Skoun was created in 2001 to provide drug dependence treatment and care, deliver tools to reduce drug-related harms, and advocate for drug policy reform.

Skoun fue creado en 2001 para brindar tratamiento y atención sobre la dependencia de drogas, proporcionar medios para reducir los daños relacionados a las drogas, y promover una reforma de las políticas de drogas.

Skoun offre des services de traitement et de soins pour les usagers dépendants, des outils pour réduire les risques liés aux drogues, et préconise une réforme des politiques en matière de drogue au Liban.

Skoun Lebanese Addiction Centre

Thursday, 27 February 2025 / 14:00 - 15:00 (London) - 

The tenth edition of the IDPC webinar on the regular session of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) focuses on its 

, which will take place in Vienna from 10-14 March 2025.

The webinar will shed light the key issues that are likely to structure the debates, discuss tabled resolutions and opportunities for engagement, and showcase the experience of IDPC network members in navigating and leveraging this forum for political advocacy.

This event will be available in English, Spanish and French.

 (International Drug Policy Consortium - IDPC).

CND 68: Key issues and opportunities

In recent weeks, escalating military actions by Israeli occupying forces across many regions in Lebanon have severely impacted the local communities, resulting in over 2,700 casualties and over 12,000 injuries as well as over 1.2 million displaced to date.

The current conflict has significantly affected Skoun — a leading harm reduction, treatment and education nonprofit.

Many of Skoun's services have been rendered unsafe due to nearby strikes. The escalating violence has pushed the organisation into crisis, amidst catastrophic impacts for people in Lebanon.

84% of Skoun's opioid agonist therapy (OAT) clients have been displaced, hindering their access to essential treatment and support systems, and increasing reliance on riskier coping mechanisms, including in relation to drug use.

Amidst the ongoing turmoil, funding priorities have shifted to respond to increasingly unmet basic needs. Specialised services, like Skoun, are underfunded, and their important services jeopardised. Service users, whose needs are compounded in these circumstances, risk being pushed further into situations of vulnerability.

Kindly consider supporting Skoun's work by donating here.

Urgent support needed amidst escalations in Lebanon

How we think about, regulate, moralise or criminalise drugs is often not a response to domestic considerations, but a negotiation with global forces in an uneven international environment. Drug control in Lebanon is no exception to this rule. Its policies, since their inception, are the result of colonial and neo-colonial impositions and local resistance to these international impositions.

The colonial roots of drug policies are clear in Lebanon. The first drug control imperatives were introduced under the French mandate in the 1920s. In fact, the 1922 

 of the League of Nations that put Lebanon and Syria under French rule specifically mentions in article 12 that France will adhere, on behalf of the countries under its mandate, to conventions related to “drug trafficking” among other things.

The imposition of prohibitionist policies had to contend with the reality that 

 of Lebanon’s economy was reliant on cannabis. As a result of the decline of the silk industry in the early 20th century, many farmers resorted to cannabis cultivation, which had been part of the Lebanese agricultural landscape for centuries. French authorities were 

 by local politicians for prohibiting cannabis cultivation, which was a source of income for the villagers. Lacking power in the rural areas, and unwilling to alienate powerful landowners whose support they relied on, the French authorities resorted to a “

” implementation of drug policies, aimed at satisfying international requirements without ostracising domestic political forces.

The intersection of colonial impositions with local negotiations, resulting in performative drug control policies, would become the 

After its independence, Lebanon continued the French charade. After declaring that it would take drastic measures to curb hashish production during WWII, members of the British Security Mission who assisted Lebanese authorities 

 that they had to apply “considerable direct pressure . . . on a reluctant Gendarmerie” to get any action done.

The colonial legacy of drug control in Lebanon

We, the undersigned organisations, are deeply concerned about the drastic intensification of anti- drug operations in Sri Lanka leading to significant human rights violations.

On 17 December 2023 the Acting Inspector General of Police Deshabandu Tennekoon, with the endorsement of Minister of Public Security Tiran Alles, spearheaded an operation titled “Yukthiya”, with the stated aim of controlling “the drug menace”. The operation is ongoing as of 10 January 2024, with at least one thousand persons arrested daily.

This operation is unfolding in a context of already severe repression against persons who use or are suspected of using drugs, who suffer discrimination and stigma within the Sri Lankan criminal justice system and society.

