaccurate, and can lead to misguided and harmful responses.

This online event, convened to mark the 2025 International Human Rights Day, will examine contemporary uses of the narcoterrorism narrative and explore how the international community can respond to this troubling development to safeguard the integrity of international human rights law, with particular attention to mechanisms for investigation and accountability. 

- UN Special Rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights

 - Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

, International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC)

The ‘narcoterrorism’ threat: Exploring avenues to uphold human rights amidst a new 'war on drugs'

WOLA and Amnesty International are hosting a conversation on U.S. military action in the Caribbean.

The Trump administration has conducted lethal strikes against civilian vessels in the Caribbean, killing 61 people as of late October, claiming it’s engaged in a “non-international armed conflict” with narco-terrorist organizations. What are the legal, human rights, and geopolitical implications? Join experts on international law, drug policy, Venezuela, and civil liberties for a dynamic discussion.

Hybrid Event | 1666 Connecticut Avenue NW or online

Uncharted waters: U.S. Military action in the Caribbean

The global war on drugs as authoritarian statecraft and its human rights costs

Two of Zimbabwe’s leading drug rehabilitation hubs, Matrix Rehabilitation Centre and Angel of Hope Foundation, are among a plethora of sprouting correctional centres that are increasingly taking the limelight for human rights abuses and corruption. .

This emerged during an investigation supported by Information for Development Trust, a non-profit outfit promoting accountability journalism in Zimbabwe and Southern Africa.

The investigation established that some of the victims at such detention centres who are being arbitrarily rounded up are as young as nine.



Human rights abuses, corruption rampant at Zimbabwe’s shady drug rehabilitation centres

Asean governments recently met in Singapore for a regional meeting about drugs, where the host nation urged renewed commitment to a "drug-free region". The problem isn't simply the recycling of an outdated mantra first declared in 1998, nor the fact that the region's drug markets have only expanded since then, but that this approach ignores how government policies themselves shape those markets -- and the devastating harms that follow.

In his opening speech to the regional meeting, the Singaporean Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam began by chronicling deaths related to drugs in different parts of the world. He lumps together deaths caused by overdoses in the USA with those caused by violence related to drug markets in places like Mexico and Ecuador. The statistics are indeed devastating, but the citing of these deaths without any acknowledgement of the harms driven by policies or the complex problems driven by political, structural and socioeconomic factors seeks to absolve the responsibility of governments to do better to protect life and uphold human rights. The international drug control conventions state that the priority goals of national drug policies are to improve the health and welfare of all people. Singapore's continued justification of the death penalty is not only at odds with international human rights law but also with the principle that drug policies should be to protect lives -- not take them away.

In 2016, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) governments adopted a work plan on drug issues that ends this year. The Philippines led the review of the work plan's implementation, but following the regional meeting hosted by Singapore, the results of the review do not appear to be publicly shared. Ahead of the meeting, the International Drug Policy Consortium sent a submission of civil society perspectives to Asean drug policy agencies on the impacts of the regional drug strategy since 2016, with recommendations for the way forward. For the most part, it has been a harrowing decade: about 30,000 people killed in a "war on drugs" in the Philippines, prisons overcrowded with people held for drug offences (Thailand has the world's second highest rate of women's incarceration, mostly for drug offences), abusive drug rehabilitation systems and continued executions of people for drug offences.

An Asean free from 'wars on drugs'

Former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte has been charged with crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The 80-year-old is accused of being criminally responsible for dozens of murders that allegedly took place as part of his so-called war on drugs, during which thousands of small-time drug dealers, users and others were killed without trial.

The ICC's charge sheet, which includes several redactions, dates from July but was only made public on Monday.

ICC deputy prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang said Duterte was an "indirect co-perpetrator" in the killings, which the court alleges were carried out by others, including police.

The first count laid against Mr Duterte concerns his alleged involvement in the killings of 19 people in Davao City between 2013 and 2016 while he was mayor there.

The other two charges relate to times when he was serving as president of the Philippines, between 2016 and 2022, and launched his so-called war on drugs.

ICC charges Rodrigo Duterte with crimes against humanity

In October 2023, I was awarded the “Drug Laws and Access to Justice Fellowship” by the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC) as part of the REFORM project, which is a regional partnership supporting people who use drugs, media, legal and civil society allies to end punitive drug laws, abusive enforcement, and stigma. The Programme supports fellows in boosting their capacity to bring about change in a region characterised by some of the most punitive policies against people who use drugs in the world — applying their legal and paralegal skills and knowledge.

