Lao People's Democratic Republic's position at the hub of the Greater Mekong Subregion and its shared borders with Cambodia, China, Myanmar, Thailand and Viet Nam make it "extremely vulnerable" to the trafficking of people, illicit drugs and commodities by transnational organized crime groups, warned the Executive Director of the Vienna-based United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Yury Fedotov. He said this was true despite the country's economic reforms, impressive economic growth rates and its efforts to combat corruption.

"While economic growth and regional integration bring many positives such as the increased mobility of goods, services, people and money, they also provide opportunities for transnational organized crime to expand, threaten human security and challenge the rule of law," said Mr. Fedotov.

"Transnational organized criminal syndicates traffic in illicit drugs, children, women and men, counterfeit products and fake medicines. But they also play a role in illicit resource extraction including protected natural resources, timber, fish and other wildlife. These syndicates represent a threat to public health and to society's well-being," said Mr. Fedotov. "Let's put them out of business!"

In his first official visit, Mr. Fedotov met with the Prime Minister of the Lao PDR Thongsing Thammavong, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Thongloun Sisoulith, the Minister of Public Security Thongban Seng-Aphone and the Acting Chair of the Lao National Commission for Drug Control and Supervision Kou Chansina. He also met with victims of human trafficking and university students.

Mr. Fedotov thanked the Government for its annual contribution to UNODC's annual South-East Asia Opium Survey. He reiterated UNODC Lao PDR Country Programme's continued support to Government efforts to reduce illicit opium poppy cultivation and to increase food security, as well as develop sustainable livelihoods in former opium-growing areas, and to fight illicit drugs, organized crime, corruption, terrorism, and the trafficking of people and sexual exploitation of minors.

During a visit to the UNODC-supported Counseling and Protection Centre for Women and Children, Mr. Fedotov cited it as a best practice. "We need more such shelters at a time when many of those in society are being victimized in this way," he said.

Mr. Fedotov noted that the centre currently housed both women and children who had been victimized by human trafficking - as well as domestic violence and sexual exploitation. He commended police and prosecutors for focusing on victims and their human rights in their response to such crimes against children and women.

Mr. Fedotov also urged support for Project Childhood, an initiative to combat the sexual exploitation of children - mainly in the travel and tourism sectors - within the Greater Mekong subregion. The project is currently active in Lao PDR, Cambodia, Thailand and Viet Nam. Project Childhood is being implemented in two complementary pillars - the Protection Pillar, a partnership between UNODC and Interpol, and its sister arm, the Prevention Pillar, implemented by World Vision.

While Project Childhood (Prevention Pillar) aims to work with communities to prevent children from becoming victims of sexual exploitation in travel and tourism, Project Childhood (Protection Pillar) strengthens law enforcement capacity to identify, arrest and prosecute travelling child sex offenders in the Mekong region.

In other meetings, Mr. Fedotov congratulated the Government for significant seizures of illicit drugs in the last few years, and strongly emphasized the need for an effective community-based approach to drug abuse and HIV prevention. Such an approach should be evidence-based and supportive of human rights.

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

Lao PDR "extremely vulnerable", says UNODC Executive Director

HAVE you seen Molly? She makes me want to dance. The posters plastered on walls around Melbourne are often met with a nudge and a wink by club goers. "Molly" is the slang term for MDMA, better known as ecstasy. And it makes a great number of Australians want to get on the dance floor.

Taken mainly as a party drug, ecstasy causes the user to be more energetic and alert. It lowers aggression and anxiety, leads to euphoria and creates increased empathy and a sense of intimacy with others. According to a 2010 government report, one in 10 Australians over age 14 has used it, the highest per capita rate in the world.

At first glance, this seems alarming – hundreds of thousands of people using a drug that carries the same classification as heroin or crystal meth. But is this alarm warranted? If ecstasy were a legal and available alternative to alcohol, would the social and moral and health consequences be cause for concern?

Many experts Fairfax Media spoke to for this story say there is overwhelming evidence ecstasy is significantly less dangerous than alcohol for the user and society generally. And the word from users is when it is available, they choose it over drinking. The most comprehensive study of the top 20 recreational drugs was carried out in 2010 by the British Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs (ISCD), which ranked them from most to least harmful using a range of weighted criteria.

The results were published in the medical journal 

and have been reported worldwide. Alcohol was found to be most harmful to society and fifth most harmful to users, making it the most harmful drug overall. Ecstasy, on the other hand, causes almost no harm to society and scored very low on the harm done to the user, coming in at 17th overall. Cannabis (legalised in two US states last month) came in eighth.

"The present drug classification systems have little relation to the evidence of harm," wrote ISCD researcher Professor David Nutt, former chief adviser on drugs to the British government until he was dismissed in 2009 after controversially stating that using ecstasy is safer than horse riding.

These findings are no surprise to think tank Australia21, which has released two reports condemning the so-called "War on Drugs".

"What Australia21 is about is laying out the evidence," says chairman Paul Barratt, a former head of the Defence Department. "And there's evidence that there are drugs that are less harmful than alcohol or tobacco."

