In recent years, the historical isolation between the United Nations (UN) drug policy and human rights bodies has eroded significantly, and with accelerating speed. The human rights consequences of drug policies have become an unavoidable – if fractious – topic in global drug policy debates, and human rights bodies routinely monitor the impacts of drug responses. 

The growing convergence between the UN human rights and drug policy regimes is the result of 15 years of progress across the whole UN environment, with contributions from Geneva, Vienna, and New York-based bodies reinforcing and encouraging one another. Civil society has been a constant and necessary presence, broadening the horizon of what is possible, transmitting key information across the UN system, and consistently advocating for change. 

Despite some reluctance to engage in drug-related discussions up until the 2010s, the Genevabased human rights system has become gradually more influential in pushing for this alignment. The first call for convergence between the two regimes came from Geneva, in 2008. Since then, a large number of UN human rights bodies have regarded drug policies to be under their mandate, including the Human Rights Council, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), special mandate procedures, and human rights treaty bodies. 

A parallel shift in priorities also took place in Vienna – at least initially. The first, and so far only, resolution dedicated to human rights at the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) was adopted in 2008, thereby legitimising human rights within the agenda of the CND. In the following years, Member States began to incorporate human rights language into plenary statements; new resolutions on topics closely aligned with a human rights approach were adopted. In 2014, the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) finally condemned the use of the death penalty for drugs offences, discarding its long-standing refusal to acknowledge human rights violations connected to drug control. 

These changes were hard fought by progressive Member States and civil society alike. The 2016 UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on drugs provided an opportunity to accelerate the inclusion of a stronger human rights narrative in drug policy debates across the UN system. This included establishing human rights as a new pillar of the global response to drugs, and the adoption of the strongest negotiated language to date. In part, this progress was due to the unprecedented involvement of UN human rights bodies in the preparations for the Special Session following the first-ever Human Rights Council resolution on drugs in 2015. 

The 2015 Human Rights Council resolution was mobilised Geneva-based bodies to increase their attention to drug policies after the UNGASS. Since then, OHCHR has remained steadfastly engaged on the drugs issue, while there has been ever increasing attention from special mechanisms. In parallel, the recommendations provided by human rights treaty bodies have gained in systematicity and ambition. Recent developments such as the announcement of a forthcoming new General Comment on drug policies by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), show that this trend will intensify in the future. 

The constraints imposed by consensus-based drug policy making and the strong coordination of conservative Member States have blocked progress on human rights language at the CND. Human rights have nonetheless gained visibility and influence at the Commission, thanks to constant pressure from civil society, the increased presence of the OHCHR and human rights mechanisms in Vienna, and the now constant references to human rights by vocal Member States. The centrality of human rights to drug responses is also recognised within the UN System Common Position on drugs, which was adopted by the Chief Executives Board composed of the heads of 31 UN entities in November 2018. 

2022 might have marked a turning page in consensus-based policy making on drug-related matters at the UN. First-ever votes took place at both the CND (albeit on a procedural matter), and at the UN General Assembly, where a substantial majority of Member States supported new and strong human rights language in the yearly drugs resolution. Whether the international community is truly ready to finally end the long-standing consensus on UN drug policy on a regular basis remains to be seen. However, this does open the door for new possibilities in global drug policy debates, and shows that a majority of countries now unequivocally support a greater role for human rights and human rights bodies.

Converging universes: 20 years of human rights and drug policy at the United Nations

Drafted by Sylvia Kay (Transnational Institute) with contributions from Marie Nougier (IDPC).

The 2022 World Drug Report was released at a moment marked by the aftermath of the COVID19 pandemic, global economic turmoil, multiple armed conflicts, a climate emergency, and increasing calls to end the so-called ‘war on drugs’. And yet, the Report’s conclusions and policy recommendations disappointingly keep to ‘business as usual’, by refusing to contemplate alternatives to criminalisation and interdiction.