Alongside the Sri Lankan police, members of the armed forces have been supporting this operation, during which several human rights violations have been reported. These violations include alleged arbitrary arrests, primarily against individuals from marginalised socio-economic communities; searches conducted without warrants or reasonable suspicion; and degrading treatment including strip searches in public as well as cavity searches. The searches and arrests have been televised, in violation not only of the right to privacy (and of basic human dignity) but also of a person’s right to be presumed innocent. According to lawyers, persons are being arrested even when no drugs are found in their possession, simply for having been arrested for drug offences or having been sent to compulsory rehabilitation in the past. The arrests of main livelihood earners and mothers have adversely impacted the ability of families to meet their basic needs during a time of economic crisis in Sri Lanka, and the wellbeing of children.

Persons are being arrested primarily under Section 54A of the Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, an offence which is non-bailable. As a result, those arrested are bound to spend time (sometimes months) in pretrial detention, thereby exacerbating already poor conditions of imprisonment in an overburdened prison system. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka has previously stated that the existing prison conditions and treatment of incarcerated persons are “inhumane and degrading.”At present, as per statistics issued by the Department of Prisons, the level of overcrowding of the prison system is at nearly 200% - with punitive drug policies playing a significant role: as of 2022, 63% of convicted persons were sentenced for drug-related offences.

The total reported number of arrests pursuant to operation Yukthiya has exceeded 29,000 as of 9 January 2024, while nearly 1,500 people are in administrative detention in police custody for further investigation.  At least 1,600 more persons have been sent for compulsory drug rehabilitation, in violation of several fundamental rights; including the right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to consent to and withdraw from medical treatment. “Drug treatment” in these centres is abstinence-based, essential harm reduction services are not available, and persons undergo severe withdrawal symptoms without any medical assistance while in detention. The use of violence to discipline and punish has been reported in at least two compulsory drug rehabilitation centres which are within the purview of the Bureau of the Commissioner General for Rehabilitation and are operated by the military, which is in itself a violation of international standards.

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in its statement at the conclusion of its visit to Sri Lanka in 2017 expressed concern regarding the involvement of military personnel in drug treatment and rehabilitation, the fact that strenuous physical exercise was the core component of compulsory drug treatment, and at the lack of trained professionals to monitor the health of people in detention. Furthermore, the statement highlighted the irregularities in the judicial process by which persons were sent to drug rehabilitation centres without a medical assessment.

More broadly, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has highlighted that by denying persons access to substitution therapies, states are subjecting “a large group of people to severe physical pain, suffering and humiliation, effectively punishing them for using drugs and trying to coerce them into abstinence.” The Special Rapporteur has further stated “forcible testing of people who use drugs without respecting their autonomy and their right to informed consent may constitute degrading treatment, especially in detention settings. States are obliged to respect the enjoyment of the right to health, including by refraining from using coercive medical treatment. The requirement of informed consent, including the right to refuse treatment, should be observed in administering any treatment for drug dependence.”

Since the 2016 UN General Assembly Special Session on drugs, there is international consensus on pursuing a holistic and health and human rights-based approach to drugs, which encompasses supply and demand reduction as well as harm reduction. The 2019 Ministerial Declaration on drugs – the current global drug policy document - as well as multiple resolutions of the UN General Assembly, the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs, and the UN Human Rights Council reiterate and recommend a similar approach.

A punitive and militarised approach to drug control contravenes recognised international human rights standards and guidelines, is ineffective to protect individual and public health, and ultimately fails to make communities safer.

Africa Network of People Who Use Drugs (AfricaNPUD) (Africa)

Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) (Asia)

Association for Humane Drug Policy (Norway)

Centre on Drug Policy Evaluation (CDPE) (Canada)

Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS) (Argentina)

Corporación Acción Técnica Social (Colombia)

Correlation - European Harm Reduction Network (Europe)

Drug Harm Reduction Advocacy Network Nigeria (Nigeria)

Foreningen Tryggere Ruspolitikk /Safer Drug Policies (Norway)

GREA - Groupement Romand d'Etudes des Addictions (Switzerland)

Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (Poland)

International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)

International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC) (Global)

International Network of People who Use Drugs (INPUD) (Global)

Skoun, Lebanese Addictions Centre (Lebanon)

Zimbabwe Civil Liberties and Drug Network (Zimbabwe)

Sri Lanka: Stop abusive anti-drug operation and release those arbitrarily detained

Cannabis has a long history of medical use that spans back thousands of years. The first recorded medical use for the plant dates back to 2737 BC, in the world’s oldest pharmacopeia where cannabis was indicated for over a hundred ailments including gout and malaria.