Australia21's latest report, "Alternatives to Prohibition" contains a proposal by Professor David Penington, that ecstasy (along with cannabis) be decriminalised and made available in controlled doses to those who are willing to be put on a confidential national users register.

"If [ecstasy] could be handled in a controlled manner rather than just by arresting people for possession and use, we might have a basis to deal with it more effectively with education as a health issue among young people," Penington says.

So why are people being criminalised for possessing and using a substance that experts claim causes little harm to users and virtually none to society? In Victoria, possession of ecstasy carries a maximum penalty of a $4200 fine and imprisonment for one year.

Several ecstasy users agreed to speak to Fairfax Media on the condition of anonymity. All have professional jobs, which may be at risk should they receive a drug conviction.

"I'd have to say MDMA has given me some of the best experiences of my life," says user "Malcolm". "But also a lot of frustrating times that all seem to come from it being illegal: worrying about the police, sourcing the product, the quality, whether it'll actually even be MDMA or if I'll be robbed or hurt or killed buying it."

Professor Alison Ritter of the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre says arguments against legalising ecstasy are not based on the available evidence about the drug. "The policy debate is much more about ideology and beliefs about drug use than it is about research evidence" she says.

The most common objection is that legalisation would increase the uptake of the drug by young people. Ritter emphasises there is no current evidence to support this assertion.

But even if it is true it would be naive to think prohibition will prevent people from turning to other drugs. Indeed, the Australian Institute of Criminology has reported a correlation between the unavailability of ecstasy and a rise in crystal meth use. Experts say others will resort to alcohol, which Nutt's research shows causes greater harm.

David Penington's studies over the years have led him to a similar conclusion. "It is an anomaly that ecstasy, which causes far fewer problems than alcohol, is seen as criminal." He believes young people are aware of this and therefore, "these issues have no credibility among young people when we preach about them on moral grounds".

All users who spoke to Fairfax Media say they drink less when using ecstasy, mainly because alcohol lessens its effects. "I used to think I was happy when I was drunk but I realised that wasn't the case. The euphoria associated with alcohol just doesn't measure up to Molly," says one user.

Dr Alex Wodak, who was director of the Alcohol and Drug Service, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, for 30 years says adverse health events from MDMA are uncommon but nonetheless receive saturation media coverage when they do occur. This, he says, compares with adverse health events from alcohol which are "regrettably common" but receive little coverage.

"For every person seen with a problem with MDMA there would be hundreds, if not thousands, seen with an alcohol-related problem," he says. He doubts that there have been "more than a handful" of deaths directly related to MDMA in Australia.

David Nutt's research also found ecstasy lowers levels of aggression.

"George" concurs. "After a few too many [beers] , if someone bumps into me I get angry. When I'm on ecstasy I just laugh and apologise. You never ever feel like getting into fights on ecstasy."

Criminal barrister and spokesman for the Australian Lawyers Alliance, Greg Barns agrees. Of his clients who wind up in jail after a big night out, he says alcohol always plays a part, but ecstasy never does.

"If police wanted a quieter Saturday night make sure there's a plentiful supply of ecstasy, rather than alcohol. Because ecstasy is not a drug that is known to be associated with violence," he says.

While there is little risk of harm in using MDMA, the greatest health risk comes from not knowing what (non-MDMA) adulterants are in black market pills. For some, this has been alleviated by the emergence of online illicit drug marketplaces, which have vendor feedback and user reviews confirming the purity of the drug. "It's been a godsend," says "Malcolm".

Another cause for concern, says Penington, has been a rise in synthetic drugs that mimic the effects of ecstasy. The impact on users' health from these unregulated research chemicals is unknown, whereas more than 30 years of research has found MDMA to not only be relatively benign, but may have medical and therapeutic benefits.

After serving with the Australian Army for 15 years, including a war in Somalia in 1993, Steve McDonald, 50, was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and hospitalised in a psychiatric ward. "I went through all the mainstream treatments," he says. None of them worked.

Some years after his first breakdown, McDonald developed an interest in work being done by US group MAPS (Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies) into psychedelic-assisted therapy. He is now the association secretary of PRISM, a non-profit association of Psychedelic Research in Science and Medicine, which is seeking approval for a clinical trial of MDMA-assisted psychotherapy for PTSD sufferers.

US studies found that in 2010 more than 80 per cent of subjects who received MDMA-assisted psychotherapy for treatment-resistant PTSD no longer met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD following the trial.

Those who were successfully treated said the MDMA produced a state of mind that allowed them to feel and talk about their trauma without being overwhelmed by it.

McDonald is frustrated that he and other Australian war veterans do not have access to a therapy he says has been proven to be beneficial in overseas trials.

"I think there's a great deal of scientific evidence coming from around the world right now that many of the drugs that we have on Schedule 9 here in Australia, including psychedelics, are extremely promising medicines which can open up new approaches to healing."

