In 2025, the European Union will adopt a new EU Drug Strategy that will define the political direction and priorities for the period 2026–2030.

While the current strategy (2021–2025) recognises the pillars of drug supply reduction, demand reduction, and harm reduction, its implementation has remained disproportionately focused on law enforcement and punitive measures.

This imbalance has not led to improved public safety—instead, it has worsened health outcomes, increased stigma, and deepened the marginalisation of people who use drugs.

Access to essential health and harm reduction services continues to be limited, particularly for vulnerable and underserved communities.

As the next EU Drug Strategy is being shaped, we face a critical opportunity to advocate for a more balanced, health-centred, and human rights-based approach to drug policy.

To seize this momentum, leading European drug policy networks — including C-EHRN, EHRA, IDPC, and HFHR — have launched the European Drug Policy Campaign.

This initiative is supported by the European Drug Policy Alliance, a coalition of civil society and harm reduction experts working to influence the content and implementation of the new strategy.

The campaign will be presented during a webinar on 26 June, the Support, Don't Punish Global Day of Action, bringing together policymakers, civil society representatives, and European drug policy experts to foster dialogue and build momentum for drug policy reform in the EU.

This webinar will feature diverse perspectives from key stakeholders and serve as a platform to mobilise support for a more just, inclusive, and effective EU Drug Strategy.

EU drug policy campaign 2025: A call to invest in a European health-based drug policy-

Delivered at the 5th Brandenburg Forum in Geneva : “Expanding the Conversation on the Human Rights Implications of Drug Policy”

Excellencies,
Distinguished participants,
Colleagues,

It can stigmatize and isolate people, or it can help heal connections with others.

More and more, we see that it’s human connection and evidence-based approaches – not punishment – that transform and uplift the lives of people affected by drug use disorders.

Those same policies reinforce social bonds and create healthier, more resilient communities and societies.

I welcome the growing acknowledgement by States that discussions on drug policy must take into account States’ human rights obligations.

This forum is an important part of our efforts to exchange views and best practices, and demonstrate how human rights offer us a path towards a more humane and effective approach to drugs.

Distinguished participants, dear friends,

That new path is desperately needed, because the so-called war on drugs has failed. It has neither reduced drug use, nor the illicit drug trade, nor the production and consumption of a growing range and quantity of illicit substances.

Some 292 million people around the world used narcotic drugs in 2022 – the latest year for which we have figures. That represents a 20 per cent increase over a decade.

New, increasingly potent drugs are emerging in several high-income countries, resulting in an increase in overdose deaths.

Not only has the war on drugs failed; the militarization of drug control continues to lead to many unnecessary deaths, and to the excessive and disproportionate imprisonment of certain groups, including vulnerable people.

Some of those deaths are state-sponsored killings. Thirty-four countries still retain the death penalty for drug offenses, killing hundreds of people every year. More than 40 percent of state executions in 2023 were for offences related to drug offences. This proportion has also risen sharply over the past two years.

Punitive and militarized drug policies are also linked with corruption and illicit financial flows. The profits from drug trafficking may be used to finance violence, terrorism, and armed conflict.

Economies based on illicit drugs are also having a large and growing impact on our climate and environment, from water stress to deforestation and the dumping of toxic waste.

This forum’s focus on the negative impact of drug policy on economic, social and cultural rights is a very important one.

It is increasingly clear and documented that the war on drugs is harming public health, and people who use drugs are not getting the help they need. Though an estimated 64 million people worldwide suffer from drug use disorders, only one in 11 is in treatment.

Women are particularly affected. Only one in 18 women with drug use disorders is in treatment, compared to one in seven men.

Fear of arrest and widespread stigma have deterred people from seeking drug treatment, healthcare and support, including medical care for HIV/AIDS.

Homelessness is both a cause and consequence of drug use, and contributes to poor health among people who use drugs. Programmes such as Housing First that prioritise stable housing as the basis for recovery have proven their value in a number of countries. I encourage States to share their experiences and explore how such initiatives can be established and expanded.

Poorly designed drug policy also harms other human rights. In some countries, evidence of drug use or a criminal record for drug-related crimes can disqualify people from social benefits or restrict access to education or employment.