But long before the fellowship, my collective — 

 has been practising care beyond the remit of the state. In Cavite, we have been running mutual aid efforts for years through survivor support, food, medical care, and accompaniment — modest but necessary acts of care and survival. In August 2023, Temple Street Los Area Locos, a local gang, reached out to us when one of their members was stabbed by a police asset for refusing to “snitch” on their peers. Later that year, that same young person was arrested on alleged drug charges, abandoned by the legal system, with no support to navigate court proceedings. Faced with this crisis, we asked ourselves: “

What would it look like if we built our own systems of care, rooted in community accountability, instead of waiting for justice from institutions that only criminalise us?”

Weaving Resistances: Building safer communities by and for young people impacted by drug use and allies

 was born. It was neither a non-profit nor a “civil society” organisation, nor a program signed off by a formal agency. It was something else — something 

adrienne maree brown describes emergent strategy as 

“fractal — small patterns that scale into the whole.”

 Our own small patterns took the shape of community meals, neighbourhood conversations, and music events. From these small acts of connection, we were trying to rebuild relationships within our community and scale safety. In doing so, we reclaimed and embodied the harm reduction mantra: 

 For us, this wasn’t just a slogan — it traverses our lives and survival.

Street-based youth like us are often seen as 

. As it happens with other scapegoated groups, narratives of essentialised ‘risk’ are weaponised against us, denying us the very possibility of ‘innocence’. Against this backdrop, sitting together over food became a transformative practice for us, a way to challenge stigma while rebuilding bonds with our neighbours, who had previously written us off. As Ruth Wilson Gilmore says, 

“Abolition is about presence, not absence. It’s about building life-affirming institutions.”

 Sharing food in community meals became one such institution — informal and fragile, but very real.

“Community accountability is not a checklist, it’s a practice of showing up for each other when harm happens and when it doesn’t.”

 Our meals and events were exactly that: showing up even outside of crisis, building relationships that would hold when harm inevitably occurs.

From November 2023 to March 2025, we organised community meals, music shows, film screenings, and open dialogues about drug use and sexual and reproductive health. We amplified the 

 campaign, and started prisoner support networks for our friends behind bars. These weren’t just events — they were abolitionist rehearsals of a different future.

“Transforming harm is not about pretending harm doesn’t exist. It’s about building the skills, practices, and conditions we need so that when harm happens, we don’t turn to police or prisons—we turn to each other.”

 That was the heart of our work: not escaping harm, but transforming how we respond to it.

Our work rippled outward. In 2024, we founded the Philippines chapter of 

, joining a global network of young organisers fighting for humane drug policies. To launch, we mobilised two actions during the 

2024 Support. Don’t Punish Global Day of Action

Starting SSDP Philippines was about giving young people a range of places to belong — that we’re part of a global fight for justice. This is an emergent strategy in motion: starting small, moving at the speed of trust, and letting relationships guide our organising.

 By paying attention to each other, even through small acts of care, we were growing a movement.

Solidarity across movements: Toward transformative and healing justice

As we grew, we realised our struggle couldn’t be isolated from others. In 2024 and 2025, we joined events organised by the 

Philippine Safe Abortion Network (PINSAN)

Women’s Global Network for Reproductive Rights (WGNRR)

. Their fight for reproductive justice mirrored ours — both criminalised by the state, both demanding autonomy and dignity.

This wasn’t just coalition-building. It was 

— understanding that the same systems policing drugs are policing bodies, gender, and sexuality. If we want liberation, we have to dismantle all of it together. 

Informality as access to justice and care

What began as “informal” acts of care has become the foundation for a broader political demand. Informality itself became a form of justice: a refusal to wait for permission to care for each other. The state has offered us violence and neglect, so we built our own systems. That’s how we survived. Now those same systems — our networks of care, our ways of looking out for each other — are shaping our fight and practice towards new, liberatory worlds.

Abolition isn’t only about ending prisons — it is about building life. As Ruth Wilson Gilmore reminds us, “Where life is precious, life is precious.” And as Andrea Ritchie writes, “Practicing new worlds is not abstract — it’s in how we cook for each other, how we respond to harm, how we create safety without punishment, every single day.” These everyday gestures are more than survival — they are blueprints for the futures we want to live in.

