Una coalición de organizaciones que representa a personas que usan drogas, profesionales de la salud y defensores de los derechos humanos ha propuesto que se revisen las políticas de drogas punitivas, respondiendo a las demandas de la sociedad civil. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

After the March 4 general elections in Italy, the 18th Legislature is starting its session facing an array of urgent problems – including a National drug policy reform. At least this is the main goal of several groups that in mid-February introduced a seven-item platform detailing a series of actual changes to the current repressive approach. Indeed, even the new President of the House, Roberto Fico, underlined that the Parliament is an ideal setting for civil society proposals and direct democracy action, a place where “popular initiative” bills deserve broader acknowledgement and consideration.

Building on this perspective of democratic participation and open debate, in recent years a coalition of groups and associations representing users, health professionals and advocates contributed in drafting some legislative proposals previously introduced in both branches of the Parliament. These bills are based on feedback from all actors in the field and provide a comprehensive strategy that also aims at strengthening individual and civil rights and lessening the burden on the criminal justice system.

The first and most important issue is the full revision of the current drug law (Dpr n.309/90, also known as Iervolino-Vassalli Act). Approved in 1990 during the ‘war on drugs’ frenzy, this law relays completely on a prohibitionist and punitive approach, further exacerbated in 2006 by the Fini-Giovanardi Act, which eventually was largely canceled by the Constitutional Court in 2014.

El nuevo Parlamento italiano debe actuar para reformar la política de drogas

Trump ha respaldado la ejecución de narcotraficantes, a pesar de la gran cantidad de pruebas que apuntan a que esta medida no desincentiva las actividades delictivas y viola los derechos humanos. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

Politicians often escalate drug war rhetoric to show voters that they are doing something. But it is rare to ignore generations of lessons as President Trump did earlier this month when he announced his support for the execution of drug traffickers.

This idea is insane. But the war on drugs has never made any sense to begin with.

Executing a few individual smugglers will do little to stop others because there is no high command of the international drug trade to target, no generals who can order a coordinated surrender of farmers, traffickers, money launderers, dealers or users. The drug trade is diffuse and can span thousands of miles from producer to consumer. People enter the drug economy for all sorts of reasons — poverty, greed, addiction — and because they believe they will get away with it. Most people do. The death penalty only hurts the small portion of people who are caught (often themselves minorities and low-level mules).

Indeed, on the ground, the threat of execution will even help those who aren’t caught because they can charge an increased risk premium to the next person in the smuggling chain. The risk of capture and punishment increases as drugs move from farm to processing lab, traversing jungles, through cities, across oceans, past borders, distributed by dealers and purchased by consumers. The greater the risk to smugglers in this chain, the more they can demand in payment.

La guerra contra las drogas genera traficantes astutos

El Cirujano General de los Estados Unidos, la principal autoridad federal en materia de salud, emitió el primer aviso nacional de su departamento en 13 años para instar a que se garantice una mayor oferta de naloxona. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

The nation’s chief doctor wants more Americans to start carrying the overdose antidote naloxone to help combat the nation’s opioid crisis and save lives.

Speaking at the National Rx Drug Abuse & Heroin Summit in Atlanta on Thursday morning, U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams issued his office’s first national public health advisory in 13 years.

Adams said he hopes those who are at risk — as well as their friends and family members — will keep the antidote on hand and learn how to use it.

“You don’t have to be a policeman or a firefighter or a paramedic to save a life,” said Adams, who pointed out that more than half of opioid overdose deaths in the U.S. occur at home.

According to federal data, more than 42,000 Americans suffered fatal opioid overdoses in 2016, more than double the number who died in 2010.

Naloxone can restore a person’s breathing after it is injected or sprayed in the nostrils, quickly bringing overdose victims back from near-death.

The drug, which is often referred to by the brand name Narcan, is available without a prescription in most states and is regularly used by first responders across the country. Another product, Evzio, is available with a prescription and delivers naloxone via a hand-held auto-injector.

Adams said 95 percent of all insured Americans are covered to purchase naloxone. First responders and community organizations can purchase Narcan nasal spray, one of the most widely available products, at group discounts of $37.50 per dose, drugmaker Adapt Pharma said in a news release.

