Despite billions spent in drug control, European drug policies have failed to protect the health and safety of our communities.

Drug use is reaching historical records. New substances are entering the EU market every year. War-on-drugs policies have been unable to stop the growing power of organised crime. Evidence shows that prevention, treatment, and harm reduction are necessary to save lives and protect our communities, but services for people who use drugs lack resources and political support.

The 2024 European elections must bring a paradigm shift. This manifesto lays down a vision for a pragmatic, innovative, and human rights-centred European drug policy that will deliver healthier and safer communities. We invite all European civil society organizations, parties, and candidates to endorse the following calls to action.

Together, we will build a drug policy that prepares Europe for the future.

Open To Everyone, Initiated by Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network, the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), NEWNet Enjoying Safer Nightlife.

The Principle of the Drug Policy Manifesto:

Ramp up investment in health and social care

Drug use in Europe is at record levels, and the growing presence of new psychoactive substances, including synthetic opioids, has raised the alarm. Law enforcement and drug control will not stop this new threat, just as they have failed in other regions of the world. To be prepared for the future, the EU institutions must prioritise support and funding for integrated health and care services that are proven to work. A focus on services that support, rather than punish, people who use drugs is necessary to save lives and keep communities safe.

EU drug policy must be rebalanced, ending the current prioritisation of law enforcement over health. The EU institutions must ramp up investment and support for selective and indicated prevention programmes, evidence-informed voluntary treatment, life-saving harm reduction (including HIV/AIDS and HCV prevention, opioid assisted treatment, take-home naloxone, drug checking services, and drug consumption rooms), and community-based and community-led services that can reach out to everyone in need.

It is time to abandon war-on-drugs policies that, despite costing billions, have failed to reduce the size of illegal drug markets, to curb the power of organised crime or to reduce violence. Policies and narratives that stigmatise and blame people who use drugs and marginalised communities must be replaced with interventions grounded in evidence, inclusion, and human rights.

To ensure an integrated, holistic, and intersectional approach to drugs, EU health bodies must have a pivotal role in shaping EU drug policy. Drug policy must be mainstreamed across social, health and economic policies, and not be left at the hands of law enforcement alone.

The EU institutions must mainstream an inclusive, human rights and gender-based approach to drugs, including an unequivocal support for the decriminalisation of people who use drugs as a measure to remove stigma and improve access to services.

The new EU Drugs Agency must create indicators that monitor the effectiveness and impact of current drug policy approaches such as crime prevention and demand and harm reduction, including on stigma, access to services, and human rights, and conduct more policy-oriented research. EU bodies mandated to uphold human rights, EU values and the rule of law must also be involved.

Ensure civil society and community participation

A safer and more effective drug policy requires the involvement of civil society organizations that work every day with communities, can reach out to vulnerable populations, and are best informed of new trends in drug markets. EU drug policy must reflect the principle ‘nothing about us without us’, involving first and foremost affected communities and people who use drugs.

Mechanisms for civil society participation in EU drug policy, including the Civil Society Forum on Drugs in the EU, should be appropriately funded, supported, and meaningfully consulted by the European Commission, the EU Drugs Agency, and all relevant EU institutions. They should include representatives of affected communities, including people who use drugs, young people, women, and those disproportionately affected by criminalisation, stigma, and discrimination.

Explore innovative approaches, including responsible regulation

A pragmatic drug policy requires exploring innovative approaches to drug markets, including the responsible regulation of drugs such as cannabis, as a key measure to protect the health and human rights of communities, and reduce the power of organized crime. The EU should facilitate these innovations, and monitor their impact on health, safety, and human rights.

European policy makers must ensure that European laws and policies facilitate the adoption of innovative approaches to drug markets, including responsible regulation. The EU Drugs Agency should monitor the impact of drug policies and regulation, to allow for evidence-informed policy making. This will support mutual learning, increase uptake of best practices, contribute to pragmatic solutions, and prepare Europe for the future.

Alliance Nationale des Communauté pour la Santé (ANCS)

Asociace poskytovatelů adiktologických služeb, z.s.