Across time and space, various cultures, including the local one, have grown the plant and utilized it spiritually, culturally, industrially as well as medicinally. Scholars have studied and recorded its medical properties and benefits through the ages until the 20th century when the international drug control regime strictly restricted its use, scheduling it under both Schedule I of the 1961 and 1971 conventions and Schedule IV of the 1961 convention. Schedule IV of the 1961 Convention contains “the most dangerous substances which are particularly harmful and of extremely limited medical or therapeutic value”. Schedule I of the 1971 convention contains, for its part, the substances “presenting a high risk of abuse, posing a particularly, serious threat to public health which are of very little or no therapeutic value.”

As such, the drug conventions effectively halted any research into cannabis, until a recently renewed interest emerged worldwide with a number of research institutions focusing on the properties of the plant, and experimenting with different legal frameworks for the control, regulation or legalization of controlled substances. 

In 2018, the World Health organization’s Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD) recommended rescheduling cannabis to recognize its medicinal properties and medical uses, allowing for a more flexible approach towards the use and research of cannabis. In December 2020, the Committee on Narcotic Drugs (CND) partially took into consideration the ECDD’s recommendation and removed cannabis from Schedule IV of the 1961 Convention while keeping THC under Schedule I of the 1961 Convention.

In the meantime, after years of regional instability and faced with the growing threat of economic and financial collapse, Lebanon was looking at avenues for possible economic growth and financial gains. Enter the 2018 Mc Kinsey report, proposing around 150 economic options for Lebanon’s economy, including the export of cannabis which promised returns of $1 Billion. 

In April 2020, the Lebanese parliament passed a law legalizing “the Cultivation of Cannabis for medicinal and industrial purposes.” Law 178/2021 establishes two bodies in charge of granting licenses to persons or entities for the cultivation of cannabis and defines the requirements to apply for a permit, cultivate cannabis and sell it or manufacture products from the plant. 

In the section detailing the rationale for the law, Lebanese legislators highlight the “scientific findings and the many studies pertaining to the medicinal benefits of cannabis”, all the while denying the rights of local population and residents to access medicinal cannabis. 

Since the days of the French mandate in Lebanon, the state has adopted a repressive approach to drugs and has considered cannabis an illicit substance despite the long history of cultivation of the plant in the country. In 1998, Lebanon passed law 673/1998 which criminalizes the use of illicit drugs and schedules cannabis as a “very dangerous substance with no medical use3”. 

Despite legalizing the cultivation of cannabis for medical purposes and recognizing the plant’s medicinal properties, the 2020 law fails to expressly provide the right to consume medicinal cannabis, fails in amending the Lebanese Law on Drugs which criminalizes substance use and personal possession, and fails to reschedule cannabis as a substance with medicinal properties. 

By failing to consider avenues through which the local population could benefit from the scientific and medical advances linked to cannabis, it emerges that the Lebanese legislator has solely focused on the economic prospects all the while avoiding reconsidering its drug policies. It has done so, as evidenced by the raison d’etre of the law, to “protect public health” and shield it from the “health risks linked to the use of cannabis.” Whereas the medical use of other substances that are considered “dangerous and harmful” is still allowed under certain conditions.

Should the state focus only on the legality of a substance, upholding its moralistic view of cannabis while disregarding the medical evidence that would benefit the individual’s health?

In light of these contradictions, Skoun interviewed health care professionals in Lebanon as well as patients and academics to establish the need to amend drug laws in Lebanon in order to ensure access to medicinal cannabis to people residing in Lebanon. 

This policy paper will look at the history of cannabis in Lebanon and the attempts to control its cultivation, the specificities of Lebanese cannabis, the right to access medicinal cannabis through the right to health lens, the right to access medicinal cannabis in light of the SDGs, and finally explore legal avenues to ensure access to medical cannabis. 

Before tackling access to medical cannabis, this paper will briefly go over the law regulating cultivation of medicinal cannabis and some of its most prominent failures that go beyond the absence of recognition of the right of people to access medical cannabis for medical purposes.

The legalization of the cultivation of cannabis in Lebanon - Moralistic views vs the right to health

Drug Law Reform Should Be Among the Priorities of The Lebanese Parliament

On the occasion of the “Support Don’t Punish” Global Day of Action, which falls on June 26, the signatories of this Joint Statement address the Lebanese Parliament to demand the reform of local drug policies, specifically the revision of the Lebanese Drug Law (673/1998), in order to effectively respond to drug use and addiction. While the Lebanese Law on Drugs recognizes the use of illicit substances and addictions as public health matters, it continues to criminalize people who use drugs.