For the first time in the history of these annual reports, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) dedicates its thematic chapter to the issue of drugs and the environment, with the UNODC coming to the welcome conclusion that the international community should ‘mainstream the objective of “do no harm to the environment” in drug policy responses’. While the Report provides important takeaways, it also contains significant blind spots and questionable assertions that are highlighted in our analysis.

Firstly, the Report’s claim that damage to the environment is mostly identified in areas with little to no State presence should be questioned. In fact, recent research has pointed out that rural and underdeveloped regions are not defined by State absence, but rather by particular modalities of State presence, and that such State intervention can have equally, or even greater, damaging impacts on the environment as State absence, for instance by undermining modes of rural governance and environmental protection associated to farmer and indigenous land control.

Secondly, the Report fails to acknowledge the harmful effects of the ‘war on drugs’ approach for the environment, especially with regards to its discussion – and questioning of the mere existence of – the ‘balloon effect’. In the context of crop cultivation, the ‘balloon effect’ refers to the displacement that follows the forced eradication of illegal crops, with efforts to eliminate cultivation in one area simply leading to cultivation shifting elsewhere, and driving ecological harms such as deforestation. Contrary to what the World Drug Report suggests, the balloon effect is a well evidenced phenomenon, and it should be taken into consideration when assessing the environmental impacts of responses to cultivation.

Thirdly, the UNODC offers questionable comparisons of the carbon footprint associated with the production of cannabis, cocaine and cocoa beans. This analysis is problematic in many respects, including the fact that calculation of the carbon footprint of cocaine includes the impact of land deforestation whereas that is not included in the case of cocoa beans, and that cocoa beans and cocaine are simply not comparable products, as the former is a raw material whereas the latter is the result of a chemical and industrial process.

Fourthly, when discussing ‘community responses’ towards environmental protection, the Report fails to examine how different drug policy regimes impact on these community responses. These drug policy regimes are indeed a determining factor in shaping the prospects for addressing drug-related environmental challenges.

Finally, the Report refuses to acknowledge how legal regulation may address some of the environmental harms identified, for instance by allowing legal outdoor cultivation of cannabis in Global South countries that have traditionally produced the plant, which would have a much lower carbon footprint than indoor cannabis cultivation in the Global North. This, however, would also require addressing the tensions with the current UN drug control regime. It would also force a reckoning with the colonial legacy in drug policy narrative and practices – an issue that is entirely ignored in the 2022 World Drug Report.

To conclude, while the efforts made by the UNODC to consider the environmental impacts of drugs and drug policies may be laudable, the UNODC continues to be behind the curve as it refuses to acknowledge the severe consequences of the ‘war on drugs’ rationale, to challenge the range of human rights abuses associated with this approach, or to propose meaningful options for reform. Unless the UNODC aligns itself with the work of other UN entities to promote an approach to drugs truly grounded in human rights, health, development and environmental protection, there is a real risk that it will quickly get out of step with broader efforts to building a strong and unified UN response to pressing world challenges.

The World Drug Report 2021: A critical assessment of projected increases in African drug use

The World Drug Report 2020: Perspectives on markets, technology, and policy

The World Drug Report 2019: Perspectives on protecting public health

IDPC response to the 2018 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2017 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2016 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2015 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2014 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2013 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2012 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2011 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2010 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2009 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2008 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2007 World Drug Report

IDPC response to the 2006 World Drug Report

IDPC analysis of the UNODC World Drug Report 2022

To: Ms Ghada Waly, Executive Director, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

Subject: Open letter on occasion of International Human Rights Day 2022

We urge you to mark International Human Rights Day 2022 by calling on Member States to change drug policies and practices to fulfil the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to place human rights at the centre of all dimensions of UNODC’s work

We are writing to you ahead of International Human Rights Day on 10th December 2022, which will celebrate the legacy and relevance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ahead of its 75th anniversary. For the past two years, dozens of civil society and community organisations have called on you to issue a statement on International Human Rights Day urging Member States to change drug laws and practices that undermine health and human rights. We reiterate this petition once again, as we call on you to mainstream human rights into all dimensions of UNODC’s work.