The fight is far from over. But the streets show us that resistance doesn’t always look like court battles or legislation. Sometimes, it looks like a meal shared among those who have targeted and criminalised identities, a network of care among the abandoned — our refusal to disappear and let others be disappeared. It is in these quiet, persistent practices of care that we reclaim life and dignity.

We carry this commitment both in our daily acts and within formal spaces of advocacy like drug policy reform in the Philippines. On 

Cavite Side Suldados – Temple St. MBPLS

Regional Dialogue on the ASEAN Work Plan on Securing Communities against Illicit Drugs 2016–2025

 in Manila. Facilitated by IDPC, the dialogue brought government, civil society, and directly impacted communities into conversation about the implementation and impacts of the ASEAN Work Plan. Our presence in that space — coming from the streets, from communities often left out of regional and international policy tables — was itself an act of care and resistance, ensuring that those most affected by drug policies are never excluded from shaping them.

consultation focused on developing the ACCEPT Drug Education Modules

. Guided by a community-centred, human rights-based, and health-oriented approach, the modules aim to promote understanding, compassion, and informed conversations about substance use within the community.

We will continue building these worlds, both through our small acts of care and in our collective engagement within drug policy reform spaces in the Philippines. Our survival has always been political, and our care has always been resistance – our refusal to disappear.

Practising liberatory harm reduction: From street-level care to policy reform advocacy

Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network condemn in the strongest terms the execution in Singapore of Malaysian national Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah on 25 September 2025 and are alarmed at the continued violations of international human rights law and standards associated with the use of the death penalty in the country. We renew our call on the government of Singapore to urgently establish a moratorium on executions as a first step towards full abolition of this cruel punishment.

Cruel anguish as execution temporarily stayed

Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah was set to be executed at 6am on 25 September 2025, following a shortened notice period that started on 21 September. According to information received by our organizations, just over five hours before it was due to be carried out, the execution was temporarily stayed to allow the President of Singapore, Tharman Shanmugaratnam, to consider his clemency request. The family was later notified that the execution would proceed at approximately 1.40pm, after the appeal was rejected.

The last-minute stay of execution left Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah and his relatives in excruciating anguish for approximately seven hours.

We oppose the death penalty unconditionally as the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. We strongly condemn the treatment of Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah and his family, which amounts to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in line with international standards on the death penalty. Torture and other ill-treatment or punishment are absolutely prohibited under international human rights law, and this is also a rule of customary international law binding on all states, whether or not they are parties to particular treaties which include this prohibition. This continued pursuit of executions by the Singapore government at all costs, including with shortened notice periods, must immediately stop.

Death sentence unlawful under international human rights law and standards

Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah was convicted and sentenced to the mandatory death penalty after he was found in possession of 44.96 grams of diamorphine (heroin), presumed to have knowledge of the drug and to possess it for the purpose of trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act and convicted.

We reiterate that the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences violates international human rights law and standards, which restrict its use to the “most serious crimes”, most recently interpreted as referring to “crimes of extreme gravity involving intentional killing”. Several UN bodies, including the International Narcotics Control Board, have repeatedly clarified that drug-related offences do not meet this threshold.

We also remain alarmed by the continued resort to the mandatory death penalty, which removes judges’ power to consider the particular circumstances of the offence and the background of the convicted person, also in violation of international law and standards; and the reliance on the legal presumption of trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act, based on the amount of drugs a person is found with. When these legal presumptions are invoked, the burden of proof is shifted onto the defendant to be rebutted to the reversed – and therefore higher – legal standard of “on balance of probabilities”. Legal presumptions of guilt violate the right to be presumed innocent – a peremptory norm of customary international law – and other fair trial guarantees under international human rights law that mandate that the burden of proving all charges rests on the prosecution. In addition, presumptions of guilt have also had the effect of lowering the threshold of evidence needed to secure a conviction in capital cases.

Urgent need for moratorium on executions as critical first step

So far in 2025, Singapore has executed 11 men, including nine for drug-related offences. In recent years, only two countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) were known to have carried out executions – Singapore and Viet Nam. With the recent abolition of the death penalty for transporting drugs in Viet Nam on 25 June 2025, Singapore is due to be the last ASEAN country to carry out executions for this offence.

Several others remain at imminent risk of execution in Singapore, including Malaysian nationals Pannir Selvam Pranthaman, Saminathan Selvaraju, Lingkesvaran Rajendaren and Singapore national Jumaat bin Mohamed Sayed. We renew our call on the Government of Singapore to immediately establish a moratorium on all executions; commute all death sentences; and review national legislation to bring it in line with international human rights law and standards, pending full abolition of the death penalty.

