In 2010 the international HIV/AIDS community called on countries to take action to prevent HIV transmission among people who inject drugs (PWID). To set a baseline we proposed an “accountability matrix”, focusing upon six countries accounting for half of the global population of PWID: China, Malaysia, Russia, Ukraine, Vietnam and the USA. Two years on, we review progress.

Prevention of HIV infection and access to HIV treatment for PWID is possible. Whether countries with concentrated epidemics among PWID will meet goals of achieving universal access and eliminating new HIV infections remains unknown. As long as law enforcement responses counter public health responses, health-seeking behaviour and health service delivery will be limited.

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

What has been achieved in HIV prevention, treatment and care for people who inject drugs, 2010–2012?

To coincide with the 17th International Conference on AIDS and STIs in Africa (ICASA), the International AIDS Society, Médecins du Monde (MdM), the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) hosted this High Level Panel for around 50 participants including policy makers, journalists and programme managers.

This High Level Panel was the first event of its kind in Africa, warning the participants about the HIV response thoughout the country.

The High Level Panel was expertly chaired by Anso Thom, a leading health journalist from SECTION27 in South Africa – who reminded participants that this was the first event of its kind in Africa, following similarly themed meetings in Asia and elsewhere.

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

Report from the high-level panel on HIV, drug policy and public health in Africa

This new report aims to assess the various policy responses to new psychoactive substances (so called "legal highs") in five European countries - Hungary, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Serbia - , from the perspective of researchers, service providers, law enforcement officials and activists working with the most affected communities of people who use drugs.

The not-so-balanced approach: Policy responses to new psychoactive substances

This Crane Survey provides information about most-at-risk populations in Uganda (people who use drugs, female sex workers and men who have sex with me).

Crane survey: High risk groups conducted in 2008/2009 in Kampala, Uganda

People who inject drugs (PWID) are at high risk of contracting and transmitting and hepatitis C virus (HCV). While accurate screening tests and effective treatment are increasingly available, prior research indicates that many PWID are unaware of their HCV status.

The results suggest that drug-injecting individuals who reside in non-urban settings, who have poor access to primary care, or who have less education may encounter significant barriers to routine HCV screening. Expanded access to primary health care and prevention services, especially in non-urban areas, could address an unmet need for individuals at high risk for HCV.

Barriers and facilitators of hepatitis C screening among people who inject drugs: A multi-city, mixed-methods study 

The vast majority of countries are signatories to international treaties that prohibit the production, distribution and possession of cannabis for non-medical and non-scientific purposes. The treaties have not changed in nearly 25 years, but laws and policies pertaining to cannabis have changed in some countries.

Several jurisdictions have reduced the penalties for possessing cannabis for personal use (and in some places even for home cultivation), making the maximum penalty a fine and/or participating in some type of diversion programme or community sentence. Some jurisdictions have taken more dramatic steps and changed their laws and practices with respect to producing and distributing cannabis.

Multinational overview of cannabis production regimes

Pharmaceutical drugs provide a broad range of benefits to Australians. The myriad of medications available enhance our quality of life and many are widely and appropriately used in the community. The fact that some medicines are also subject to misuse, or poor quality use, in no way detracts from these benefits. In addition, Australia is fortunate that its Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) makes many medicines readily accessible by world standards.

Nevertheless, the misuse and poor quality use of these medications is an issue of increasing concern in some circumstances. This trend involves a wide range of pharmaceutical drugs, but opioids (both prescription and non-prescription) and benzodiazepines are of particular concern.

Australia has experienced a substantial increase in opioid supply in recent years (Dobbin, 2011) with a range of associated harms including:

the risk of blood borne diseases and the specific harms associated with injection and inhalation of oral pharmaceuticals

individuals seeking treatment for prescription opioid or benzodiazepine dependence;

levels of trafficking in, and police seizures of, pharmaceutical drugs; and

robbery, theft, identity fraud, extortion and the manufacture of illicit drugs.

National pharmaceutical drug misuse framework for action, Australia 

This report analyses the current global situation of the drug question and highlights the limitations of the so-called “war on drugs”. It specifically reflects on the particularities of the anti-narcotics crusade in Latin America by showing its poor results in terms of coping with the drug phenomenon. The report then deals with concrete public policies against drugs in the region and discusses the sense of fatigue and frustration experienced among Latin American governments and societies in terms of the drug problem. Finally, it approaches the key characteristics of a new debate on drugs in the region, suggesting that this is having a significant impact on the overall drug issue worldwide.

Latin America and the drug issue: Searching for a change

This working paper provides a diagram of sources and flows for alcohol and drug treatment in Australia, and explanatory information. We have focused on what we believe are the primary funders and funding flows for alcohol and drug treatment. The working paper also includes key background information on the structure of the federal health system.

The working paper illustrates that alcohol and drug treatment funding is complex, and originates from multiple sources. Important sources of Commonwealth funding include: The National Health Funding Pool; National Partnership payments; grants schemes; the Medicare Benefits Scheme; and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Payments are made through these channels to services including public hospitals, pharmacies, government alcohol and drug services, community health services, non-government alcohol and drug services, doctors, psychiatrists and psychologists.

Alcohol and other drug treatment financing in Australia: Funding flows

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) represents a remarkable opportunity for criminal justice and drug policy reform advocates to advance efforts to enact policy changes that promote safe and healthy communities, without excessively relying on criminal justice solutions that have become so prevalent under the war on drugs, and which fall so disproportionately on low-income communities and communities of color.

Even with its challenges, the ACA sets the stage for a new health-oriented policy framework to address problems such as substance use and mental health disorders by more appropriately and effectively casting substance use and mental health disorders as matters of public health and not of criminal justice.

To assist advocates in navigating this new terrain, 

Healthcare Not Handcuffs: Putting the Affordable Care Act to Work for Criminal Justice and Drug Law Reform

 outlines some of the major provisions of the ACA immediately relevant to criminal justice and drug policy reform and explores specific applications of those provisions, including program and policy examples and suggested action steps.

Healthcare, not handcuffs: Putting the Affordable Care Act to work for criminal justice and drug policy reform

Specialized drug treatment courts are a central part of drug-related policy and programs in the United States and increasingly outside the U.S. While in theory they offer treatment as a humane and pragmatic alternative to arrest and incarceration for certain categories of drug offenses, they may exclude some forms of treatment–notably methadone maintenance treatment (MMT). We sought to understand from the perspective of treatment providers whether this exclusion existed and was of public health importance in New York State as a case example of a state heavily committed to drug courts and with varying court-level policies on MMT. Drug courts have been extensively evaluated but not with respect to exclusion of MMT and not from the perspective of treatment providers.

Methadone treatment providers’ views of drug court policy and practice: A case study from New York State

In 2013, the activities of the Brazilian Commission on Drugs and Democracy (CBDD) and Viva Rio had a remarkable impact in four different spheres: the Judiciary, the Legislative branch, Public Opinion and the Healthcare and Social Assistance public systems.

Read below a report of their activities. The report is in Portuguese.

Publications