“The recent national election has seen a change in administration where the party of the prime minister had campaigned for much stricter drug policies,” says Gloria Lai, regional director of Asia for the International Drug Policy Consortium said. “The government has since announced that new laws regulating the cannabis market are expected to pass in mid-2024, which will aim to support only medical use of cannabis, with restrictions on the sale of certain cannabis products and related equipment.”

As Lai explained, this is highly likely to have an impact on the thousands of businesses that have made weed their income over the past 18 months. She has concerns that it will shut out small business owners and local farmers who have been able to make a livelihood from this. The market, she fears, will instead be left to elite or large organizations to profit.

In addition, potentially millions of Thai people, who may not be able to obtain a prescription, could either lose access or face harsh criminalization once again.

With economic factors no doubt a key factor in the initial decriminalization decision, the past year would have been the perfect opportunity for the government to study health and social outcomes of the policy, obtaining data to inform its next steps. However, Lai is unaware of any such studies being carried out.

The motives behind this re-regulation are as murky they were for the initial decriminalization, though Prime Minister Thavisin told 

 in September 2023 that drug problems had been “widespread lately.”

Inside Thailand’s U-Turn on cannabis decriminalization

Cutting-edge treatments don’t mean much if patients can’t access the

The logistical and ideological obstacles to treatment are, of course, tied to the kinds of people who bear the brunt of the epidemic — those who exist, in one way or another, on the margins of society. Addiction is one of a cluster of interconnected crises unfolding across the country: homelessness, poverty, mental illness, untreated trauma, an epidemic of loneliness. Opioid overdoses spiked in 2020 during the onslaught of Covid-19, in part because people were isolated from each other as well as from treatment. Racism plays a major role in limiting access to treatment, too, as does mass incarceration. There’s a shortage of addiction care providers, particularly in rural America, where the scarcity of basic primary care for all types of patients is increasingly dire.

Until recently, nearly 60 percent of rural people lived in counties without a single doctor authorized to prescribe buprenorphine. (That changed last year, after a law requiring providers to obtain a special waiver to dispense the medication was eliminated.) In Madison, Wisconsin, where Elizabeth Salisbury-Afshar practices addiction medicine, it’s not unusual for patients to travel one or two hours each way to her clinic “for an appointment that’s maybe 30 minutes long,” she says. “It’s a full-day endeavor. But folks don’t have another choice.”

In rural areas, Salisbury-Ashfar said, many of the primary care doctors who would be the first line of addiction treatment are too overwhelmed to provide it. “The providers that we have, we’re just trying not to burn them out, because we are short-staffed on every front,” she said. “We would love to have enough primary care docs to be doing this, but primary care docs can’t keep up with primary care.”

It’s not enough to have a breakthrough treatment like MAT if the people who need it can’t get it — or can’t stay in it. Among the “compounding mistakes and failures” that led to the current crisis is the fact that “our health care system is not set up well to accommodate people who are vulnerable or marginalized,” a group that includes most of those with addiction, said Joudrey, the Pittsburgh addiction doctor. “In the United States, we’ve become so focused on innovation and looking for technological solutions, we can end up neglecting the sociological and economic contributors of the overdose epidemic.”

US: We have treatments for opioid addiction that work. So why is the problem getting worse?

Human Rights Council
Intersessional panel on human rights challenges in addressing the world drug situation
5th February 2024


High Commissioner, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, colleagues,

It is a privilege to be part of this distinguished panel today. It has been over a decade since United Nations human rights bodies began breaking down the silos that separated drug policy and human rights. Through tireless efforts, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rightsand other human rights entities have had a truly transformational effect on global drug policy debates. They have shone a spotlight on the catastrophic impacts of the so-called ‘war on drugs’ which can no longer be denied or downplayed. And I feel confident that, sooner than later, this critical work will transform the global approach to drugs.

It is my honour to represent the International Drug Policy Consortium, a global network of over 190 NGOs from over 75 countries who come together to promote drug policies grounded in human rights and social justice.