Correlation European Harm Reduction Network (C-EHRN)

Episteme - Investigació i Intervenció Social

International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC)

RefletsduReel (RdR) - Asud auto-support usagers de drogues

For a drug policy that makes Europe safer, healthier, and more just - Drug policy manifesto for the 2024 European Parliament elections

The Harm Reduction International Conference 2025 (HR25) will be held in Bogotá, Colombia on 27-30 April 2025.

In October 2023, Colombia’s new government announced a bold new drug policy that broke away from the war on drugs. It focussed on opportunity and justice.

Among other things the new policy looked to: prevent deforestation linked to drug trafficking; help transition small farmers to the legal economy; and tackle drug use with a focus on public health and human rights.

The Harm Reduction International Conference is going to Colombia to support a country that is taking the leap towards a new paradigm and to learn from the country and region.

Harm Reduction International Conference 2025

In this review article, we develop the case for the decriminalisation of drug possession in the UK by describing our ‘modest proposal’ to repeal the relevant sections of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and its advantages. We defend this proposal against possible critiques from both conservative and radical positions. On the conservative side, these criticisms include that it would increase drug use and harm and that it would be illegal under international law. From the more radical position, we anticipate the criticisms that decriminalisation of possession would leave the harm associated with illegal drug supply to continue, that it would leave in place restrictions on the rights to use drugs, that it would forego the possible tax income from a legally regulated market, and that the drug laws would continue to act as tools of social control. In response, we argue that decriminalisation offers a feasible first step towards reducing the harm of drug control which would not increase drug-related harm.

In defence of the decriminalisation of drug possession in the UK

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy signed into law a bill legalising the medical use of cannabis, a parliamentary database showed on Thursday.More than 6 million people, including cancer patients, civilians with post-traumatic stress disorder, and wounded soldiers need medicine containing cannabis, according to a lawmaker.The bill signed by Zelenskiy on Tuesday would only come into force six months after it is officially published, and the ban on selling or supplying cannabis for recreational use would remain in effect.

Ukraine legalises cannabis for medical use

Decades of harsh laws that punish and stigmatize people who use drugs and others involved in the drug trade have led to 

mass incarceration, disease, suffering and violence.

 Criminalizing drugs does not decrease their use or supply. Instead, it drives the trade underground, increases the harms of using drugs and fuels organized crime, corruption and violence. 

The prohibition of drugs directly impacts our 

 People who use drugs are denied access to medical treatment or are deterred from seeking medical assistance for fear of being reported to the authorities. This increases the risk of overdose and other threats to their life and health. 

Drug policies designed to punish people exacerbate the risks and harms associated with drug use. These policies can lead to increased 

 They also obstruct access to drugs for medical purposes, including for pain relief and palliative care, resulting in further harm and 

The term “war on drugs” was first used in 1971 by US President Richard Nixon with his aggressive and discriminatory campaign to enforce drug prohibition. Since then, it has been used by many governments around the world to launch crackdowns on people who use drugs and reduce the trafficking of drugs. These campaigns rely on harsh punishments to deter people from using or selling drugs.

From mass killings in the Philippines and the application of the death penalty for drug offences in Malaysia, to mass incarceration in the USA and torture in Mexico, the “war on drugs” has been a driver of widespread human rights abuses.

There is growing evidence from every region in the world that the “war on drugs” fails to decrease the use and availability of drugs. Instead, it undermines the rights of millions of people, exacerbates the harms of using drugs, and intensifies the violence associated with illicit markets.

It disproportionately affects the poorest and most marginalized communities, who carry the burden of this failed strategy. It traps entire communities in cycles of incarceration, violence and poverty.

Amnesty International's portal on drug policy reform

On 22 March, German lawmakers finally adopted a bill that will decriminalise cannabis possession and home growing, and will create a regulated framework for supply through non-profit cannabis clubs. While a significant step, the draft law retains a prohibitionist framework and will create two-tiered cannabis justice. While middle-class white users are likely to have easier access to cannabis, people from racialised groups will continue to face policing and prosecution. How we got to this place—and the current uncertainties about how the bill will be implemented makes clear that we must centre racial justice and social equity in efforts for cannabis regulation in Germany and across Europe.