Blunt, punitive approaches have disproportionately affected some of the most marginalized communities, and perpetuated cycles of exclusion.

For example, States often overpolice Indigenous Peoples who cultivate drug crops to make a living.

The illicit drug economy also undermines the rights of people who are vulnerable to exploitation, including farmers, women, minorities, people of African descent and Indigenous Peoples. As States make efforts to curb the illicit drug trade, they must invest in viable and sustainable economic alternatives, in consultation with those affected. I welcome the recent resolution on alternative development by the Commission on Narcotic Drugs which supports this approach.

Excellencies,
Distinguished participants,

Looking forward, we must continue pursuing humane drug policies that advance all human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights.

This requires concerted action by all – primarily by States, but also civil society, and the United Nations system, among many others.

First, I encourage all States to integrate the International Guidelines on Human Rights and Drug Policy into their national laws and policies, including with regard to housing, employment, harm reduction and protecting marginalised communities.

I welcome the decision by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to prepare a new General Comment on States’ legal obligations around drug policy. This should provide important additional guidance.

Second, harm reduction measures, such as needle exchange programmes, safe consumption sites, and access to information and healthcare, are crucial. States need to tackle shame and stigma around treatment for drug use disorders, and remove legal and policy barriers to access these services. We must show that they save and improve lives, for people, communities and societies at large.

Third, decriminalising drug use – accompanied by harm reduction measures and support for social reintegration - is another key element. Criminalizing people with a drug use disorder deters them from seeking treatment and creates further stigma and isolation.

Fourth, there is an urgent need to abolish the death penalty for drug-related offences. Executing people for these offences does not comply with international human rights law, which specifies that the death penalty can only be imposed for the most serious crimes involving intentional killing. The United Nations, as a matter of policy, opposes the death penalty in all circumstances.

Fifth, responsible regulation should aim to take control of illegal drug markets, eliminate profits from illegal trafficking, criminality and violence, and protect the environment.

Sixth, it is essential to include those most affected by drug use disorders in all decisions, policies and laws. The Scottish Charter of Rights for People Affected by Substance Abuse is an example of a policy developed through a multistakeholder process, reflecting the unique needs of different groups, including people who use drugs. I hope it can serve as inspiration to other countries around the world.

My Office and I personally will continue to do everything in our power to ensure coherence across the United Nations system on this issue, which affects hundreds of millions of people around the world.

Together, with your support, we must - and will - keep human rights at the centre of global drug policy, as we work for dignity, justice and equality for all.

'We must continue pursuing humane drug policies that advance all human rights' - UN Human Rights Chief

Full-day event (exact schedule to be confirmed)


 Free for all NNEF members (Not a member yet? No problem! Membership is free)

This event is all about open discussion, learning, and collaboration, bringing together people passionate about harm reduction and improving services. Whether you’ve been involved for years or are new to the field, this is your chance to hear from expert speakers, share experiences, and shape the future of needle exchange services in the UK.

Speaker information coming soon! Stay tuned for updates on our fantastic lineup of speakers and sessions.

We can’t wait to see you there—register now to secure your place!

National Needle Exchange Forum (NNEF)

In 2025, the European Union will adopt a new EU Drug Strategy that will define priorities for 2026–2030. As this critical moment approaches, we call for a shift towards a balanced, health-focused, and human rights-based approach to drug policy.

To support this effort, we are launching the 

, coordinated by C-EHRN in collaboration with the 

Eurasian Harm Reduction Association (EHRA)

International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC)

Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (HFHR)

. The campaign is accompanied by the publication of a new 

Support Don’t Punish Global Day of Action

 outlines urgent recommendations for the EU and Member States, including:

Ensuring a balanced EU Drug Strategy 2026–2030

Establishing dedicated EU-level funding for harm reduction

Prioritising decriminalisation and responsible regulation

This toolkit supports civil society and national stakeholders to engage with policymakers at both the EU and national levels. It includes:

A Canva template for translating the policy paper

Ready-to-use social media content and visuals

Customisable email templates for outreach

Advocacy tips and ideas for national action

We will present the campaign’s goals and share ways civil society organisations and allies can get involved.