For decades, the unrealistic goal of achieving a ‘drug-free society’ has driven drug policies based on prohibition, criminalisation and harsh punishment. The harms caused by these policies can only be repaired by making sure that civil society and community organisations play a central role in bringing forward evidence and lived experience to inform and shape drug policies. Member States and UN bodies have a responsibility to honestly listen to civil society and affected communities, including people who use drugs, as well as subsistence farmers, producers, people who have been incarcerated and all those who have been disproportionately impacted, and to reflect on how to reform a global system that has so clearly failed.

I begin on a sobering note. As we have heard today, the United Nations is in the midst of conducting the midterm review of the current global drug strategy, the 2019 Ministerial Declaration on Drugs.

In December, IDPC launched a Shadow Report to evaluate the progress made by the international community in addressing the 12 challenges identified in the 2019 Ministerial Declaration.

The conclusion is that little to no progress has been made, and the situation remains grave. Despite billions spent every year on drug law enforcement, the illegal drug market is thriving, and militarised responses are fueling violence and conflict. Drug-related deaths remain at historical highs – over half a million deaths per year, driven in many places by a deadly, toxic and unpredictable drug supply - while access to harm reduction, treatment, and other support services falls dramatically short of what is needed. Access to controlled medicines for pain relief and palliative care also remains low to non-existent in many parts of the world.

Our report also highlights that, in all regions, the human rights impacts of drug control have either worsened, or remained unchanged. These abuses are widespread and range from the ongoing use of the death penalty, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detention, mass incarceration, and cases of torture masquerading as ‘treatment’. There is also widespread discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age and socio-economic status.

In sum, we absolutely concur with the High Commissioner’s finding that the world drug situation has a major impact on the enjoyment of human rights. The United Nations system - both in Geneva and in Vienna - needs to recognise this reality, and initiate a process of institutional transformation that brings an end to the current paradigm.

The good news is that global drug policy is posed to change. For instance, this panel has been convened at the request of the historical 2023 Human Rights Council resolution on human rights in drug policy, which broke the taboo on harm reduction, and recognised the centrality of gender, Indigenous Peoples rights, and racial justice in drug policy debates. Such progress would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

The resolution also requested the preparation of the report on human rights challenges in drug policy presented by the High Commissioner today - a truly ground-breaking document that presents a clear blueprint for global reform. At its release, the report was welcomed by a joint statement by 134 NGOs, urging Member States to take on the High Commissioner’s recommendations. And the report is already being used by advocates for reforms all over the world.

Drug policy itself is shifting. By the end of 2023, 66 jurisdictions in 40 countries had decriminalised drug use and possession for personal use - a measure endorsed by the UN Common Position on drugs, and described by OHCHR as ‘‘ a powerful instrument to ensure that the rights of people who use drugs are protected’’.Over 300 million people live in legal systems that have regulated drugs like cannabis for recreational use, thus checking the power of organised crime and the pressure of the police on people who use drugs, and marginalised populations. Many other jurisdictions will follow soon. At the request of Bolivia, the WHO recently initiated a critical review of the status of the coca leaf under the drug control conventions - a measure that could end the global prohibition on the coca leaf, thus reinstating the rights of Indigenous Peoples that have used the plant for centuries.

The role of Geneva in fostering change and call for a special mandate

Human rights bodies have been indispensable in building this global moment for change, and their contributions are not ending anytime soon. To put only two examples, the UN special rapporteur on the right to health will release this year a much expected and much necessary report on harm reduction within the framework of the right to health.And the Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights continues to make progress towards the adoption of the General Comment on drug policy, which already started in 2022.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights must be praised, not only for the landmark 2023 report, but also for tirelessly supporting advocates and civil society seeking reform at both international and national level. Its presence in Vienna has been consequential, and it needs to be continued and strengthened through regular reporting and interventions at the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs.

In spite of this progress, the contribution of human rights mechanisms has been limited in scope, and inevitably depends on the personal interest of each mandate holder. If we want to ensure a genuine understanding of the human rights dimension of drug policies and to generate recommendations that will change the system, a further step needs to be taken.

In that regard, we urge the Human Rights Council to move towards the creation of a special procedure mandate on human rights and the world drug situation. A special mandate - either a special rapporteur or a working group - is necessary to provide evidence on the broad range of dimensions in which the drug phenomenon impàcts human rights, shed the light on the situation of affected communities, and most importantly to develop in a coherent and systematic way the international standards necessary to bring a new drug policy paradigm to reality.