Singapore: Cruel and unlawful drug-related execution of Malaysian man renews urgency for moratorium on executions

 – UN experts* today condemned the extrajudicial execution by the United States of 11 people when it sank a civilian vessel in the Caribbean Sea on 2 September 2025, and three people on another vessel on 15 September.

“International law does not allow governments to simply murder alleged drug traffickers,” the experts said. “Criminal activities should be disrupted, investigated and prosecuted in accordance with the rule of law, including through international cooperation.”

On 2 September 2025, the President of the United States announced a “kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua narco-terrorists” aboard a vessel in international waters, allegedly transporting illegal narcotics to the U.S., killing 11 people. The Secretary of State of the United States indicated the U.S. could have intercepted the vessel but chose to destroy it to deter traffickers. The U.S. had previously designated Tren de Aragua as a foreign terrorist organisation.

“Under international law, all countries must respect the right to life, including when acting on the high seas or in foreign territory. The use of potentially lethal force is only permitted in personal self-defence or defence of others against an imminent threat to life,” the experts said.

“The United States’ attack also violates the international law of the sea, which does not authorise unprovoked attacks on ships, requires criteria to be met to intercept ships, and insists on a law enforcement, not military approach to using force,” they said.

The United States has previously accused Tren de Aragua of mounting an “invasion” or “predatory incursion” of the U.S., at the behest of the Venezuelan Government. “There is no evidence that this group is committing an armed attack against the U.S. that would allow the U.S. to use military force against it in national self-defence,” the experts said.

The strike follows a classified order reportedly signed by the U.S. President in August 2025 authorising military force, in foreign territory or international waters, against Latin American drug cartels that the U.S. Government recently designated as terrorist organisations. These include groups based in Latin America, including in Mexico and Venezuela.

“International law does not permit the unilateral use of force abroad to fight terrorism or drug trafficking. Attacks on organised crime groups in foreign territory would violate the other country’s sovereignty and could amount to an illegal use of force under the United Nations Charter and customary international law,” the experts said.

The United States has reportedly deployed substantial naval, air and land forces in the region for the purpose of deterring drug trafficking and “narco-terrorism”.

On 25 July 2025, the U.S. designated Cartel de los Soles as a terrorist group and alleged that the Venezuelan President is its leader, raising the prospect that the U.S. may use military force directly against a foreign government.

We urge the United States to retreat from its lawless “war on narco-terrorism”. Under international law, the U.S. must independently investigate those who ordered and carried out these murders, prosecute perpetrators, no matter how senior in government, provide reparation to the victims’ families, and guarantee that such acts will never occur again,” the experts said.

The experts have been in contact with the Governments concerned regarding these matters.

Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism

Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions

Independent expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order

US war on 'narco-terrorists' violates the right to life, warn UN experts after deadly vessel strike

In public drug policy conversations, decriminalization has too often been framed as a catch-all solution to drug-related issues, from overdose and stigma to health care access and public drug use. It’s easy to see why—especially in the heat of campaigns pushing for long-overdue reform—but overpromising can be dangerous.

While decriminalization is rightly celebrated as a progressive improvement to punitive drug laws, the global reality is messy: a patchwork of partial reforms, mixed results and models being measured against goals they were never designed to meet.

“We’ve developed this idea that decriminalization is some kind of magic bullet,” Professor Alison Ritter, AO, director of the Drug Policy Modelling Program at the University of New South Wales, told 

 “It will reduce arrests—we can be confident about that. There is evidence to support it. But will it reduce overdose rates? Honestly, I don’t think it would.”

At the International Conference on Health and Hepatitis in Substance Users (INHSU) in October 2024, Ritter presented data from various decriminalization models, evaluating their impact across four areas: arrests, overdose, stigma and health care access.

Her conclusion: Decriminalization consistently reduces arrests and incarceration for people who use drugs, but its impact on other harms is less clear. Ritter’s message? It’s time to get real about what decrim can and can’t do.

“We now have drug decriminalization in 59 jurisdictions in 39 countries, and the momentum towards this approach is growing,” Jamie Bridge, deputy director of the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), told 

. “But the actual policies themselves vary a lot, with some much less effective and less fair than others.”

Violence, policing & punishment