In Germany, people from racialised and migrantised communities have been disproportionately criminalised for drug-related offenses. This is driven by practices such as 

, and local laws that grant police authority to control people without individualised suspicion in self-designated crime “hotspots”, 

 neighbourhoods. Police control cannabis on a wide scale, with 214,242 cannabis offenses recorded in 2022. Of an estimated 40,000 cannabis cases sentenced each year,² 28% are against non-German citizens,³ with enormous consequences for people’s mental health, employment prospects, and more.

Enforcement of cannabis has targeted people from racialised and migrantised groups despite evidence of similar levels of drug use among groups in Germany

Enforcement of cannabis has targeted people from racialised and migrantised groups despite evidence of 

 among groups in Germany. In addition to that, 

90% of drug supply is estimated to occur behind closed doors

, in a market served primarily by white Germans. This means that the concentration of police powers in racialised populations and neighbourhoods is little else than an arbitrary practice, grounded on prejudice rather than evidence. We at the 

, an organization focused on discriminatory criminalisation of people in Germany, find that the new cannabis law will do little to remedy these disparate impacts of cannabis criminalisation.

Under the new law, people in Germany will be able to grow and possess cannabis, with a limit of 25 grams of cannabis (50 grams at home), and up to three plants per person. They will also have access to a regulated supply via non-profit cannabis clubs.

But these liberalising measures are accompanied by other policies that continue patterns of punitive punishment for cannabis offenses. For example, there is a restrictive limit on the quantities users can legally possess,⁴ and people can be fined for using cannabis within 100 meters of schools or in cannabis clubs. The draft law is also restrictive in the design of the clubs, requiring, for example, that members cultivate their own cannabis and 

 that can be shared among enforcement authorities. Many from already-marginalised groups are unlikely to have capacity to contribute to cannabis clubs and many will be unwilling to share personal data. As experience in other countries shows, including in Uruguay, when cannabis regulation is too stringent, people are unable to benefit from the law.

Just as regulated cannabis reflects a rethinking about the criminal culpability of consumers of cannabis, so should it prompt an overhaul in how people are criminalised for supply outside of regulated channels, as has been the case in some jurisdictions in the United States that have regulated cannabis.

The persistence of a prohibitionist framework is most visible in how supply outside of cannabis clubs will be sanctioned going forward. Just as regulated cannabis reflects a rethinking about the criminal culpability of consumers of cannabis, so should it prompt an overhaul in how people are criminalised for supply outside of regulated channels, as has been the case 

While the ceilings for punishment for some cannabis-related offenses will be reduced (from five years to three), some of the most arbitrary and harsh aspects of the current law remain in place. Under one provision, people face a mandatory one-year prison sentence for cannabis supply labelled as “commercial”. Our interviews with defence attorneys suggest it is often the most vulnerable who are deemed to be selling commercially, because they sell for survival, a reality for many.The law will also increase some mandatory minimum prison sentences. Our experience suggests that it will be people from racialised and migrantised groups who are racially profiled by police that will continue to be punished for cannabis supply. Nowhere in the law do we find the kind of reparations frameworks adopted in some US jurisdictions, including social policy to facilitate current suppliers’ employment in another field.

Why does Germany’s bill fall short in these ways? In part, it is because the bill was drafted with a more privileged white cannabis user in mind. The debates surrounding the bill were focused on questions of youth and the health effects of cannabis, certainly important considerations. Crowded out was a robust rethinking of what justice should mean under a new, regulated cannabis regime in Germany.

Instead, when it comes to matters of justice and the criminal legal system, law-and-order rhetoric from justice officials—including the police, 

, and prosecutors—has been always at the centre of the cannabis debate, seemingly almost derailing the passage of the bill at various points. They have argued that the illegal market will continue to dominate, and that they will also have more work as they oversee cannabis clubs. Most telling, they have been vocal against the very limited social policy in the law. The bill requires that people who possessed now-allowed quantities may apply to have their records erased, and existing German regulations require retroactive relief to people with open cases. According to these actors’ arguments, the administrative burden of these provisions is simply too high, and the bill should have been reconsidered, or at least delayed. Thankfully, this has not come to pass, but nor have stronger measures been adopted that place the responsibility in the hands of the state to erase records, without applications from individuals.