Progress on the Australian trial has been disappointing. Such studies need to be approved by an ethics committee and the MDMA trial was refused, mainly because PRISM has been unable to secure the services of a psychiatrist with both the credentials and availability to run the study.

Greg Barns says there is also a final compelling argument to legalise ecstasy on economic grounds alone.

"As an exercise of public policy and judicious use of taxpayers' money, this should be regarded as not only a failure but a scandalous waste of money by law enforcement agencies and governments around the world," he says.

Not only is the enforcement of the ban on ecstasy draining scarce government resources, it is diverting potential government income from ethically sourced or manufactured drugs into the hands of organised criminal gangs.

"I don't know of any other area of public policy where we not only run counter to the evidence but in fact we knowingly support criminal enterprises," Barns says.

Paul Barratt has requested a Productivity Commission inquiry into the "War on Drugs" with independent analysis to determine the economic impact of current policy. The response, he says, has been "deafening silence". "We've spent billions on drug law enforcement [and associated costs]," he says "Why is it completely off the agenda to take a look at whether we're getting value for money for those things?"

Experts say decriminalising ecstasy would allow resources currently spent identifying and prosecuting users to be diverted into other areas. Actually legalising it could bring money in through a government-owned supply or taxes on regulated supply from private manufacturers.

Despite overwhelming evidence that prohibition is expensive, ineffective and potentially dangerous neither of the major political parties is interested in entering into a debate on drug reform.

"It's just political caution," Barratt says. "Most people think drug law reform is a good idea, but those who don't are much more passionately committed to their view." For them, he says, it is a vote-changer.

"[The parties] are in thrall to conservative tabloid media, some Christian groups and marginal seats," Barns says. "It's a classic case of putting short-term political gain in front of the long-term health of Australia."

Penington thinks any impetus for change has to come first from the broader community. "The general community attitude is that taking alcohol is not seen as a moral failure, while taking any amount of ecstasy is seen as a wicked, dangerous thing to do".

But Steve McDonald believes there is a grass roots change under way overseas and remains hopeful. "I think once there's a very clear signal that the majority of the Australian public support drug law reform, you'll see the politicians changing their minds."


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/dancing-with-molly-20121203-2ar04.html#ixzz2EAuWmkqN
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/dancing-with-molly-20121203-2ar04.html#ixzz2EAuTipPB

Dancing with Molly: The evidence about MDMA

On 16-19 November, 2012, TS Hub Kiev and Rumah Cemara conducted a workshop on Study Design, Data Generation and Interviewing for research teams from China, India, Indonesia, Kenya, and Malaysia, in Bali, Indonesia. The workshop was organized prior to the launch of operational studies that will be implemented by CAHR partner organisations in 2013 and was facilitated by Professor Tim Rhodes from London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK and Doctor Alisa Pedrana from Burnet Institute, Australia.

The participants of the workshop had different experience in conducting qualitative studies. The group was very diverse: there were project managers, representatives from research institutions and field workers. For those who had not have any research experience before, it was “an eye opening workshop” (as stated in the evaluation forms), the participants from research institutions learnt how interventions targeting people who use drugs can benefit from qualitative studies. The future research teams from five countries had a chance to work together on their studies, discuss them in details and receive a feedback from their colleagues and facilitators.

The participants found the workshop very useful, saw its practical implication and highly evaluated the work of the facilitators.

A workshop on study design, data generation and interviewing

Supervised injection sites help save lives and protect communities. This was the conclusion of over 30 research studies on Vancouver’s own supervised injection site (SIS) known as Insite. And Canada’s Supreme Court agreed in September 2011, ordering the federal Minister of Health to grant a Section 56 exemption to the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act to allow Insite to continue to operate.

To scale up harm reduction and support the development of similar services throughout the province, the BC Ministry of Health has now revised its “Guidance Document for Supervised Injection Services.” Written for health care professionals, it provides advice to health authorities and other organizations considering supervised injection services in their local areas.

According to provincial policy, anyone who wants to offer this service will need to consider how they will sustain the support of local groups like medical health officers, police departments and other potentially interested groups. The decision of Canada’s Supreme Courts makes brief mention of future applications for a section 56 exemption:

[153] The CDSA grants the Minister discretion in determining whether to grant exemptions. That discretion must be exercised in accordance with the Charter. This requires the Minister to consider whether denying an exemption would cause deprivations of life and security of the person that are not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. The factors considered in making the decision on an exemption must include evidence, if any, on the impact of such a facility on crime rates, the local conditions indicating a need for such a supervised injection site, the regulatory structure in place to support the facility, the resources available to support its maintenance, and expressions of community support or opposition.

This last sentence has raised concerns about the likely success of future supervised consumption services. Despite overwhelming evidence of their successes, harm reduction services continue to generate public controversy, meaning that some members of a community are likely to object to supervised consumption services. But the existence of opposition does not necessarily mean that potential applicants must halt their efforts. In fact, the Supreme Court’s judgment is not a checklist of requirements for a successful application but rather a description of the factors the Minister must consider when making a decision. Potential applicants must be able to demonstrate that they have gauged public support and can offer evidence that it exists. Applications, as the B.C. provincial government suggests, must include evidence of positive support along with opposition.