To that effect, the statement signatories would like to highlight the following:

First, the Lebanese state arrests 3000 individuals a year on substance use charges and interrogates another 2000 to 6000 people a year on the basis of the same charge.

Almost 80% of the individuals charged with substance use are aged between 18 and 35 years. Since the promulgation of the law in 1998, an estimated 100,500 individuals have been sentenced by a court of law for their use of drugs, and have thus been deprived of their right to treatment and to support, and have seen their chances of employment and education hindered as a result of their conviction.

Second, in 2016, the Inter-ministerial Substance Use Response Strategy for Lebanon was launched by a number of key ministries; five years after its launch, the majority of its objectives have yet to be met, notably the objective related to the revision of the Lebanese law on drugs.

Finally, the reform of drug policies can constitute a part of the solution to the many challenges currently faced by Lebanon, and that by:

Decreasing the number of files for non-violent offenses before an already overburdened djudiciary.

Creating job opportunities for young people by removing criminal penalties attached to the use of illicit substances which facilitates access to employment and thus allows young people to contribute to economic growth, noting that 60% of young people are currently unemployed in Lebanon.

Diverting resources spent on repressive drug policies into a health-oriented response aimed at preventing chronic illnesses that often accompany drug use and that constitute considerable costs to the state.

Reducing the incidence of human rights violations, notably violations to basic fair trial rights.

The co-signatories of this statement call on the new members of Parliament to prioritize drug policy reform and to revise the Lebanese Law on Drugs, taking as a starting point the draft law submitted to the legislative body in 2016, and revising it in line with global developments and the Lebanese State’s own commitments and strategy, notably towards the decriminalization of drug use.

The Middle East and North Africa Harm Reduction Association(MENAHRA)

MENA Network of People who Use Drugs(MENANPUD)

Society for Inclusion and Development in Communities and Care for All(SIDC)

Association Justice et Miséricorde(AJEM)

Drug law reform should be among the priorities of the Lebanese parliament

To: Ms Ghada Waly, Executive Director, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

Subject: Open letter on UNODC statement on International Human Rights Day 2021

We urge you to mark International Human Rights Day 2021 by calling on Member States to change drug policies and practices that violate human rights and perpetuate inequality and discrimination.

We are writing to you ahead of International Human Rights Day 2021, which will take place on the 10th December amidst escalating global demands for the reform of laws and practices that entrench racial discrimination and social inequality, including drug policies. Last year, IDPC – together with dozens of other civil society and community organisations – called on you to issue a statement on International Human Rights Day urging Member States to change drug laws and practices that undermine health and human rights. A year later, we ask you to seize this day as an opportunity to show UNODC´s alignment with other UN entities in calling for an end to drug policies and practices that perpetuate inequality and discrimination, and violate human rights.

For decades, punitive drug policies have driven widespread human rights abuses, as has been amply documented by the UN. These include the death penalty for drug offences; extrajudicial killings; arbitrary detention, often masquerading as ‘rehabilitation’; the denial of access to life-saving harm reduction services; widespread barriers to accessing controlled medicines for pain relief; the criminalisation of people who use drugs, subsistence farmers and others groups in situations of vulnerability; corporal punishment; and mass incarceration. In all of these cases, draconian drug policies have disproportionately affected people marginalised on the basis of their gender, race, ethnicity, and economic status, thus entrenching inequality and discrimination.

Along 2021, a broad range of UN entities called on Member States to reform drug policies with discriminatory outcomes. In June 2021, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention released a landmark study on arbitrary detention and drug polices, which found that ´

the war on drugs may be understood to a significant extent as a war on people. Its impact is often greatest on those who are poor, but also frequently overlaps with discrimination in law enforcement directed at vulnerable groups

´. At the same time, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights published a new ‘Agenda towards transformative change for racial justice and equality´, highlighting that ´

The discriminatory application of criminal law must be tackled at every stage, including by reforming drug-related policies

´. The High Commissioner´s proposal led to Human Rights Council Resolution 47/21, which contains key commitments to uproot systemic racism in the law enforcement and criminal justice systems. The Political Declaration on HIV and AIDS, adopted in June 2021, also showcased the international community´s commitment to ending inequalities as a step towards ending AIDS. Lastly, the new UN system Common Position on Incarceration, led by UNODC in partnership with other UN entities, notes ‘

the overrepresentation of minority and marginalized groups among prisoners, many of whom are charged with petty and nonviolent offences

support reform efforts aimed at ensuring proportionate and individualized sentencing and alternatives to conviction or punishment in appropriate cases, including for minor drug-related offences