The human rights catastrophe brought about by punitive drug policies is well documented by the United Nations system. Every year, UN human rights experts pay increasing attention to the human rights consequences of drug policies, and more are announced to come soon. The recent and unprecedented joint statement released on 26th June 2022 (UN World Drug Day) by 13 UN human rights special mandates, in particular, notes that ‘the UN system, the international community and individual Member States have a historical responsibility to reverse the devastation brought about by decades of a global “war on drugs”’. The joint statement calls on all UN agencies to ‘ground their drug policy responses in international human rights law and standards’, and to ensure that their ‘financial and technical assistance on drug policy’ promotes responses that are ‘gender responsive’ while ‘actively seeking to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms’.

As the lead UN agency on drug-related matters, this call concerns UNODC most of all.

Furthermore, both the 2016 UNGASS Outcome Document and the 2019 Ministerial Declaration – alongside the UN System Common Position on drugs – commit the international community to ensure that drug policies are aligned with human rights obligations. As explained by the INCB on the occasion of the 2020 International Human Rights Day, ‘Human rights are inherent and inalienable. The world drug problem cannot be lawfully addressed without ensuring the protection of human rights’. The recent intersessional meeting of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs showcased the growing centrality of human rights at the Commission, as well as the increasing presence of human rights bodies and experts in Vienna.

Taking into consideration the theme of this year’s International Human Rights Day, we urge you once again to mark this occasion with a strong statement, calling on states to reform drug laws, policies and practices in order to align them with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. To be credible, such a statement should call on Member States to:

Abolish the death penalty in all circumstances. Imposing capital punishment for drug offences has been found to be contrary to international human rights law by the Human Rights Committee, and the Human Rights Council.

Put an immediate end to extrajudicial killings committed in the name of drug control, as has been repeatedly called for by the Human Rights Council and UN human rights experts.

Acknowledge the disproportionate impact of drug laws and drug control on people marginalised on the basis of their gender, race, ethnicity, and socio-economic status.

Promote the end of all criminalisation and punishment for drug use and related activities, as called for by the UN System Common Positions on drugs and on incarceration, OHCHR, UNAIDS, and UN human rights bodies

Permanently close compulsory drug detention centres, including those that masquerade as ‘rehabilitation’, and implement voluntary, evidence-informed, and rights-based health and social services, as recently called for by sixteen UN agencies, including UNODC.

Stress the urgent need to provide accessible, affordable, and adequately funded harm reduction services– including by well-funded peer-led services –, to fulfil the right to health and the right to life of people who use drugs. This is also central to UNODC’s core role as lead UNAIDS co-sponsor regarding prisons and HIV amongst people who use drugs.

Take immediate measures to address prison overcrowding, as already recommended by your own agency, the UN Common Position on incarceration and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, in line with the basic principle that prisons should only be used as a last resort in all circumstances.

Ensure that people who use drugs are not subject to arbitrary detention, torture, or ill-treatment – whether in state custody or in public or private drug services.

Make sure that drug policies incorporate a gender-sensitive perspective, by tailoring drug services to the specific needs of women, and by ensuring that criminal laws take into account the circumstances of women involved in drug offences, as most of them come from backgrounds of poverty, marginalisation, and oppression.

As the lead UN agency in drug-related matters, UNODC has the responsibility to promote drug policies that respect, protect, and fulfil human rights, including where appropriate to clearly speak out for their reform, in line with the commitments made in the UN System Common Position on drugs.

In that regard, we also call on you to use your leadership at UNODC to place human rights at the centre of all dimensions of the agency’s work. This should include not only providing technical guidance to member states, but also:

Ensuring that UNODC’s operations do not contribute to, fund or facilitate the implementation of policies in contravention of international human rights laws and standards

Mainstreaming reporting on the human rights consequences of drug policies, including by remedying the current absence of human rights in the World Drug Report;

Stepping up UNODC’s involvement in human rights cases that require urgent action, in close cooperation with civil society and with other UN entities, including where appropriate through public statements and diplomatic interventions;

Working as the lead of the Task Team responsible for the implementation of the UN System Common Position on drugs to update the Task Team’s excellent 2019 report as a key contribution to the 2024 mid-term review of the 2019 Ministerial Declaration.