EU drug policy campaign 2025: A call to invest in a european health-based drug policy

In 2019, Andrea Siclari was diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer. Alongside medical treatments, he participated in a LSD-assisted therapy in Switzerland within a clinical trial programme to address his deep anxiety. Andrea’s experience showcases a scenario in which a patient suffering from one of the most commonly known terminal illnesses was able to greatly improve his outlook and quality of life through psychedelic-assisted therapy. LSD has shown great results as a potential treatment for common conditions such as anxiety, depression, PTSD, addiction, and existential distress at the end-of-life. But access remains out of reach for most Europeans. 

 to foster equitable, timely, affordable, safe, and legal access to innovative psychedelic-assisted therapies.

How LSD saved my mind - Andrea's healing story

Harm reduction has long been a cornerstone of European public health, minimising drug use risks like overdose deaths or preventing the spread of infectious diseases. These interventions have been instrumental in improving the health and wellbeing of people who use drugs (PWUD).

However, in the last few years, the financial sustainability of many harm reduction initiatives has been under serious threat. A growing funding crisis, driven by shifting political priorities and a 

 to drug policy within the European Union (EU), is threatening to dismantle decades of progress. 

This shifting landscape in harm reduction funding has hit at a critical time. Europe is facing an increasingly complex drug landscape, with hundreds of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) and synthetic opioids 

Speaking to TalkingDrugs, Alexei Lakhov, Executive Director of the 

European Network for People Who Use Drugs (EuroNPUD)

 highlighted that “this complexity often increases the demand for specialised harm reduction services”, further straining service providers.

European harm reduction has historically been financed through national health funds, international aid and EU-wide grants. Yet, a 

 from Harm Reduction International (HRI) into harm reduction funding has underscored how national and international donors have scaled back many of their financial commitments to harm reduction. European countries, particularly those classified as high or upper-middle income, are 

 for key international funding sources such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS. While understandable, this shift has left critical harm reduction programmes struggling with severe budget shortfalls.

Political shifts toward right-leaning governments across Europe have further amplified this crisis, as policymakers shift their focus to drug-related security concerns and supply side interventions over harm reduction. While the 

 continues to support harm reduction, national concerns around drug-related insecurity have prioritised law enforcement-based approaches, leaving many harm reduction services with reduced resources.

pioneer of European harm reduction since the 1970s

, is one of the many countries facing funding cuts that threaten its services’ stability. For over 35 years, 

 has played a key role in conducting research on harm reduction and providing updated information on drug trends and alerts to PWUD across the Netherlands through their 

. Now, however, they are facing serious cuts.

European harm reduction is facing a funding crisis

Legal amendments that make cannabis smokers 

 if a neighbour reports them and claims they can smell the drug, have infuriated two NGOs.

"The new cannabis amendments demonstrate a government that has lost all sense of direction and is now a hostage to the cannabinoid industry," ReLeaf Malta and Moviment Graffitti said in a statement on Sunday.

"The violation of privacy and anonymity reduces personal rights and gives fresh impetus to a culture of stigma against thousands of cannabis consumers and cultivators in Malta and Gozo," they added.

The new, stricter regulations against people who smoke and cultivate cannabis were approved by parliament earlier this month.

Malta: NGOs infuriated by new regulations on cannabis smoke that annoys neighbours

A French law is set to unleash invasive new police surveillance powers.

 Fuelled by absurd rhetoric, the government is proposing what has been dubbed “the worst surveillance law in the EU”. Experts warn that it will fail to achieve its aims. However, the broad scope of the law means the powers can be used against migrants, their supporters, and to crack down on dissent. As official reports have made clear, dealing with drug use and trafficking requires long-term, low-tech policies – not high-tech police surveillance powers.

The French government is stepping up its war on drugs, combining absurd rhetoric (with smoking a joint compared to shooting a child in the head) and new legislation.

This repressive approach is similar to that favoured in many other countries around the world, where it has also failed to reduce drug trafficking or use.

The French government’s proposal includes some particularly invasive surveillance measures, including:

remote activation of phones by the police; and

mass surveillance of internet and telecoms traffic.

The broad scope of the law means these powers can also be used against irregular migrants, those providing them with aid or support, and political dissidents.

There may soon be similar measures proposed at European level, as part of the EU’s new internal security strategy.