These various commitments emerging across the United Nations are aligned with the 2018 Chief Executives Board’s UN System Common Position on drug-related matters, which makes clear that ‘

should be designed and implemented by States in accordance with their human rights obligations

’, and commits all UN agencies, including UNODC, to support drug policies ‘

that put people, health, and human rights at the centre

Similar human rights concerns have been highlighted in the just-released Global Drug Policy Index, which measures and ranks the national drug policies of 30 countries according to how well they align with the UN system Common Position on Drugs and its Task Team report of March 2019.

The theme of the 2021 International Human Rights Day is ‘Equality: Reducing inequalities, advancing human rights’, and is aimed at ´

addressing and finding solutions for deep-rooted forms of discrimination that have affected the most vulnerable people in societies

´. As such, it presents a crucial opportunity for UNODC to align itself with other UN entities in calling for the end of policies that perpetuate inequality and discrimination, while highlighting its commitment to the promotion of human rights, in line with the UN system Common Positions.

It is in this context that we urge you to issue a strong statement on International Human Rights Day, calling on states to change the drug laws, policies and practices that violate health and human rights, and entrench inequality. To be credible, such a statement should explicitly acknowledge the disproportionate impact of drug laws and drug control on people marginalised on the basis of their gender, race, ethnicity, and economic status, and urge Member States to:

Abolish the death penalty in all circumstances. Imposing capital punishment for drug offences has been found to be contrary to international human rights law by the Human Rights Committee, and the Human Rights Council.

Put an immediate end to extrajudicial killings committed in the name of drug control, as has been repeatedly called for by the Human Rights Council and UN human rights experts.

Permanently close compulsory drug detention centres, including those that masquerade as ‘rehabilitation’, and implement voluntary, evidence-informed, and rights-based health and social services, as recently called for by sixteen UN agencies, including UNODC.

Stress the urgent need to provide accessible, affordable, and adequately funded harm reduction services in community and closed settings, to fulfil the right to health and the right to life of people who use drugs, as demanded by several UN human rights bodies and experts. This is also central to UNODC’s core role as lead UNAIDS co-sponsor regarding prisons and HIV amongst people who use drugs.

Take immediate measures to address prison overcrowding, as already recommended by UNODC and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, by promoting alternatives to incarceration, and ensuring proportionate sentencing for all drug offences, including by taking into account mitigating factors – in line with the basic principle that prisons should only be used as a last resort in all circumstances.

Ensure that people who use drugs are not subject to arbitrary detention, torture, or ill-treatment – whether in state custody or public or private drug services. While under detention, people with a drug dependence or health problems associated with their drug use must be offered evidence-based treatment, harm reduction and other drug services on a strictly voluntary basis.

Promote the end of all punishment for drug use, and drug possession and cultivation for personal use, as permitted within the three drug control conventions. Such policy shifts will help to end the stigma, criminalisation, and exclusion faced by people who use drugs, and to facilitate access to health and social services, as called for by the UN system Common Position, UNAIDS, and UN human rights bodies.

Make sure that drug policies incorporate a gender-sensitive perspective. This should be done by tailoring drug services to the specific needs of women, and by ensuring that criminal laws take into account the circumstances of women involved in drug offences, as most of them come from backgrounds of poverty, marginalisation, and oppression.

Clearly outline the ways in which UNODC will work to achieve these changes, and the measures being taken to ensure that human rights are effectively embedded as a core strand for all of the Office’s work.

As the lead UN agency in drug-related matters, UNODC has the responsibility to promote drug policies that respect, protect, and fulfil human rights, in a way that is consistent with the standards developed by the UN system, and in line with the commitments set in the UN system Common Positions on drugs and on incarceration. A strong statement in the forthcoming International Human Rights Day would be an important and welcome step to signal UNODC’s unequivocal commitment.

We look forward to discussing these concerns and recommendations with you.

NGOs urge UNODC's Executive Director to mark Human Rights Day with a call to reform drug policies that entrench inequality

It is with great pleasure and excitement that the Vienna NGO Committee on Drugs (VNGOC) and New York NGO Committee on Drugs (NYNGOC) introduce the relaunched Civil Society Task Force (CSTF). The CSTF — a joint initiative of the NYNGOC and VNGOC— will serve to promote inclusivity of civil society at all proceedings leading up to and at the Ministerial Segment of the 62nd Session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs in 2019.