We look forward to your response, and to discuss these concerns and recommendations with you.

Ann Fordham
Executive Director
International Drug Policy Consortium

Africa Network of People who Wse Drugs (AfricaNPUD), Tanzania

African Law Foundation (AFRILAW), Nigeria

Akzept e.V Bundesverband für akzeptierenden Drogenarbeit und Human Drogenpolitik, Germany

Andrey Rylkov Foundation for Health and Social Justice, Russia

Asociación Bienestar y Desarrollo, Spain

Asociación Costarricense para el Estudio e Intervención en Drogas (ACEID), Costa Rica

Asociatia RHRN - Romanian Harm Reduction Network, Romania

Centre of Excellence for Research in AIDS (CERiA), Malaysia

Centro de Estudos de Segurança e Cidadania, Brazil

Centro de Orientación e Investigación Integral, Dominican Republic

Comisión Mexicana de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos A.C., Mexico City

Corporación Acción Tecnica Social, Colombia

Corporación Humanas Centro Regional de Derechos Humanos y Justicia de Género, Colombia

Correlation - European Harm Reduction Network, Netherlands

Drug Policy Alliance, United States of America

Drug Policy Network South East Europe, Serbia

East African Harm Reduction Network, Uganda

Episteme Investigació i Intervenció Social, Spain

Eurasian Harm Reduction Association (EHRA), Lithuania

Fédération Bruxelloise Francophone des Institutions pour Toxicomanes, Belgium

Groupement Romand d'Etudes des Addictions (GREA), Switzerland

Harm Reduction Nurses Association/L’association des infirmiers et infirmières en réduction des méfaits, Canada

Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, Poland

HIV Legal Network/Réseau Juridique VIH, Canada

HOPS- Healthy Options Project Skopje, North Macedonia

Indonesian Harm Reduction Network, Indonesia

Intercambios Civil Association, Argentina

International Center for Ethnobotanical Education, Research and Service (ICEERS), Spain

International Drug Law Advocacy & Resource Center (IDLARC), USA

Law Enforcement Action Partnership, USA, U.K. and France

Mexico United Against Crime (MUCD), Mexico

Middle East & North Africa Harm Reduction Association (MENAHRA), Lebanon

National Harm Reduction Coalition, United States of America

For the third year in a row, 100+ NGOs urge UNODC Director to mark International Human Rights Day by calling for rights-affirming drug policies

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the Ministry of Justice and Law present the monitoring report on territories affected by coca cultivation as of 31 December 2021, prepared by the Integrated Illicit Crop Monitoring System (SIMCI).

The first chapter highlights that potential cocaine production maintains the upward trend that has been registered since 2014, while the area planted with coca resumes the strong upward trend that had been present since 2014 and that was interrupted between 2018 and 2020. It indicates that this recovery of the trend is the result of the interaction of multiple structural factors that coincided with a reduction in the efficiency of interventions.

In contrast to the 2018-2020 period, coca did not only grow within the productive enclaves, as the increase was generalised; even departments that were showing a downward trend, such as Caquetá, Meta and Guaviare, showed an increase in coca cultivation. The consolidation of coca-free territories has not yet taken place, despite the fact that five departments have now had less than 100 hectares under cultivation for more than nine years.

The second chapter emphasises elements of change that boost the incentive system and can have an impact on the reactivation of the phenomenon in territories that had a tendency to abandon coca cultivation. These changes do not only affect coca growers; they also have an impact on the communities that interact with the production chain. The report highlights the changes in the roles and actors of power present in the territories, the new urban-rural relations that imply new alternatives for transforming illegal profits into goods and services, as well as the formation of productive enclaves not only related to the concentration and permanence of coca, but also to the development of other enclave characteristics in an economic sense.