But every night in jail is one too many for those impacted, every day with the burden of a criminal record harms people’s life prospects, and every additional police control generates more harm.

But every night in jail is one too many for those impacted, every day with the burden of a criminal record harms people’s life prospects, and every additional police control generates more harm. Despite the magnitude of these consequences, arguments for justice and equity—for example, through more robust social policy, expansive decriminalisation, or reinvestment—are scarcely heard amidst a tough-on-crime chorus.

In our view, the reason for this is that the cannabis conversation has, since the beginning, mostly left out the voices of people policed and criminalised for cannabis. Policy makers avoid discussing racial and ethnic disparities, hiding behind a lack of official data on these issues—while also, for example, painting lopsided populist pictures of racialised “criminals” involved in the cannabis trade.

In the last months, we’ve tried to address this shortcoming in the cannabis reform conversation, bringing together a coalition of drug policy advocates and racial justice activists. We developed an 

about these disparities and are demanding politicians address the injustices we’ve so clearly identified, in implementation and when Germany’s law is reviewed in a few years. What is also clear to us is that this law could have been stronger if these considerations had shaped the new regulatory framework from the outset: We may have had a law tailored to remedy past injustices and avoid similar harms from occurring in the future.

European jurisdictions have a lot to learn from places in the US and elsewhere that have: reinvested in the people and communities criminalised under prohibition, including with robust social policy and employment opportunities; erasing people’s past cannabis-related criminal records automatically, including for supply; easier access to cannabis markets for consumers; and more aggressive decriminalisation, including for supply and higher thresholds for possession.

As momentum for cannabis regulation continues to grow across Europe, it is likely that other countries will take this model as a starting point, just as Germany was inspired by Malta – the first European country to regulate cannabis in 2022. It is essential that we learn the lessons learnt from the German experience and apply them elsewhere in the continent. And so, we urge activists elsewhere: Racial justice in cannabis regulation in Europe, from the beginning.

And so, we urge activists elsewhere: Racial justice in cannabis regulation in Europe, from the beginning.

 “Migrantised” is a term similar to “racialised”, to suggest that there is a social process through which, in this case, certain areas are understood as “migrant” and associated with certain stereotypes.

 In 2022, of the total 60,754 drug cases sentenced were against non-German citizens. In 2022, 64% of police-recorded drug offenses were for cannabis.

 Criminal legal system data is unavailable in Germany by racial or ethnic group. Therefore the closest proxy we have for quantifying racism in the system is data on the number of non-German citizens in the criminal legal system. This number is necessarily an over and under count: It is an overcount because not all non-German citizens are from racialised groups and it is an undercount because German citizens from racialised groups are also criminalised.

 By contrast, Minnesota's cannabis regulation, which became law in May 2023, has a domestic possession threshold of 2lbs (907g). In Spain, the threshold is 100g. A moderately experienced grower can easily harvest 150g from 3 plants. The thresholds as they stand are divorced from the reality / practice of growers and users.

As cannabis regulation becomes a reality in Europe, racial justice must be at the centre of our movement’s advocacy

The Government of Saint Lucia, through the Ministry of Commerce, Manufacturing, Business Development, Cooperatives and Consumer Affairs, has been engaged in the revision and development of policy, legislation and a regulatory framework for cannabis in Saint Lucia.

In keeping with these advancements, the Government of Saint Lucia will be hosting a two-day Cannabis Symposium from March 19 – March 20, 2024 as an open-ended regional policy discussion on matters relating to cannabis.

This symposium will afford relevant stakeholders and Cannabis Authorities within the region an opportunity to hold candid discussions on some of the issues and challenges experienced throughout the region.

Subsequently, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will be signed by the aforementioned parties, guided by a common interest to establish and maintain robust, inclusive and safe regimes surrounding cannabis cultivation, manufacturing, sale and use in the individual states of the region.

This MOU will, in effect, establish the Caribbean Cannabis Forum—a mechanism to encourage and host joint discussions on national, regional or international cannabis matters of relevance to the Caribbean region.