A quick look at the themes of the over 50 special procedure mandates already existing today makes clear that the scale of the human rights impacts associated to the world drug situation - over half a million drug-related deaths per year, and 20% of the global prison population - warrants the creation of a mechanism. I hope that this is a recommendation that we can discuss today and in the coming days.

Finally, I wanted to reiterate that the High Commissioner’s report is a historical moment that builds on the encouraging momentum that we’ve seen over the past decade in firmly centring human rights in UN drug policy debates.Our hope is that true transformational change is coming that heralds a genuine paradigm shift away from repression and punishment towards drug policies that truly prioritise human rights, andthe health and welfare of humankind.

Transforming the UN drug policy paradigm: IDPC statement at Human Rights Council intersessional panel

The Drug Enforcement Administration has confirmed it is reviewing the classification of cannabis under the Controlled Substances Act, just days before the first public acknowledgement of its medical use by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Amid an “unprecedented” situation, speculation is rife around whether the U.S. is finally heading for a shift in policy at a federal level. But one thing experts do agree on is that any decision on cannabis policy is likely to be based on politics, rather than public health.

And yet, it will do little to address the harms caused by decades of this hard-line approach, according to Ann Fordham, executive director of the International Drug Policy Consortium.

“The devastating harms of U.S.-led global cannabis prohibition, such as the criminalization and incarceration of millions of people for cannabis-related activities, would remain entirely unaddressed by domestic rescheduling,” she says in an email.

“Furthermore, advocates for drug policy reform within the U.S. have called on President Biden to take steps to completely remove cannabis from the domestic schedules, noting that a move to Schedule III does not mean cannabis is decriminalized, as per his campaign promise, or lessen the harms of federal prohibition.”


DEA considers rescheduling cannabis: What this means for U.S. and global policy

Are you passionate about global drug policy and want to support reforms that promote social justice and human rights? IDPC is looking for a dynamic and motivated volunteer to support our communications and campaigning work!

The selected candidate will help us enhance the visibility of our work and our network's, service our website with the latest developments in global drug policy, and contribute to the organisation of the Support. Don't Punish campaign's 2024 Global Day of Action.

The duration of your volunteering opportunity, time commitment, and workload will depend entirely on your availability and capacity. That said, we suggest that volunteers consider a minimum period of three months, so as to ensure that they fully familiarise with our communications systems, platforms, and style; gain experience and skills in campaigning work; and that there is space for feedback and progress.

For more information about the position, have a look at the 

 and then please send a CV and 1-2 paragraphs outlining why this experience is of interest to you (to the attention of Juan Fernández Ochoa - jfernandez[@]idpc.net)

The deadline for applications is 23 February 2024. 

Please note that this volunteering experience will take place remotely.

IDPC recruits campaigns & communications volunteer

The nature of the trans experience for me, and many, is of being forcibly politicised from a young age. Our existence is debated by people with little understanding of it, and often with no consideration for our lived realities. This is especially relevant now, as we find ourselves in the midst of a culture war that none of us asked to be part of. I find it important to share my own experiences and those of my community.

There is a significant lack of research into our community’s use of drugs. My own experiences as a queer person have always impacted what, how, where and why I use drugs. When I first came out as a transgender woman and made my first, formative steps into the world, drug-using spaces and people who use drugs were among the first to accept me as a woman.

My initial experiences of using drugs were that of immense joy, not just because of the substances, but also because I was so welcomed and loved, something I rarely experienced before. This experience also gave me the confidence to be unapologetic about my existence and live life as I am now.

The intersections of my experience as a trans woman who uses drugs also had negatives. The joy and acceptance are impacted by intensely traumatising elements of the trans experience which reverberate across my life. Harassment and assault have led me to change the way I use drugs, using them with far less regard for my own wellbeing, and instead to treat the intense dysphoria I have felt for many years.

Gender dysphoria is something with a very effective and direct, if often inaccessible, treatment. The denial of access to this treatment (which has a 

) led me to self-medicate with drugs to cut through the intense fog of dysphoria from being forced to live in a body I felt a disconnect from and active hatred towards. Since accessing gender affirming healthcare, my drug use has changed drastically: I no longer need to self-medicate. I’ve developed a sudden connection with myself, my body, and a renewed sense of care for my own wellbeing. I can now use for enrichment and joy, maximising benefits while minimising harms.