Colombia - Monitoring of territories affected by illicit crops 2021

To better understand the role of Afghan women in opiate trade in Afghanistan and following the publication of the “Voices of Quchaqbar” report, the UNODC’s Afghan Opiate Trade Project, under the framework of CRIMJUST initiated the current study, utilising a similar methodology to interview Afghan women. This study investigates Afghan women's role and involvement in the drug trade, motivations for entering and remaining in the drug trade, the business model and drug trafficking networks.

Mr. Michael Osman, Head, Afghan Opiate Trade Project, Border Management Branch, 

Mr. Alan Cole, Chief, Border Management Branch, UNODC

Representative, Research and Trend Analysis Branch, UNODC (tbc) 

Representative UNODC Country Office for Afghanistan - tbc • Representative UNODC Gender Team – tbc 

Introduction, overview of the study and presentation of the key findings 

Mr. Michael Osman, Head, Afghan Opiate Trade Project, Border Management Branch, UNODC 

Ms. Monika Roszkowska, Research Officer, Afghan Opiate Trade Project, Border Management Branch, UNODC

Launch of the UNODC report on Afghan women and the opiate trade

Access to controlled medicines in humanitarian emergencies remains constrained

Recognizing World Humanitarian Day 2021, the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) once again call on governments to facilitate access to medicines containing controlled substances in emergency settings, including during pandemics and the increasing number of climate-related disasters.

The theme of World Humanitarian Day 2021 acknowledged the impact of climate-related emergencies. Over 7,348 disasters have been reporting in the last two decades of which 40% are now estimated to be climate-related according to United Nations reports. The impact of their increasing number combined with the persistent COVID-19 pandemic creates a complex landscape for ensuring access to controlled medicines in emergencies.

A year after an earlier joint statement, unprecedented trade restrictions, shortages of medicines, surges in infections, and new variants of SARS-CoV-2 compound the problems related to maintaining a supply of controlled medicines, according to WHO and the World Trade Organization.

The problem of access to controlled medicines in emergencies

There is an increase in demand for controlled medicines in emergency responses. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, WHO has identified over 20 medicines with global-level shortages, including four that contain controlled substances that are used in intensive care units for the treatment of severe cases of COVID-19. Internationally controlled medicines such as morphine, diazepam, and midazolam listed as WHO essential medicines, are vital for the management of pain, palliative care, surgical care and anesthesia, and treatment of drug-use disorders, mental health, and neurological conditions.

Shortages impact countries of all income levels. Low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) are often disproportionately impacted by shortages--partly related to their relative purchasing power in international medicines markets and partly because specialized systems to manage controlled medicines do not always accommodate sufficient exceptions for emergencies.

Urgent action is needed to ensure that national systems improve access to controlled medicines for people affected by emergencies, including pandemics, and climate-related disasters.

INCB, UNODC and WHO joint statement on access to controlled medicines in emergencies

Subject: Open letter on UNODC statement on International Human Rights Day

On 10 December 2020, we urge you to mark International Human Rights Day by calling on Member States to change drug policies and practices that violate human rights, and entrench exclusion and discrimination.

We are writing to you concerning the forthcoming International Human Rights Day, which will take place on 10 December 2020 amidst the devastating global COVID-19 pandemic that has compounded the exclusion and discrimination faced by people and communities affected by drug policies worldwide. As your first International Human Rights Day as Executive Director of UNODC, this occasion is an important opportunity to issue a strong statement that underlines UNODC’s commitment to rights-based drug policies, and calls for change in the laws and practices that threaten health and human rights.

For decades, punitive drug policies have driven widespread human rights violations, as has been amply documented by the UN.1 These include: the death penalty for drug offences; extrajudicial killings; arbitrary detention, often masquerading as ‘rehabilitation’; the denial of access to life-saving harm reduction services; widespread barriers to accessing controlled medicines for pain relief; the criminalisation of people who use drugs, subsistence farmers and others groups in situations of vulnerability; corporal punishment; and mass incarceration. Furthermore, draconian drug policies have disproportionately affected people who live in situations of exclusion on the basis gender, race, ethnicity, and economic status, amongst others.