It is important to remember that Insite did not necessarily start out with full community support. Rather, over time, and as the facility continued to operate, the surrounding community felt its positive effects and researchers were able to demonstrate its effectiveness in terms of health and social order. This does not mean that if one group objects then the application will necessarily fail. Potential applicants for an exemption will need to describe what efforts will be made to respond to community concerns and they will need to consider how they plan to educate their community about the positive effects of these services.

Supervised consumption services and community support

Harm reduction overviews are available for 30 countries — the 27 EU Member States, Norway as EMCDDA member, and Turkey and Croatia as Candidate Countries.

The harm reduction overviews consist of five main parts:

description of the key responses to prevent and reduce drug-related infectious diseases.
The information is divided in 3 main categories: needle and syringe programmes, responses targeting infectious diseases (i.e. hepatitis) and health promotion activities. Drug treatment is considered part of harm reduction responses but further information can be found in the country-specific treatment overviews.

description of the key responses to prevent and reduce drug-related deaths.
The information is divided 3 main categories: targeted responses in the community, Naloxone provision and drug consumption rooms.

description of the key responses to prevent and reduce drug-related harms in recreational settings

The overviews are based primarily on data from structured questionnaires and standard tables on harm reduction interventions collected via the Reitox network of national focal points.

EMCDDA harm reduction overviews

The pledge by ASEAN leaders to intensify campaigns to create a drug-free ASEAN by 2015 is increasingly out of step with international trends which, according to the recent findings of The Global Commission on Drug Policy, increasingly favor drug policy reforms like decriminalization and treating addiction as a public health issue.

Dr. Michel Kazatchkine, a member of the Global Commission on Drug Policy told a Bangkok forum that the war on drugs is a failure. Citing the commission’s recent report, Kazatchkine said, “We recommend immediate major reforms of the global prohibition regime to halt the spread of HIV infection…” and other health problems.

Many countries around the world seem to agree. In Latin America, for instance, many governments have declared that the war on drugs has failed and are instead searching for a new, more common sense approach to the problem.

In Argentina and Mexico the possession of small quantities of certain drugs has recently been decriminalized. This followed Brazil partially decriminalizing drugs through a series of laws in the middle part of last decade.

Similarly, a majority of voters in the U.S. states of Colorado and Washington recently approved referendums legalizing the personal use of marijuana (marijuana is still illegal under federal statutes, which technically takes precedence over state laws). Many other states have legalized the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes, while others, like New York State, are considering decriminalization. Meanwhile, many European countries– including the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain have also decriminalized drugs

Doing so has often proved remarkably successful, resulting in lower HIV rates and even, in some cases, a decline in drug usage. For example, a 2009 CATO Institute study of Portugal's decision to decriminalize drugs in 2001 concluded: "In virtually every category of any significance, Portugal, since decriminalization, has outperformed the vast majority of other states that continue to adhere to a criminalization regime."

ASEAN stands in stark contrast to these examples as member nations are clinging to tough anti-drug laws that champion aggressive law enforcement measures and the detention of 300,000 drug users and sex-workers outside the normal court system in compulsory rehabilitation centers.

Most shockingly, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Singapore still impose the death penalty for narcotic offenses. In some cases, narcotic crimes require mandatory death sentences. Not surprisingly, many drug-addicts are afraid to seek treatment for fear of being jailed… or worse.

Nor does change appear to be imminent. In Thailand last year the government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra (sister of ousted PM Thaksin) declared a new “war on drugs” in the name of a “zero tolerance” policy. Gen. Adul Saengsingkaew deputy national police chief was quoted by the 

as stating, “The war on drugs now is going much better than it was under the previous government. Actually, it is even better than under the Thaksin Shinawatra administration which initiated this policy in 2001.”

The fact that the police chief cited Thaksin’s harsh crackdown on drugs in 2002 that led to as many as 2,700 deaths as a benchmark of success, is emblematic of the issue. Amnesty International and other human rights groups condemned the policy that encouraged this spate of extra-judicial killings, and undermined basic legal principles of bringing suspects before a court.

Thai police statistics show that arrests for drug related charges have risen by 14% this year, while drug-related prosecutions have increased by 8%. Already drug offenders constitute 65% of Thailand’s incarcerated population. With prisons overflowing in the country, it’s unsustainable to continue increasing the number of imprisoned drug offenders.

The new war on drugs: ASEAN style

New HIV infections among Romanian drug users have grown exponentially over the past couple of years, from three to five cases annually between 2007 and 2009, to 98 just in the first half of 2012.

The year 2011 saw 129 new cases of HIV among injecting drug users after 12 new cases had been registered in 2010. Injecting drugs has now become the second most common way to contract the virus in Romania (the first is heterosexual transmission), after being a negligible cause of infections for most of the post-socialist period.