The communities of trans people and people who use drugs are very similar. They provide for each other in ways that state structures either refuse to or simply cannot. We share controlled substances with one another, be they illicit drugs or hormone replacement treatment, disseminating injection advice and safe equipment. Through all of the joy and the devastation, including the bereavement – a feature of both communities – the community is always there for one another. This is an immensely important facet of our existence.

How gender affirming care Is harm reduction

aulo picks up a lighter from the table in front of him, holds it beneath the foil-encased bowl of his thin metal pipe for a few seconds, and then inhales. For a brief moment, he falls silent, head slumped forward. Then the 47-year-old is back to his usual chatty self, conversing with the seven other drug addicts who, like him, are making the most of their 30-minute slot at Porto’s new “shoot-up” centre. “It beats getting stoned on the street, where, you know, anyone can come along, kids or whatever,” he says. “Here, we can just do our thing and no one hassles us.”

Lack of interference is not the only reason that Paulo and 400 or so other regulars visit the centre. The government-funded service also provides them with clean needles, strips of aluminium foil, and other materials to facilitate their drug-taking and prevent infections.

The overarching ethos of the centre revolves around harm prevention. A list of rules by the entrance contains no strict injunctions; it simply invites users to be courteous and preferably not leave litter on the floor. Even the free sachets of citric acid, which addicts use to dissolve heroin or crack cocaine for injection, come with a health warning on the packaging: “Can damage the veins if used in excess.”

Housed in a nondescript portable cabin in Pasteleira, a low-income neighbourhood of Porto, the centre, which opened in August 2022, serves as a highly visible flagship of Portugal’s long-standing policy of drug decriminalisation. The scene is far from salubrious. Set beside the road on a patch of scrub, the temporary facility faces out to featureless blocks of social housing. Behind is a small encampment of makeshift tents – home to some of the centre’s users, 75% of whom are unhoused. Just up the hill, smartly dressed pupils file through the gates of the elite Lycée Français.

Yet the centre offers a rare ray of hope in the scourge of drug addiction, locally and perhaps globally. First, its target users are alive and, if not exactly well, then at least using safely. Three decades ago, it was a different story. Heroin addiction in Portugal affected an estimated one in every 100 adults, and death by overdose or drug-related disease was commonplace.

‘It beats getting stoned on the street’: how Portugal decriminalised drugs – as seen from the safer consumption site

Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema has called for the regulation of the sale and use of cocaine to undermine the economics of criminal enterprises that she said are racking up “billions” in profit.

The mayor, who has also sought to curtail 

 vacationers from visiting the Dutch capital city, has organized a public debate on the matter on Jan. 26 in Amsterdam.

“Let us conclude that hundreds of years of discouragement and repression have achieved very little,” Halsema said in an interview with Dutch newspaper Het Financieele Dagblad. “Apparently people have a need for stimulants. There is a market for that.”

Amsterdam mayor calls for regulation of cocaine as crime thrives

After decades of advocacy by civil society, the government finally approved the opening of the first drug consumption room in Slovenia. On this occasion we interviewed Katja Krajnc from the 

, a leading harm reduction organisation in the country.

Drugreporter: Can you talk a bit about your own background? How and why did you choose to work in the field of harm reduction? What work do you do for the organisation?

: I think that in choosing this field, the work, in a way, chose me. Even when I was a student and occasionally passed by the drop-in centre of the NGO Stigma, I often envisioned working for this organisation. After completing my studies, I had the opportunity to be employed by the association, and I have stayed here ever since. In my opinion, working in the field of harm reduction is not for everyone. Anyone who takes a job in harm reduction must start from the belief that drug use is a matter of personal choice and a human right to bodily integrity. It is necessary to be aware, without moral judgments and a patronising attitude, that there are people who, for various reasons, cannot or do not want to stop taking drugs.

The NGO Stigma is one of the leading harm reduction organisations in Slovenia. What is the story of Stigma? When and why was it established?