The CSTF is co-chaired by the chairs of the VNGOC and NYNGOC and consists of 5 additional Steering Group members, 18 representatives of global regions
and 10 representatives from affected populations and global voices.


The VNGOC and NYNGOC were established in 1983 and 1984, respectively, and serve as representative platforms for discussion and debate on drug policy issues, as well as being interfaces between civil society organisations, the United Nations system and its member states. Emerging in 2015, the CSTF was originally created by the NYNGOC and VNGOC to ensure comprehensive, structured and balanced participation by civil society at the 2016 UNGASS on the world drug problem. In the process leading up to the 2016 UNGASS, the CSTF was an effective vehicle for increasing the inclusion of civil society voices at all
stages of preparation prior to the proceeding. The CSTF successfully delivered a range of actions and consultations. This included the selection of high quality civil society speakers at the 2016 UNGASS itself from around the world. In order to maximize the engagement of civil society in the 2019 Ministerial Segment and its lead-up, the VNGOC and NYNGOC bilaterally signed the Memorandum of Understanding during the 61st CND in March 2018. Following an open call and selection process, the Task Force now comprises 35 individuals from around the world.


In order to support civil society participation in the Ministerial Segment, in accordance with CND Resolutions 60/1 and 61/3, the Civil Society Task Force has been replenished and relaunched in 2018. The CSTF’s goal is to secure the comprehensive and meaningful participation of civil society actors in the implementation of the recommendations made in the 2016 UNGASS outcome document. The CSTF will also work towards fostering an environment where evidencebased
approaches to drug issues (including methodologies and ideologies) are comprehensive and where regional and gender diversity is represented through various inputs. In preparation of the 2019 Ministerial Segment, the CSTF will promote the contributions of civil society with expertise in various drug-related areas.

The CSTF is excited to begin working immediately to ensure that civil society is active and present at all preparatory stages of the 62nd CND. In the short time available, the Task Force’s plans include: a post-UNGASS global consultation process, to inform a comprehensive output document to support the debate; civil society hearings in Vienna and New York to bring together civil society speakers and member state representatives; the selection of speakers for all opportunities at the United Nations in Vienna and New York; and the delivery of any further activities that will require CSTF attention.

In particular, the CSTF will identify and facilitate speaker inclusion for all relevant preparatory events and UN meetings, host regional and thematic online consultations, organize civil society hearings on the margins of the third committee negotiations and during the 62nd CND, co-host an Interactive Civil Society Hearing for all stakeholders with the Chair of the CND culminating in a recognized document preserving all conclusions from the event as a part of the preparatory process and ensure drug-related and wider civil society, policy makers and member delegations remain aware of relevant updates regarding CSTF projects and events leading up to the 2019 Ministerial Segment. In the pursuit of encouraging the acknowledgment of civil society contributions, the CSTF looks forward to the participation of many diverse civil society stakeholders and organisations toward the 62nd CND preparatory process.
For all questions and inquiries, the CSTF may be reached by e-mail at info@cstfondrugs.org.

Please visit: https://www.cstfondrugs.org/membership/

Civil Society Task Force on Drugs re-launched

Over a year after the activation of the National Committee for Combating Addiction and a binding ruling by the Court of Cassation, some judges are still refusing to apply the drug law by allowing drug users to seek treatment in lieu of prosecution. Activists and lawyers who spoke to The Daily Star said many prosecutors and judges still perceive addicts as criminals, especially if they are from impoverished or troubled backgrounds.

“Judges are trying to help but are now just recently being educated,” said Rabih Khattab, one of the founders of the Cedar Rehab Center in Hammana, which opened earlier this year. “We’ve gotten phone calls [from judges] where they ask if a patient can be admitted to rehab rather than going to jail, but they only call when they know the patient is ‘not suitable’ to be in a jail cell, suitable meaning somebody coming from a good family.”

Although some judges might assume only wealthy users can afford Cedar’s $7,000-a-month price tag, Khattab said the center operates on a sliding scale and about half of all patients receive financial assistance. The Oum al-Nour association offers inpatient rehabilitation for free, but a spokesperson for the institution refused to discuss its relationship to the judiciary or whether the number of referred cases had risen since the Committee’s formation.

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

Skoun Lebanese Addiction Centre

Region

Translations

Related Content