International and national groups working for HIV prevention expect the emerging epidemic to expand over the next years, despite causes for the rise in cases being relatively easy to pin down.

For one, there has been a significant change in drug consumption patterns. In Romania, the vast majority of injecting drug users live in capital Bucharest. There were over 19,000 so-called problem drug users (who inject drugs or regularly use opioids, cocaine or amphetamines) in the city in 2010, in a total population of almost two million.

Bucharest users had been traditionally injecting heroin but have more recently switched to amphetamine-type stimulants – mostly synthetic cathinones such as mephedrone. In 2009, 97 percent of users reported heroin as the main drug of injection; in 2010 already 30 percent of users were injecting synthetic amphetamines.

Since 2008, Romania has seen a boom in the market for legal highs. While the authorities were struggling to understand the phenomenon and outlaw the synthetic substances one by one, numerous injecting users had switched already from heroin to the new drugs because of the perceived safety behind their legality and easier availability. A ‘heroin drought’ hitting Europe in 2010 because of lower opium production in Afghanistan may have played its indirect role as well, though causality is difficult to establish.

The injecting synthetic drugs available on the Romanian market require on average twice as high frequency of injection as heroin, meaning that users need more syringes and are likely to share more.

Importantly, while this change was happening on the drugs market, the number of syringes distributed through needle exchange programmes halved between 2009 and 2010 and remains low to date. In 2009, organisations working with drug users distributed 1.7 million syringes to Romanian users, while in 2010 only 965,000 were given out. According to the European Monitoring Centre on Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), 3.6 million syringes would be needed in Bucharest only to keep the risk of infectious diseases spread low.

In Romania, needle exchange programmes were set up and funded by international donors such as the United Nations, the Global Fund (to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria), or the Open Society Foundation. But as Romania started to be categorised as a better off country by donors, foreign funds dried up. For instance, the halting of grants from the Global Fund in 2010 was directly related to Romania’s being classified as an upper middle income country by the World Bank.

European Union regional funds, still used by local NGOs for some programmes, reportedly come with bureaucratic burdens often too big. For one, groups accessing these funds say that administrative tasks keep staff away from social work on the ground; additionally, disbursement of these EU funds requires submitting personal data of the beneficiaries, which may deter some users from seeking help in a country where drug use is heavily criminalised.

While international funding is getting increasingly harder to access, Romanian authorities are not stepping in to fill the gap.

The Romanian Ministry of Health is at the moment in charge of detoxification programmes in the country. The Ministry and the National Anti-Drug Agency also run in total seven opiate replacement centers across the country, which handle around 1,200 patients; in 2011, in Bucharest, only 9 percent of injecting drug users were covered by the available opiate treatments. However, authorities have so far failed to recognise the importance of financing syringes.

“The spike in HIV in Romania demonstrates a troubling dynamic we are expecting to see across Central and Eastern Europe, which is the withdrawal of international support for HIV programmes without any assurance that national governments will pick up the slack,” says Daniel Wolfe, director of the International Harm Reduction Development Programme at the Open Society Foundation.

“There was a fantasy that EU accession would help ensure the same kind of health protection and social support in countries like Romania that the richer EU countries have,” Wolfe told IPS. “But while some small support for programmes for drug users have come from EU social funds, these have been inadequate to the need and excluded support for the sterile injection equipment that is the core of HIV prevention efforts.”

Neither the Ministry of Health nor the Municipality of Bucharest, which share responsibility for HIV prevention among and care for drug users in Bucharest, responded to requests from IPS to comment on how they plan to deal with the emerging epidemic.

According to Valentin Simionov from the Romanian Harm Reduction Network, an advocacy group working on HIV prevention and care, while HIV prevention policies in place in Romania look well on paper, implementation has been disastruous.

“Romanian authorities are ignoring public health,” says Simionov. “When they say that they do not have money for needle exchange programmes, we would rather answer that this is a case of bad management of public resources.

“We have estimated that it would cost the Romanian state four million euros annually to fully support needle exchange programmes covering 9,000 injecting drug users, from purchase of syringes to their safe disposal,” Simionov told IPS. “It’s common knowledge that this is the price that the Romanian state pays for one kilometre of highway in some cases, so how can they say the money does not exist? In reality, it is all a matter of setting the right priorities.”

New HIV Epidemic Looms over Romania

It was a day just like any other. Lin, a 10-year-old Hmong girl, sat in front of the television for the evening news, along with other children from her village in the hills of Chiang Mai province.The children chatted throughout the whole news programme. They were only waiting for their favourite soap opera to come on after the news.

Suddenly, images from a press conference flashed up on the screen. Police were parading the suspects from a recent drug bust before the media.

Lin (not her real name) glanced at the screen, and spotted someone who looked familiar.

She screamed and cried once she realised that the people who had been arrested were her parents.

With her mother and father in prison and no-one to look after her, Lin headed to Chiang Mai where she scratched out a living selling garlands on the street.

She was eventually picked up by the Volunteer for Children's Development Foundation in Chiang Mai, a non-profit group which helps children in need.