In 2014, the French government warned that the country was at a “tipping point” and called for the fight against drug trafficking to become “a national cause”. The government’s latest plan to address the problem has two components. First, try to shock the public. Second, pass new legislation on ‘narcotraffic’.

This attempt to shock people has led to a stream of ridiculous statements from officials. If there is a competition amongst them, then Bruno Retailleau, the interior minister, is the clear winner. He has warned that smoking a joint is akin to “two bullets in the head of a five-year-old kid; this is a youth who has been stabbed 50 times with a knife and burned alive.”

Over the years, there has been an undeniable rise in violence. A book published last year looked at the phenomenon of young “shooters” – children and young adults who become involved in gun violence. The authors argued that young shooters were similar to 

, Mexico’s notorious killers for hire. The parallel between France and the world’s most violent country for drug trafficking quickly spread. Retailleau, the interior minister (yes, him again), claimed there had been a “Mexicanisation” of France.

The comparison is absurd. Mexico holds the record for disappearances and deaths related to the war on drugs. Amnesty International, citing Mexican government data, says that some 30 people disappear every day in the country. This equates to more than one person every hour, and a total of almost 11,000 people annually. In France, there were 110 deaths linked to drug trafficking in 2024, according to interior ministry data.

France is just one of many countries taking an ever-more repressive approach to drugs. 

, a global network of over 190 NGOs that promotes person-centred, rights-affirming drug policies at the national, regional and international levels, told 

“The reality that we see across the globe is that repressive measures have comprehensively failed to suppress the drug trade and have instead led to the drastic erosion of fundamental rights. This move in France is unfortunately no exception.”

These quick fixes get their proponents headlines in the press, but they provide few positive long-term results. The French Court of Auditors recently warned that the entire system of youth assistance is screaming for survival. It requires long-term human and financial investment. Instead, resources are directed elsewhere.

A government report on limiting children’s involvement in drug trafficking proposed a number of potential solutions to the problem. They include proposals for better follow-up from local services in providing care, and improved social services for the youth and their families. They do not include proposals to give the police military-grade surveillance powers. That, however, is precisely what is happening.

France: How the “war on drugs” is turbo-charging surveillance powers

The Netherlands expanded a government-run initiative on Monday allowing legal cannabis sales.

While growing cannabis is still illegal, cannabis shops — known as coffeeshops — in 10 municipalities will be allowed to sell marijuana from 10 licensed producers.

“Weed was sold here legally for 50 years, but the production was never legal. So it’s finally time to end that crazy, unexplainable situation and make it a legal professional sector,” Rick Bakker, commercial director at Hollandse Hoogtes, one of the regulated producers, told The Associated Press.

Some 80 coffeeshops are taking part in the experiment which advocates hope this will ultimately end a long-standing legal anomaly — you can buy and sell small amounts of weed without fear of prosecution in the Netherlands, but growing it commercially remains illegal.

Bakker's company in Bemmel, near the German border, is indistinguishable from the surrounding greenhouses producing tomatoes and peppers. But it makes 200 kilograms (440 pounds) of weed per week and is one of the largest producers in the experiment.

A trailblazer in decriminalizing pot since the 1970s, the Netherlands has grown more conservative. 

, long a magnet for marijuana smokers, has been closing coffeeshops in recent years and has banned smoking weed on some of the cobbled streets that make up its historic center.

Advocates have been pushing for a legal growing for years, citing the safety of the product as well as concerns about crime.

Dutch cannabis growers welcome expansion of state-run experiment to make sales legal

For the second year in a row, what had been an uneventful, consensus-driven United Nations meeting on drug policy saw unexpected drama and signs of real change.

At the 68th session of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) in Vienna in March 2025, governments approved the formation of an independent expert commission to recommend changes to the architecture of global drug policy, which has changed little since the early 1960s.

Colombia again played a catalytic role, as it did in 2024. But this time, the United States—under the new Trump administration—tried to block nearly everything, isolating itself diplomatically in the process.

In this episode of the WOLA Podcast, Adam Isacson speaks with three experts who were in Vienna:

, Executive Director of the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), a network of 195 organizations working to reform global drug policy.

, Senior Coordinator for drug policy at DeJusticia, a Bogotá-based think tank and advocacy group.