That’s right. The Harm Reduction Association Stigma is the first organisation that began operating in the field of harm reduction in Slovenia. The NGO was founded in 1990, and through its collaboration in the project ‘Preventing AIDS through the organization of aid and self-help for drug users,’ we established a framework for harm reduction in Slovenia. During this period, drug use increased, reflected in a higher number of overdose deaths and more frequent responses to drug issues in the media. Initiatives by drug users began to emerge as a reaction to repressive policies and moralistic treatment. With these initiatives, they sought to assert the right to health care, soon followed by the right to protection against infectious diseases, and, ultimately, destigmatisation of their social role. Stigma was formed as a collaboration project between drug users and professionals, with the aim of reaching out to those drug users who were labelled as “hard to reach”.

The choice of the name Stigma is aimed at drawing attention to the problems of the marginalisation and exclusion of a population, which, due to its hidden nature and life on the social fringes, is even more exposed to risks and dangers resulting from drug use.

What kind of services do you provide to people who use drugs?

Our NGO has two drop-in centres where needle exchange takes place, which is the basic measure and starting point for all other harm reduction approaches. Unhindered access to sterile equipment is a preventive measure and at the same time provides access to the largest number of intravenous drug users. The program provides free sterile equipment such as insulin syringes, various needles and syringes, cookers or spoons with filters, condoms, needle disposal containers, and informational materials.

Returning used needles is part of the needle exchange program, but returning a used needle is not a condition for issuing a sterile one. In the drop-in centre, we also provide counselling and practical assistance. Counselling is initiated by users who have contacted us personally, by phone, or online, within the framework of the drop-in centre program or mobile needle exchange through outreach. We assist people who use drugs access various services, such as opioid agonist treatment, and support them to find housing and jobs.

In addition, we have an outreach program to contact drug users in the initial phase of their drug use and try to reduce the harm that drug use could cause them. Our outreach workers step out of offices and counselling rooms to meet drug users in their environment, providing them with sterile injection equipment, necessary information, and incentives to follow safety instructions in drug use. If a need for more targeted treatment arises during a conversation, the person is invited to visit the drop-in centre, where we continue to address their situation.

Drug consumption rooms are coming to Slovenia – an interview with Katja Krajnc

Accra, Jan. 30, GNA – Ghanaian Law students have been urged to help prevent drug policies, measures and legislations that work against the rehabilitation of substance abusers. 

The students were asked to not only play roles in the prevention of the use and circulation of drugs (cocaine, marijuana, tramadol, etc.) but also be critical of incarceration of abusers and lack of rehabilitation centres. 

The call was made by drug policies and legislations advocates at a day’s hybrid workshop for tertiary students and faculty members in Ghana by POS Foundation on the theme: “Substance Use and Prevention: A Comparative Dialogue between Ghana and the USA’s Drug Policy.” 

Participating universities were GIMPA Law School, Ghana, Adler University, Chicago, Illinois and Columbia University, New York and Fordham University, New York and Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) with the students sharing their perspectives.

Madam Maria-Goretti Ane Loglo, Lawyer and IDPC Consultant for Africa, said the people languishing in jail because of drug use had been the younger population, a situation we had to avert because there had been lack of jobs to engage them.

“As a country we also need to revisit the fines given to offenders. The fines are very high and many of the people cannot afford. The State must resource the Fund to help in rehabilitation and put up rehabilitation centres that are accessible and less expensive,” she said

Ghana: Law students urged to guard against inimical drug policies

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

Gloria Lai, regional director of the International Drug Policy Consortium, also raised concerns over the government's decision to open drug rehab in the country's military camps. Ms Lai said Thailand has a history of violence and abuse related to drugs, and it still continues. Much violence and abuse, perpetrated by both military and law enforcement, took place during the Thaksin Shinawatra administration after he announced a zero-tolerance policy on drugs. The military are not health experts and should not be involved in the delivery of health services to the public, she said. "In addition, you have seen concerns of violence, including extrajudicial killings," she said.


"So, I think it is inappropriate for the military to take a bigger role, particularly in the provision of drug treatment services. "If the proposal is for the military to take over more work, strong justification as to why that is necessary will be needed," she added.


Ms Lai praised Thailand's efforts to reduce harm under its new Narcotic Codes. However, she said she is concerned compulsory treatment is still in place for people who use drugs.


"I think harm reduction, if you are going to make it voluntary, means you have to allow people a degree of freedom and liberty to choose what they like," she said.

News