Poj Rungrojkhnlaporn, the organisation's founder, said he first met Lin when she was 12 years old.

''I saw this young girl walking in and out of many bars on Loy Kroh Road trying to sell roses to foreigners. I knew if I didn't do anything about it, Lin may have ended up in the sex trade. I talked to her and found that she had no home.

''Lin is a very quiet girl. I think part of it is because she is mentally damaged from what happened to her parents.

''She is now back at school and is returning to a more normal life. But I don't think the scar in her heart will ever be healed.''

Drug raids are not a new issue for Thailand. In 2003, then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra announced his controversial ''war on drugs''.

Approximately 2,800 major drug dealers and more than 20,000 lower-level dealers were arrested as a result of Thaksin's policy.

More than 2,500 people were also killed, many by police.

Those who were killed included drug dealers, but also many innocent people who were not granted a trial.

Among those most affected were the thousands of children across the country, like Lin, who were left abandoned after their parents were killed or incarcerated.

Most of the raids were conducted in the northern parts of Thailand on the border with Myanmar. The area is home to many hilltribes, who suffer from poverty and social isolation.

According to Provincial Police Region 5 in Chiang Mai, there is no record of how many people were arrested or killed during the 2003 war on drugs.

Spectrum had the opportunity to talk with several organisations working directly with children in the north of Thailand. The conversations revealed that every youth shelter in the area has at least three hilltribe children who were left abandoned after the war on drugs. The effects of the policy on their lives has been devastating, with many forced into prostitution or drug dealing to support themselves.

Mr Poj from the Volunteer for Children's Development Foundation, told Spectrum about some of the children he was caring for at the foundation.

''We first ran our foundation as a place where homeless children can go to when they need somewhere to sleep or a place to eat. Most children we helped were hilltribe and Myanmar kids who worked selling garlands on the street,'' he said.

''Once our foundation became more established, a lot more children came to us. Some of them came to stay overnight and left in the morning. Others really had no place to go and ended up staying with us long-term.

''Among these kids [who stay long-term], there are a few who stay with us during the day, then go out at night to work. Some work in restaurants, while some are working in the sex trade,'' Mr Poj said.

''Of all of the kids that are with me, there are two cases that provide the greatest examples of the negative effects of hard-line drug policies,'' he said, and told their stories. Gudea, a 15-year-old Hmong boy, moved to Chiang Mai with his parents when he was very young. They previously lived in Mae Rim district, but moved to the city in pursuit of a better life.

Like the majority of hilltribe people who move to work in a big city, they expected good-paying jobs.

But Gudea's parents struggled to find a job that could bring in enough money to support the family.

After a couple of years living in Chiang Mai, Gudea's family welcomed a new baby girl. Even though the birth brought joy to his family, their financial situation was becoming impossible.

''We didn't have enough money to live on when my sister was born. So my dad told us he would have to find a new job,'' Gudea said.

''After a few months, he started to bring home a lot of money. We had good food to eat, we could afford to buy new clothes, and we even had enough money to send some back to my grandmother.

''For the next year, we had enough to build a small house and buy a second-hand pickup truck. I started to feel like our lives were going to get better.

''But one day my mother told me that my father had been arrested for drug dealing.''

Mr Poj found Gudea three years ago. He was sleeping on the streets, and had no place to go.

''Gudea told me that his mother was also arrested about a year after his father. She had also turned to selling drugs to be able to feed the family.

''After his mother was arrested, the police seized the family's property. Gudea's sister was sent back to the village in Mae Rim long before his mother was arrested. Gudea was left without a home or family,'' Mr Poj said.

''Having no place to go, Gudea joined other homeless kids selling garlands on the street. I took him in and sent him to school, and he helped me with some work at my foundation.''

The parents of Lang, a 17-year-old Tai Yai boy, were also arrested for drug dealing.

''Both of them would work during the day while I went to school. We all came back and would see each other every night. I had such a happy family life,'' Lang said.

''But I came home after school one day and my landlord told me the horrible news. She said both of my parents had been arrested for selling drugs. I was shocked when I heard that.

''My landlord told me to leave the house immediately, since she was scared that no one would ever rent the house again if they knew.''

Mr Poj found Lang two years ago living on the streets.

''When I first found Lang, he was working at a gay bar in Chiang Mai town. It was sad to see someone that young working in the sex trade. So I took him in, gave him advice, and encouraged him to get a better job. I am glad he listened to me and finally got a job as a restaurant waiter,'' Mr Poj said.

Another foundation that is helping children in Mae Taeng district is the Starfish Country Home School Foundation. Originally established to help hilltribe children, the foundation is now expanding to Chiang Mai town, Chiang Rai, and Bangkok to help underprivileged kids.

Richard Haugland, the foundation's founder and president, said that irrespective of whether one or both parents were in jail, it was their children who ultimately suffered the most.

''Some children are lucky enough to have someone look after them after their parents can no longer take care of them. But some are not that lucky and end up being homeless,'' he said.