La crisis de los opioides en los Estados Unidos: el principal encargado de la salud pública defiende el acceso a un antídoto para las sobredosis

Las revisiones propuestas al código penal del país promueven penas severas por el uso y la tenencia de estupefacientes, incluida la sanción más dura, la pena de muerte, en lugar de un enfoque orientado a la salud. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

As more countries move away from drug prohibition, Indonesia is about to step up its efforts to defend it. Proposed revisions to the country's criminal code promote harsh penalties for the use and possession of narcotics - including society's ultimate sanction, the death penalty - instead of a health-oriented approach. Rather than enabling a safer, healthier future for the world's fourth largest population, the changes guarantee a surge in prison overcrowding, inflated public health costs, decreased access to health care, and increased drug trafficking, availability, and misuse.

The current criminal code (KUHP) is nearly identical to the penal code issued by the Dutch colonial authorities in 1918, which was retained when Indonesia gained independence in 1945. Its long-overdue revamp, which is in the final stages of deliberation in the House of Representatives, contains a new set of alarming provisions, including some that criminalise homosexuality, extramarital sex, and criticism of the president.

The latest draft revisions have been widely condemned by rights organisations. The United Nations human rights chief deemed the proposed amendments "inherently discriminatory", arguing that their sanctions fall disproportionately on the most marginalised segments of society. Last month, activists from the so-called Civil Society Alliance to Reject the Draft Criminal Code organised several protests rejecting the parliament's proposals. Indonesia's National Commission on Human Rights warnedagainst the rushed adoption of the current criminal code revisions, calling for more input from the public.

Yet while the media and public have focused on the wider set of KUHP amendments, the inclusion of strict penalties for non-violent drug users has nearly slipped in unnoticed.The draft bill contains 22 articles on the use, possession, couriering, and smuggling of narcotics, all of which are treated as criminal offenses punishable with jail time, or in severe cases, death by firing squad.

El código penal de Indonesia da un paso atrás en materia de política de drogas

La nueva política representa, en general, una mejora, pero el método de clasificación de ingresos sigue siendo muy deficiente. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

On May 9-10, the board of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria will meet in Skopje, Macedonia to approve a new policy on which countries are eligible for funding.

I’ve been immersed in this labyrinthine policy as a consultant for the three civil society delegations on the board of the Fund: Developing Country NGO Delegation, Developed Country NGO Delegation and Communities Delegation. They came together to press for an overhaul of the policy. For a variety of reasons, that didn’t happen.

But there has been some progress; there are some big questions for civil society to weigh in on before May, and some critical areas to monitor if the current version is approved. Here’s an overview: heads up, it’s a long blog.

Why an eligibility policy? Funds are limited, lives are literally at stake, and difficult choices must be made about where to invest. What are the principles that should be used when you’re facing three global crises – the epidemics of HIV, TB and malaria? This is not just a question of health economics – it is also an ethical challenge.

It’s a problem that dates to the beginning of the Fund, when grants were in the millions, not hundreds of millions. To solve it, the World Bank offered to draft an approach. Sixteen years later, with over $10 billion to allocate, the criteria the World Bank identified over a decade ago still define Global Fund eligibility: national income and disease burden.

Cambios en la política de admisibilidad del Fondo Mundial: panorámica general

En el Reino Unido, la mayoría de las personas que son procesadas por simple posesión de drogas deben representarse a sí mismas ante el tribunal. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

A new app has been launched to help the thousands of people prosecuted for drug possession every year in England and Wales.

 was developed by lawyers at Release, the UK’s centre of expertise on drugs and drug laws. It provides a step-by-step guide for dealing with a drug possession offence, including informing people of what to say and do in the police station and in court. The aim of the app is to get the best possible result for the individual depending on their personal situation.

As government data shows, a huge number of people continue to face criminal convictions for possessing small quantities of drugs for personal use. In 2016, a staggering 23,000 people in England and Wales were prosecuted for simple drug possession, among which 95 per cent were found guilty.

Due to government cuts to legal aid, most people who are prosecuted for simple drug possession in the UK are required to represent themselves in court – without a lawyer – if they cannot afford to pay for representation. If a person representing themselves fails to put forward relevant mitigation, or fails to accurately demonstrate their financial circumstances, they may face a harsher sentence or financial penalty. Essentially, under current conditions, poorer people may face unfair and disproportionate legal consequences for simple drug possession.

