Monday April 15, 9:00pm ET | Tuesday April 16, 9:00am PHT

As Mayor of Davao City and then President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte orchestrated a campaign of widespread extrajudicial killings in the Philippine drug war. Now the subject of an investigation by the International Criminal Court, the Duterte drug war according to the government has claimed more than 6,000 lives, while NGOs believe the true number is upwards of 30,000. Since late during the Duterte presidency and continuing under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., drug war killings reported by media outlets in the Philippines have continued at a rate of about one per day.

Adding to the the suffering of victims/survivors, burial plots rented by the government have expiration dates, leading to cremations when families can't pay or sometimes without their knowledge. In addition to the indignity, this is also a potential evidentiary issue for the ICC. The AJ Kalinga Foundation's Program Paghilom helps families make arrangements for their loved ones' remains, with ritual to provide closure, and conducts forensic examinations, as part of a support framework that includes education, legal support and other basic needs.

International Center for Multigenerational Legacies of Trauma

, Founder and Executive Director, Rock Ed Philippines and head of its 

Fr. Flaviano Villanueva SVD is a leading human rights advocate in the Philippines. He will discuss the work of Program Paghilom, including its efforts to document and memorialize extrajudicial killings in the Duterte drug war while helping victims/survivors move forward with their lives.

Dr. Yael Danieli, a clinical psychologist, psychohistorian, victimologist and traumatologist, will discuss the challenges faced by victims/survivors of atrocities, the role of victims in relation to cases at the International Criminal Court, and the concept of reparative justice in international law. She will also discuss the impact that trauma from mass atrocities has on future generations, a phenomenon recognized by the ICC for the first time in the Uganda Dominic Ongwen prosecution.

Gang Badoy Capati is the founder of Rock Ed Philippines and Project: Steady Asia, and is a trauma therapist and trained media literacy instructor with a background in media, documentary filmmaking, education and publishing. She will discuss victims' trauma in the context of events and conditions in The Philippines.

Victims move forward from the Philippine drug war

New research into service users’ experiences of drug treatment services in the NEIC Dublin was launched in the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission by ICON, SURIA and CAN.

Applying a public sector equality and human rights duty approach to the human rights and equality issues identified by Service Users of Drug Treatment services in the North East Inner City (NEIC)

 details the process and findings of a collaborative peer led research programme.

77% of service users are aged between 36-55

56% of service users are in treatment over 16 years

87% have never been offered an alternative to methadone

88% feel they have been treated differently due to being in treatment and/or addiction

88% have never been asked their opinion on services

48% are still required to give weekly urinalysis

‘It’s like I am chained to my clinic’

‘I can’t get a job because I have to go to the clinic every day except Christmas when its closed.

The moment people know, they come undermining and dismissive of my view.

‘..that we wouldn’t be left on methadone for our lives’

Working directly with service users to identify their human rights and equality issues and monitor progress over time has facilitated their voice to be heard and validated. In doing so, it recognises the value the unique knowledge and experience of lived experience and the power it has to bring perspective and expertise to the design and delivery of services that are both appropriate and based on respect and rights.’

36% of those we surveyed were homeless, creating an additional burden on service users as they have to navigate both the addiction and homeless services. If other treatments such as Buivdal were an automatic option, people would have more flexibility to work on personal growth, particularly for women. It could enable them to access education, work, housing without having to be so open to potential employers. It would prevent attending clinics from being a part of daily life as for many, that’s there the triggers are.’

this research allowed us to facilitate service users to communicate their lived experiences and to have a say in the decisions that affect their lives from a rights based perspective. The onus is now on the HSE and public bodies to address the experiences of the service users and promote positive actions to fulfil their responsibilities and act on non-compliance of the Public Sector Duty.’

1pm – 5pm, Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission,

‘Trapped in Treatment’ – Applying a public sector equality and human rights duty approach to the human rights and equality issues identified by Service Users of Drug Treatment services in the North East Inner City (NEIC)

The 16th annual report on the death penalty by Iran Human Rights and ECPM (Together Against the Death Penalty) provides an assessment and analysis of the death penalty trends in the Islamic Republic of Iran in 2023. It sets out the number of executions, the trend compared to previous years, the legislative framework and procedures, charges, geographic distribution, and a monthly breakdown of executions. Lists of the female and juvenile offenders executed in 2023 are also included in the tables.

The report also looks into the abolitionist movement within Iran, including the forgiveness movement and its contribution to reducing the use of the death penalty. It provides analysis on how the international community can contribute to limiting the scope of the death penalty in Iran.

The 2023 report is the result of hard work from Iran Human Rights members and supporters who took part in reporting, documenting, collecting, analysing, and writing its contents. Special gratitude is extended to Iran Human Rights sources inside Iran who incur significant risk by reporting on unannounced and secret executions in prisons of 30 different provinces. Due to the very difficult context, lack of transparency, and the obvious risks and limitations that human rights defenders face in the Islamic Republic of Iran, this report does not give a complete picture of the use of the death penalty in Iran. There are 46 reported executions which are not included in this report due to a lack of sufficient details or an inability to confirm cases through two different sources. However, it aims to provide the most complete and realistic figures possible in the present circumstances. The current report does not include suspicious deaths in custody, death row prisoners who died in prison before the executions, or those killed under torture.