, WOLA’s Director for Drug Policy, who has tracked the UN’s drug control system since the 1980s.

The conversation traces the slow evolution of the UN drug control system—from decades of punitive consensus to today’s shifting coalitions, unprecedented votes, and long-overdue reviews.

Much of the episode centers on a breakthrough: a new resolution establishing an “independent external review” of the UN’s own drug control institutions. For years, countries like Colombia have called for an honest assessment of the system’s failings. Now, thanks to a resolution spearheaded by Colombia and passed over U.S. opposition, that review is happening. The details still matter: how independent the expert panel will truly be, who funds it, and whether the review can influence the hard architecture of the drug control treaties.

“Vienna was very much a space where delegates would just pat each other on the back on how well we’re doing the war on drugs,” Pereira said. “The spirit of Vienna created a sort of lockdown situation on debate, true debate,” added Walsh. “Civil society enlivened the Vienna atmosphere” in recent years, he noted, “with new debates, new arguments.” Now, this international space has become more dynamic.

The guests also discuss coca leaf: its decades-old listing as a Schedule I narcotic, Bolivia’s and Colombia’s ongoing push for a scientific review, and the possibility of a pivotal vote in 2026. They stress how traditional knowledge—especially from Indigenous communities—must be recognized as legitimate scientific input during that review.

Underlying it all is a major diplomatic shift. Colombia is using the UN system to demand drug policy grounded in health, human rights, and development—not militarized prohibition. But with Petro’s term ending in 2026, it’s unclear who will pick up the baton.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration is signaling a return to zero-tolerance drug war policies—and burning bridges with potential allies in the process. “They behaved so terribly. I mean, they broke with all diplomatic niceties,” said Fordham. “The U.S. just went for it in their opening statement… It was frankly an embarrassing, but also pretty shocking statement.”

Despite the uncertainty, all three guests agree: civil society is no longer on the sidelines. NGOs and experts are shaping debates, challenging rigid thinking in Vienna, and holding governments to account.

CND68: Historic vote initiates overdue review of UN drug control ‘machinery,’

” Ann Fordham, Adrià Cots Fernández, International Drug Policy Consortium, March 18, 2025.

A Historic Vote at the CND: Colombia Challenges the Global Drug Control System

,” Isabel Pereira Arana, DeJusticia, March 18, 2025.

CND 2025: What future for the UN drug control system?

” TRANSFORM Drug Policy Foundation, March 23, 2025.

When the Adult in the Room Is Gone: Trump’s Budget Cuts and Global Drug Policy

,” István Gábor Takács, Drug Reporter, April 2, 2025.

Download this podcast episode’s .mp3 file here

, or wherever you subscribe to podcasts. The 

Global drug policy: “Countries are being freed up to actually speak their minds”

Civil Society Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe

 series explores developments in hepatitis C care for people who inject drugs, based on observations from C-EHRN focal points in 40 cities across 35 European countries. The findings point to trends such as expanded access to direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), ongoing healthcare stigma, and disparities in harm reduction funding. To gain further insights into this year’s report, we spoke with primary author Tuukka Tammi. Download the publication and read the interview below.

Compared to last year’s findings, what has changed the most in hepatitis C care for people who inject drugs?

The biggest shift is the record number of cities in the survey, giving us again a broader view of what’s happening across Europe. Forty cities across 35 European countries is a significant number. Most cities are actively encouraging treatment for people who inject drugs, and DAAs are available everywhere now, but restrictions still prevent universal access. And stigma in healthcare remains a major hurdle.

Were there any surprises in this year’s data—either positive or concerning?

A big win is that free HCV testing is now available in every city, and non-invasive diagnostics with Fibroscan® is more common. But there are still serious challenges. Harm reduction services continue to struggle with funding, and bureaucratic barriers like slow insurance approvals delay treatment.

This year’s report includes more participating cities than ever before. Did this expanded dataset bring new insights?

Definitely. The larger dataset highlights stark differences between cities making good progress and those falling behind. Some have strong policies, easy access to treatment, and well-funded harm reduction, while others still face major gaps due to restrictive policies and lack of funding. As we know more broadly, there are major divides in access to harm reduction services across Europe.