For example, someone found in possession of cannabis for personal use for the first time should receive a cannabis warning. However, someone without legal representation may be unaware of this, and may then accept a caution or conviction for cannabis possession, both of which can have far-reaching consequences - from hindering job applications to disqualifying them from obtaining certain international visas.

These consequences of criminalisation are compounded for people who have other issues besides their drug charge – including people with mental health problems or dependencies on drugs or alcohol – as their ability to represent themselves may be hindered further.

Kirstie Douse, Release’s head of legal services, said that the 

app will help address this inherent inequality in the UK’s legal system.

“It goes beyond providing knowledge of legal process and principles, and helps reduce the harms caused by the criminalisation of drug possession. We hope that this tool empowers people to engage with the law in order to ensure that it is applied accurately and fairly, preventing poor decisions.”

Reino Unido: una nueva aplicación de ayuda en caso de arresto por posesión de drogas

Al ignorar las tensiones entre el derecho internacional y la realidad sobre el terreno, las principales potencias mundiales corren el riesgo de desvalorizar el sistema de las Naciones Unidas. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

When the wave of adult marijuana legalization in some states started in 2013, the position of the federal authorities regarding the government’s international obligations to prohibit drugs was based on a flexible interpretation of the United Nations drug conventions, commonly known as the Brownfield doctrine. The legality of this interpretation has been questioned by the U.N. convention-control bodies. But as the U.S. administration grows more suspicious of multilateralism, is the United Nations still equipped, technically and politically, to be heard?

At the U.N. Special Session on drugs (UNGASS) held in 2016, almost every country that spoke in the General Assembly hall emphasized how high drugs were on their national agendas. Yet they all agreed that the 2019 review of the decennial U.N. political declaration and the plan of action on drugs would take the form of simple ministerial meeting at a subsidiary U.N. commission based in Vienna, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND). This can be interpreted as proof that drug policy is not taken as seriously, despite how it impacts people’s lives on the ground.

International drug policy is different from other highly covered topics in the multilateral system for one main reason: no global player or P5 member has any apparent interest in opening a reform discussion, unlike for environmental, HIV or migration policies that benefit from large human, financial and communication resources.

The United States, which initiated the global war on drugs over 50 years ago, finds itself in a situation where its states are legalizing cannabis by ballot or legislative votes in contradiction with the U.N. drug conventions, while the country faces an unprecedented opioid overdose crisis that undermines every belief that prohibition results in effective drug control or is able to act as a deterrent for use.

Política internacional de drogas: ¿está perdiendo relevancia la ONU?

En un momento en que cada vez son más las muertes por sobredosis relacionadas con agonistas de los opiáceos increíblemente potentes, como el fentanilo y otras sustancias análogas, aumenta la presión para encontrar antídotos más eficaces. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

ATLANTA — Dr. Nora Volkow has heard a frightening scenario play out around the country. People are administering naloxone to synthetic opioid drug users who have overdosed. But the antidote doesn’t work well. So they give another dose. And it’s only after multiple doses — four, five, even six times — that drug users finally come to their senses.

Naloxone is the only widely available drug to reverse opioid overdoses. But anecdotal reports of its limitations against synthetic opioids are on the rise. Spurred by that public health threat — as well as a booming commercial market for the antidote — drug companies, researchers, and health officials are eagerly eyeing the development of new treatments to augment the use of naloxone or, in some cases, potentially replace it.

“The strategies we’ve done in the past for reversing overdoses may not be sufficient,” Volkow, director of the National Institute for Drug Abuse, said in a recent speech at the 2018 National Rx Drug Abuse and Heroin Summit. “We need to develop alternatives solutions to reversing overdoses.”

Those alternatives are taking a variety of forms. One biotech company is studying a drug with similar mode of action as naloxone — an opioid antagonist — but one that lasts roughly four times longer. Some addiction medicine specialists are hopeful that a different drug, buprenorphine, presently used to treat opioid addiction, could also be tweaked to reverse an overdose. Meanwhile, the National Institutes of Health hopes to pursue research into drugs that wouldn’t counteract the opioids directly but rather keep the patient breathing — the thing that causes so many overdoses to be fatal.

Noticias