''We have so many children who are under the care of the foundation. Among these children, there are a lot whose parents were involved with drugs. Once the children stay with us, we take care of them until they can be independent. We are trying to help as many as we can, but we can only help a very small group.''

Apinan Aramrat, director of the Northern Substance Abuse Centre at Chiang Mai University, said the social problems caused by the 2003 war on drugs are still present and don't seem to be getting any better. The Yingluck Shinawatra government has continued with the hard-line approach to tackling drugs, launching its own ''war on drugs'' late last year.

''The policy set up by the Office of the Narcotics Control Board [ONCB] seems to be the main cause of the problem. I am not sure what the current policy is, but when it was first launched more than 10 years ago, the ONCB just wanted to get rid of drug dealers as quickly as possible without even checking if the person accused was guilty or not,'' Dr Apinan said.

''The ONCB came up with a target number [of drug dealers to be arrested] and sent it out to the police. This is when it gets messy because the police are then under pressure to meet those targets. The result is that there are a lot of innocent people affected by the war on drugs,'' he explained.

''Some really were guilty, but there were also many who had nothing to do with drugs. We have no exact number of how many innocent people were affected, but I know there are many out there.''

But Siriporn Wanawiriya, director of the drug suppression unit at the ONCB, said current drug policies have changed significantly from those of the past, and are now less target-oriented.

''Last year, the ONCB policy for drug suppression focused on the five aspects of drug smuggling, which are production, import, export, trade and possession. Those who fell into one of those categories were arrested. We set a target of 60,000 people to arrest last year, and we arrested 64,617,'' Mr Siriporn said.

''This year, we have changed our approach to make the seizures more effective. We have focused more on pursuing the supply chain. Once we arrest one drug dealer, we will use information gained from that dealer to trace the full distribution network, from the users up to the manufacturers. I believe we will have another good year.''

Ms Siriporn said the ONCB has no policy to deal with the social aftermath of drug arrests.

''Though there are a lot of children and other family members affected by the arrests, we are not the ones responsible for that. The ONCB was only set up to take care of the drug problem. I think social problems have to be solved by other government units who are working directly with that issue.''

''The sad part is that the government spends a huge amount of money trying to get rid of drugs, but no one seems to care about the aftermath,'' Dr Apinan said

''For example, the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security is directly involved with this issue. They are the ones who take care of homeless children, but the government doesn't provide them enough funding to work on the problem.

''This is why there are so many NGOs in Thailand helping people with this problem ... that is supposed to be the government's job,'' he added.

Songwit Chearmsakul, from the of Social Development and Human Security Ministry, takes care of homeless people and those who need temporary shelter.

But because of budget constraints, the onus is still on those in need to seek out help by contacting their local office of the ministry.

''We don't have social workers to go around and search for people who have a problem. We don't have the budget for that,'' Mr Songwit said.

''Our main focus is to help children and women who are the victims of abuse. We have records of each person who comes to us, but none of them relate to the war on drugs.''

''I think the way our society works is a bit strange. I see a lot of children and family members of convicted drug dealers being abandoned,'' Dr Apinan said. ''It's all because people don't want to get involved with anyone related to drugs even though these family members are completely innocent.

''These people are cast out from society. They have no place to go and no work available to them. Many, especially hilltribe people, end up dealing drugs because it is the only option they are given.

''But the children are the ones who suffer the most. They are stigmatised by society. No one seems to want to offer a helping hand to them since they don't want to get involved.

''That is why there are so many children working at such a young age. Some wander the streets selling garlands, some become prostitutes, and others end up following in their parents' footsteps and selling drugs.

''I think it is about time that our government worked on this problem as part of a broader drug policy. Otherwise there will be no end to it.''

Orphans a forgotten casualty of 'drug war'

Five ukrainian government agencies have recently adopted an inter-ministerial order that ensures access to opiate substitution therapy by patients at police detention centers and pre-trial detention settings. This victory is the result of three years of intense advocacy and outreach by Open Society Foundations and the International Renaissance Foundation of Ukraine.

 In Ukraine, police can no longer stand between drug users and their medication

As World AIDS Day approaches on December 1, there is renewed political commitment to achieving an ‘AIDS-free generation.’ While progress can be seen in many countries, a world without AIDS is not possible unless we get real about meeting the needs of young people most affected by HIV.

One region where this is particularly evident is Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA). Four out of five people living with HIV in EECA are under the age of 30. In these countries, women are increasingly affected by HIV, and now account for 40 percent of new infections (up from 24 percent ten years ago). In a region where the primary mode of HIV transmission is injection drug use, new HIV infections among young women are increasing steadily—and faster than among young men.

To help combat the growing trend of HIV among young people, HIV Young Leaders Fund recently announced four new grants to support young women who use drugs in Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Ukraine. Selected by a peer review panel of young women from the region, all four grantee organizations are led by young women under 30, involve young people living with HIV in decision making, and work at the local level to improve services and amplify the voices of young women affected by HIV. Today, HIV Young Leaders Fund has released a short video, highlighting these women’s stories.