Saint Lucia to host Caribbean Cannabis Symposium

Thursday 14 March 2024, Vienna (Austria) -

 For the first time since 2019, world leaders gathered in Vienna today to assess the state of international drug policy, amidst a global drugs crisis that claims hundreds of thousands of lives every year, and drives systematic violations of human rights.

In an unprecedented development, a coalition of 62 countries led by Colombia 

 at the opening of the event to call for the reform of the international drug control system, which has remained unchanged since the height of the “war on drugs”. The joint statement sounded the alarm on the catastrophic consequences of punitive drug policies, which fuel violence, corruption and environmental devastation, whilst undermining health, development and human rights.

 by Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who described the current international system as “

 by the United Nations own human rights chief, Volker Türk, urging “

transformative change in global drug policy

H.E. Ms Laura Gil, Ambassador of Colombia to the United Nations in Vienna, said: “

This is a moment of reckoning for UN drug control. The price of failed drug policies has been too high and political inertia here in Vienna is costing lives. It is time to transform the system and we pledge to bring pragmatism to an environment marked by denial

This unprecedented call for global reform is the result of heightened frustrations over the current state of global drug policy. Despite 

 on the devastation brought about by “war on drugs” policies, UN drug control bodies have refused to conduct a meaningful evaluation of the current approach. As a result, the UN summit started with the adoption of a weak politically negotiated document that mainly recycles commitments from the past decade - mostly because of the outdated tradition of adopting all UN political documents on drugs by consensus.

Ann Fordham, Executive Director of the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC - a global network of 190 NGOs) said: 

“After months of negotiations, member states have adopted a watered-down political document that fails to evaluate progress to date, truly acknowledge the failings of the ‘war on drugs’, or call for meaningful change, despite hundreds of thousands of people dying every year as a result of harmful policies. However, we are encouraged by the growing voices of dissent that call for a transformation in global drug control

These developments have occurred during the first day of the high-level segment of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs, which is taking place in Vienna on 14th and 15th March 2024 with the presence of US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, Bolivian Vice-President David Choquehuanca, EU Home Affairs Commissioner Ylva Johansson, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk, and various other ministers.

Marie Nougier | Head of Research and Communications
International Drug Policy Consortium
mnougier[@]idpc.net | +447807077617

Outcome document of the high-level segment: 

https://www.unodc.org/documents/commissions/CND/CND_Sessions/CND_67/Documents/ECN72024_L6_advance_unedited.pdf

General information and registration for the high-level segment: 

https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/commissions/CND/session/67_Session_2024/67CND_Main.html

IDPC shadow report evaluating the past five years of the current UN drug strategy: 

https://idpc.net/publications/2023/12/idpc-shadow-report-2024

Report of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on human rights challenges in addressing and countering all aspects of the world drug problem: 

https://www.ohchr.org/en/calls-for-input/2023/call-inputs-ohchrs-report-human-rights-challenges-addressing-and-countering

Joint statement, delivered by Colombia on behalf of 62 countries (Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kiribati, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Timor Leste, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay): 

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/iupq00f7cajltu9usz1ep/Joint_Statement_High-Level-Segment.pdf?rlkey=u003741thqee5zju2d98mptfs&dl=0

Crisis and division at UN drug summit: Unprecedented pro-reform coalition led by Colombia challenges “war on drugs”

Against the backdrop of increasing recognition of the failures of prohibitionist approaches to drug policy, Ghana’s legislative framework on drugs was radically reformed in 2020, introducing legislative alternatives to incarceration for drug possession for use. While the changes represent a beginning in the process of moving away from past failures and toward a future with a more evidence-based, human rights- and public health-centred approach to drugs, Ghana’s new legislation requires further review in order to align with emerging best practice.

Decriminalise drug use, in alignment with the West Africa Commission on Drugs’ Model Drug Law for West Africa.

Define appropriate quantity thresholds to differentiate possession for use and possession for supply.

Move away from mandated, court-referred rehabilitation orders.

Education and sensitisation of the provisions of the new law must be scaled up.

States should adopt an explicit and clearly defined public health approach to drugs, including psychosocial interventions.

A clear architecture for the implementation of harm reduction approaches in line with WHO guidelines should be introduced.