Some cities are making strong progress toward the 2030 HCV elimination goal, while others are lagging. What are the key factors that explain these differences?

Cities moving forward typically have well-funded harm reduction, fewer treatment restrictions, and national policies that prioritize HCV elimination. When treatment is accessible, and stigma is tackled, things improve. But in cities with funding cuts, excessive red tape, and discrimination in healthcare, progress stalls.

Stigma and discrimination remain a major issue in HCV care. What new insights does the 2024 report offer on this challenge?

The report makes it clear that stigma is still a huge issue, especially in general healthcare, gastroenterology clinics, and prisons. One major problem is that many healthcare providers lack training on HCV, leading to unnecessary referrals and delays in treatment. Prescription restrictions for DAAs add another layer of difficulty. If stigma isn’t tackled through policy changes and provider training, it will continue to hold back progress.

The report mentions monitoring schemes for people who inject drugs after their HCV diagnosis and treatment. How well are cities doing in this area?

It’s mixed. Just over half of the cities have structured post-treatment follow-up, which helps prevent liver damage and reinfection. But many still lack proper monitoring systems, making it easy for people to fall through the cracks.

This year’s report also examines access to hepatitis C services for people who use drugs but don’t inject. What are the key takeaways from these findings?

People who inject drugs get most of the attention, but those who use drugs in other ways are often overlooked. The report shows that access to testing and treatment for this group varies widely.

What are the top recommendations from this year’s report for policymakers and harm reduction organisations?

Mostly the same as in previous years. HCV care needs to be easier to access. Funding for harm reduction has to be protected—when services like needle exchanges and opioid agonist therapy are cut, transmission rises. Bureaucratic delays in treatment must be reduced, and healthcare providers need better training to diagnose and treat HCV without stigma. Free testing should be expanded, and governments need clear elimination strategies. Integrating harm reduction into mainstream healthcare is also key to breaking down barriers.

Based on this year’s findings, what should we be paying close attention to in 2025?

Harm reduction funding is a big concern—if cuts continue, progress could backslide. We also need to watch how policies evolve. Are they making treatment easier or harder to access?

Eliminating hepatitis C in Europe: A report on policy implementation for people who inject drugs - 2024

The alarm is sounding in the UK's first drug consumption room.

A man in his 30s has overdosed in the "using space" – a room in the Glasgow facility where nurses supervise injections in eight booths.

He had only arrived at The Thistle minutes earlier, animated about being searched by police on the Gallowgate.

Staff rush to help, bringing him from his seat to a crash mat on the floor.

Our film crew is ushered out of the area while an ambulance is called and staff work to save his life.

Eddie Kearney, a harm reduction worker, tells us that the man had already taken drugs three times that day.

"He's using a 'snowball', he's using heroin and cocaine," he explains.

"He's been in there two minutes and he's on the floor."

We are filming in the centre after being granted two days of exclusive access to the pioneering and controversial consumption room.

Less than an hour later, the alarm sounds again, for another man in his 30s.

He had been led to reception by workers from a charity, then made his way to the booths to inject heroin.

Lynn Macdonald, the service manager, tells us it is another medical emergency.

"The first four weeks, there were no medical emergencies, and then this week we've had five.

"It could be a batch of drug that is problematic. People are noticing a difference in the heroin when they making it up, saying they are noticing a green tinge to it."

More paramedics are on their way, she says.

Both men are brought round using the overdose reversal drug Naloxone, before being seen by paramedics. The second is taken to hospital.

Lynn Macdonald later told us: "I am absolutely convinced that had we not been present during the overdoses we've seen within the Thistle, then people would not have survived."

In the 12 weeks since The Thistle opened in the east end of Glasgow, there have been 16 such overdose incidents.

A total of 180 people have visited the unit and more than 1,200 injections of street-bought heroin and cocaine have been supervised.

A total of 27 people have been referred to other services, including housing, by staff.

The service, which follows similar programmes in 18 other countries, seeks to reduce drug-related harm in a hardcore population of injecting users in one of the most deprived communities in Glasgow.

It is hoped that by providing a safer space it will allow medical staff to prevent overdose deaths, reduce blood-borne viruses and clean-up a local area that, historically, has had a major issue with discarded needles and drug debris.

Western Europe