Access to health services is key to addressing the HIV epidemic in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. In this region, age restrictions block young people under 18 and sometimes young people under 25 from accessing critical interventions—such as HIV testing, clean needle exchange programs, and substitution therapy—that help young women stay healthy. In Ukraine for example, young people under 18 need parental consent to get tested for HIV, which results in few young people seeking out HIV testing, and adds to the stigma of testing.

Too often prejudice and discrimination—including attitudes about what behaviors are “appropriate” for women and young people—adversely affect young women who use drugs. It is not uncommon for doctors to advise young HIV-positive women that it would be “better” if she did not give birth, as her child would not be “normal.” This happened to one of the project participants in Russia. Counseling and peer support provided by the project are often the only ways that vulnerable young women can get the help and support they need to access basic health services and protect their rights.

But there is hope. We know what works for young women who use drugs: evidence-informed health programs that provide harm reduction

peer support groups, nondiscriminatory sexual, and reproductive healthcare and legal services. To ensure young women who use drugs can access these services, we need to change the policy and legal environment, including abolishing parental consent laws and pushing for the decriminalization of drugs for personal use so that young people are, as a new campaign from Youth RISE notes, “supported not punished.” We must also increase support for the community organizing of young women who use drugs, which creates an opportunity for them to address the discrimination they face and become leaders in their community.

Young people in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and around the world don’t just hope the HIV response will change to better meet our needs—we demand it

For an ‘AIDS-free generation,’ focus on young women who use drugs

Few of those who enter New York City’s criminal justice system as a result of marijuana possession arrests become dangerous criminals, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

With the 33-page report, “A Red Herring: Marijuana Arrestees Do Not Become Violent Felons,” Human Rights Watch offers new data indicating that people who enter the criminal justice system with an arrest for public possession of marijuana rarely commit violent crimes in the future. Over the last 15 years, New York City police have arrested more than 500,000 people – most of them young blacks or Hispanics – on misdemeanor charges of possessing small amounts of marijuana in public view. While Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the police have said the arrests have helped reduce violent crime, they have never specified how.

“Our findings support those of other researchers who question the public safety gains from massive marijuana arrests,” said Jamie Fellner, senior adviser to the US Program at Human Rights Watch and co-author of the report. “Public officials need to explain exactly how placing thousands of people in cuffs each year for possessing pot reduces violent crime.”

Using data provided by the New York Department of Criminal Justice Services, Human Rights Watch tracked until mid-2011 the subsequent criminal records of nearly 30,000 people who had no prior convictions when they were arrested for marijuana possession in public view in 2003 and 2004. Ninety percent of the group had no subsequent felony convictions. Only 3.1 percent were subsequently convicted of one violent felony offense. An additional 0.4 percent had two or more violent felony convictions.

According to Human Rights Watch’s data, the New York City police sweep large numbers of people into the the city’s criminal justice system – particularly young people of color – who do not go on to become dangerous felons. These findings are consistent with and add to research by Harry Levine, a sociologist at Queens College, City University of New York, which shows that the preponderance of marijuana arrestees do not have prior criminal convictions.

Allegations that the city’s marijuana possession arrests are racially discriminatory, violate constitutional rights, and cost the city hundreds of millions of dollars in law enforcement and court expenses are the subject of ongoing litigation and controversy. In June, Governor Andrew Cuomo unsuccessfully attempted to have new legislation passed that would reduce the penalties for marijuana possession in public view by making it a non-criminal violation instead of a misdemeanor. Bloomberg, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelley, and the five district attorneys of New York City all supported the legislation.

Convictions for misdemeanor marijuana possession, and even arrests that are not followed by a conviction, can have far-reaching adverse consequences for those arrested, including by diminishing their opportunities for employment, housing, and loans. Referring to those arrested for criminal possession of marijuana in public view, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance has said, “The human cost to each one of these people and their families is serious and it is real.”

“As long as they keep arresting people, and making them pay such a heavy price for possessing marijuana in public view, New York City officials owe the public an explanation for how those arrests contribute to public safety, ” said Issa Kohler-Hausmann, co-author of the report and consultant at Human Rights Watch for this project. “If these arrests have crime control benefits that outweigh the costs, public officials have yet to identify them.”

US/New York: Few arrested for pot become violent criminals

The War on Drugs has failed. After 50 years of prohibition, illicit drugs are now the third most valuable industry in the world after food and oil, all in the control of criminals. Drugs are cheaper and more available than ever before. Millions of people are in prison for drugs offences. Corruption and violence, especially in producer and transit countries, endangers democracy. Tens of thousands of people die each year in drug wars.

The campaign 'Breaking the taboo' highlights that the war on drugs has failed and that it is time to reform drug policies. It calls for governments to break the taboo on drug policy debates and reform. The campaign will be launched on the back of the film with the same name. Please see below the clip of the film:

The launch of the campaign will happen at Google Headquarters in London on the 5th of December and in New York on the 6th of December, while the YouTube release will be on the 7th of December.

News