Remove mandatory minimum sentences for trafficking offences, while maintaining maximum ceilings.

Implement alternatives to punishment for low-level actors beyond people who use drugs in the drug trade.

Contributions from civil society organisations and other non-state actors should be welcomed.

Systematic data collection must be integrated into drug policies

New approaches to regulating drugs in West Africa: exploring the impact of Ghana’s drug policy reform

Ghana: Law students urged to guard against inimical drug policies, legislations

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

I hope this letter finds you in good health and high spirits. I am writing to you with great concern regarding the proposed Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances Bill that is currently under your consideration.

As a concerned citizen deeply invested in the well-being and progress of our beloved Uganda through the Uganda Harm Reduction Network (UHRN), I am compelled to express my apprehensions and urge you to desist from signing this bill into law.

While I understand the importance of addressing the challenges posed by drug abuse and trafficking, I am concerned that certain provisions in the proposed bill may have unintended consequences for individual freedoms, public health, and the overall development of our society.

The global community has increasingly recognized the need for balanced and evidence-based drug policies that prioritize harm reduction, rehabilitation, and human rights. According to the Uganda police annual report of 2022, 2,797 cases of narcotics/ drugs were reported countrywide, yet of that figure, 1,816 cases were taken to court and only 367 cases secured convictions, most of which were minor offences.

By measure of the Penal Code Act, an offence that attracts such paltry convictions needs deeper scrutiny to find ways of reducing them rather than rolling out tough laws that may be detrimental.

So, the concept of decreasing harm should be important to public policy, yet expressly trying to remove drug-related harms through legislation has never worked in drug control anywhere in the world. In passing the bill, parliament has an assumption that all drug use is ‘abuse’ and that only immediate abstinence is acceptable.

This is counterproductive and prevents harm reduction from being a drug policy priority. So, I respectfully request you, Mr President, consider the following points before making any decisions on the Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances Bill:

Some provisions in the bill may pose a threat to individual privacy and freedom. It is crucial to ensure that any legislation preserves and protects the fundamental rights of Ugandan citizens.

As a result, criminalizing drug use may dissuade people from seeking medical care for drug-related health problems, infringing on their right to health. Punitive measures can stymie harm reduction attempts by making it harder for people to get clean needles, overdose prevention measures, and other health services.

Emphasizing rehabilitation and treatment over punitive measures has proven to be more effective in addressing drug-related issues. Investing in healthcare, education and support services can contribute significantly to reducing the demand for illicit substances.

What we need are diversion programs that redirect people who use drugs away from the criminal justice system into community-based rehabilitation programs. In fact, from my experience at UHRN, such centres further need to be allocated resources and protection to provide accessible and evidence-based treatment for individuals with substance use disorders.

It would be beneficial to align the proposed legislation with international best practices in drug policy. Learning from the experiences of other nations can help in crafting effective and humane policies.

So, since harm reduction approaches aim to minimize the negative consequences associated with drug use, engaging in open and inclusive consultations with various stakeholders, including health professionals, legal experts, civil society organizations and affected communities, is crucial to ensuring a comprehensive and well-informed approach to drug policy.

Mr President, you may not be aware but people who inject drugs need access to clean needles and syringes to reduce the transmission of blood-borne infections, such as HIV/Aids and hepatitis.

I also wish to inform you that organizations such as UHRN regularly conduct public awareness campaigns and educational programs to disseminate information about the risks associated with drug use, safer consumption practices, and harm reduction strategies. These outreach programs have saved hundreds of thousands of people who inject drugs.

Therefore, it is on this background that I advocate for a law that prioritizes public health over punitive measures, decriminalizing personal drug use and possession while focusing on diversion and treatment options.

Mr President, I understand the challenges you face in addressing complex issues such as drug abuse and trafficking. However, I believe that a balanced and evidence-based approach will be more successful in achieving the desired outcomes without compromising the rights and well-being of our citizens.

I appreciate your attention to this matter and trust that you will give due consideration to the concerns I have raised. Your leadership in promoting policies that prioritize the health, welfare, and human rights of our people will undoubtedly contribute to the continued prosperity of our great nation.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Drug law reform