In the past years, an increasing number of UN bodies have called on Member States to align their drug policies with human rights standards. The 2018 Chief Executives Board’s UN System Common Position on drug-related matters makes clear that ‘National drug control programmes (…) should be designed and implemented by States in accordance with their human rights obligations’, and commits all UN agencies, including UNODC, to support drug policies ‘that put people, health, and human rights at the centre’.2 In 2019, a number of UN agencies, including UNDP, OHCHR and WHO, published the ‘International Guidelines on Human Rights and Drug Policy’,3 which provide the first comprehensive international human rights standards on drug-related matters. IDPC called on UNODC to follow this trend in our Advocacy Note ‘Recommendations for the new UNODC Executive Director’,4 which is attached to IDPC’s correspondence to you dated 24 February 2020.

The 2020 International Human Rights Day, which will be held under the title ‘Recover better: Stand Up for Human Rights’, includes a thematic focus on the need ‘to apply human rights standards to tackle entrenched, systematic, and intergenerational inequalities, exclusion and discrimination’. As such, it presents a key opportunity for UNODC to highlight its commitment to the promotion of drug policies that respect, protect, and fulfil human rights, in line with the UN System Common Position.

In that regard, we urge you to issue a strong statement on International Human Rights Day, calling on states to change the drug laws, policies and practices that violate health and human rights. To be credible, such a statement should explicitly name the major human rights violations committed in the name of drug control, and urge member states to:

1. Abolish the death penalty in all circumstances. Imposing capital punishment for drug offences has been found to be contrary to international human rights law by the Human Rights Committee6, and the Human Rights Council.

2. Put an immediate end to extrajudicial killings committed in the name of drug control, as has been repeatedly called for by the Human Rights Council8 and UN human rights experts.

3. Permanently close compulsory drug detention centres, including those that masquerade as ‘rehabilitation’, and implement voluntary, evidence-informed, and rights-based health and social services, as recently called for by sixteen UN agencies, including UNODC.

4. Stress the urgent need to provide accessible, affordable, and adequately funded harm reduction services in community and closed settings, to fulfil the right to health and the right to life of people who use drugs, as demanded by several UN human rights bodies and experts. This is also central to UNODC’s core, funded role as lead UNAIDS co-sponsor regarding prisons and HIV amongst people who use drugs.

5. Take immediate measures to address prison overcrowding, as already recommended by UNODC and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, by promoting alternatives to incarceration, and ensuring proportionate sentencing for all drug offences, including by taking into account mitigating factors – in line with the basic principle that prisons should only be used as a last resort in all circumstances.

6. Ensure that people who use drugs are not subject to arbitrary detention, torture, or ill-treatment – whether in state custody or public or private drug services. While under detention, people with a drug dependence or other problems associated with their drug use must be offered evidence-based treatment, harm reduction and other drug services on a strictly voluntary basis.

7. Promote the end of all punishment for drug use, and drug possession and cultivation for personal use, as permitted within the three drug control conventions. Such policy shifts will help to end the stigma, criminalisation, and exclusion faced by people who use drugs, and to facilitate access to health and social services, as called for by the UN System Common Position, UNAIDS, and UN human rights bodies.

8. Make sure that drug policies incorporate a gender-sensitive perspective. This should be done by tailoring drug services to the specific needs of women, and by ensuring that criminal laws take into account the circumstances of women involved in drug offences, as most of them come from backgrounds of poverty, marginalisation, and oppression.

9. Clearly outline the ways in which UNODC will work to achieve these changes, and the measures being taken to ensure that human rights are effectively embedded as a core strand for all of the Office’s work.

As the lead UN agency in drug-related matters, UNODC has the responsibility to promote drug policies that respect, protect, and fulfil human rights, in a way that is consistent with the standards developed by the UN system, and in line with the commitments set in the UN System Common Position. A strong statement for your first International Human Rights Day as Executive Director would be an important and welcome step that signals UNODC’s unequivocal commitment to human rights.