ECPM supports the elaboration, editing process, publishing, and distribution of this report in the framework of its international advocacy work against the death penalty. The problems of transparency on the data and information about the death penalty in Iran should be overcome by a strong strategy of distribution and dissemination. The overall objectives of this report for Iran Human Rights and ECPM are to call attention to and publicise the facts, in order to change national and international views on the situation of the death penalty in Iran, the first executioner country in the world.

Death penalty in Iran: an appalling number of executions in 2023

This paper traces the roots of the barriers faced by womxn who use drugs to the international drug control system and subsequent national drug policies. It outlines international standards on public health and human rights that provide guidance on the reforms governments must urgently pursue. To elaborate on the needed reforms, the paper also presents country-specific recommendations from civil society organizations to governments in Southeast Asia.

Breaking Barriers and Building Bridges: Navigating justice for womxn who use drugs in Southeast Asia

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

A coalition of stakeholders led by a number of TDs and Senators have called for part of the Misuse of Drugs Act to be repealed.

Section 3 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 criminalises people for the possession of drugs for personal use.

Yesterday, the Government announced that it would establish a Joint Oireachtas Committee to consider the Report of the Citizens' Assembly on Drugs Use and respond to its recommendations.

Following months of hearings last year, the assembly voted for a health-led approach to the use of drugs in Ireland.

At a presentation this morning, a group led by Independent Senator Lynn Ruane, Deputy Neasa Hourigan of the Green Party and Labour TD Aodhán Ó Ríordáin said Section 3 of the act should be repealed as a first step.

At this morning's presentation, coordinator of the Citywide Drugs Crisis Campaign Anna Quigley stressed the importance of ending "the current moral judgement of drug use as 'bad' and something for which people need to be punished".

She said repealing the particular section of the act would ensure "effective implementation" of the other recommendations.

It was argued that recommendations regarding health services could not be implemented effectively without repeal.

Ireland: Call for part of Misuse of Drugs Act to be repealed

This issue of Caribbean Quarterly interrogates the Caribbean cannabis landscape from a range of perspectives, addressing issues such as the socio-cultural significance of the plant and its uses, regulatory challenges and opportunities, reparatory measures for Rastafarian communities and enduring limitations in research.

From Hand Measures to Gram Weights, Ganja Becomes More Precise

Distorted Directions in Cannabis in the Commonwealth Caribbean - Did We Exhale?

The Methodology of Initiation Fifteen Years Later

Creating Cannabis Identity through Cannabis Use

The Contribution of Traditional Farmers to Cannabis Reform in St Vincent and the Grenadines

Lessons in Developing a Formal Cannabis Sector and Culture in the Caribbean

The Art of Cannabis Advocacy in Reggae Music

Ganjapreneurship, Hypocrisy and the Jamaican Nation State

Towards Purpose-driven and Responsive Laws to Regulate Jamaica's Cannabis Industry

A Cultural Beacon Pioneering Jamaica's Cannabis Events' Space

And a number of poems and book reviews are available 

New approaches to cannabis culture

Tides are turning against those who instigated the war on drugs under the previous administration. Despite President Marcos’ pronouncement that he will “not lift a finger” to assist the International Criminal Court in its probe on former president Rodrigo Duterte’s crimes against humanity, recent events have pointed to growing apprehension in the Duterte camp. The ongoing rift between the Dutertes and Marcoses further creates a fragile situation that will keep the drug war instigators constantly on their toes.

Undoubtedly, the arrest of Duterte and his ilk would be a big step toward justice for the drug war victims and their aggrieved families. But beyond Duterte’s arrest, there are critical issues fundamental to moving past the war on drugs. First, we must have a thorough accounting of the harm caused by this war; second, a progressive drug policy alternative must be laid out, and finally, we need to change the narrative toward a more humane approach to substance abuse.

Any effort for reform must start with a clear and honest assessment of what happened previously. The death toll is a common way to start. The number of deaths alone is enough to trigger outrage, although as the corpses piled up, the staggering numbers slowly lost their shock value. Near the end of Duterte’s term, only the organization Dahas continues to keep tabs on the death toll. Sadder still is the fact that the killings are just a sliver of the harm done. Children have to bear the trauma of seeing their fathers shot. Distrust prevails in barangays where neighbors and local officials listed “drug suspects” in their own community. Professional groups who were expected to push for an evidence-informed health policy fell silent, with some subscribing to the hegemony on substance use.

Philippine drug war won’t end with Duterte in jail

, which made Oregon the first state in the United States to remove criminal penalties for possession of a small amount of any drug, was and remains a historic turning point for the decriminalization movement. Sadly, the Oregon legislature has partially repealed the measure, creating new “drug enforcement misdemeanors” punishable by a term of supervised probation or up to 180 days in jail. Instead of taking steps to improve the health-based model, the legislature doubled down on criminal penalties, bowing to political pressure and an intense misinformation campaign by opponents, including the former chief of the prison system, business interests and law enforcement. Though this is undoubtedly a setback, Measure 110’s impact will reverberate for years to come.As the reform movement analyzes the 

and strategizes in other jurisdictions, some important lessons stand out:

Messaging and narrative building is a never-ending fight, even when evidence supports the policy shift

Promoting and defending a new reform policy is important well beyond the initial campaign.Whoever sets the narrative first has the upper hand, and it is important to publicize real impact and counter misinformation early on. Otherwise, any new policy can become an easy scapegoat for persistent societal problems, even with no evidence to show a causal link between them. This is precisely what happened in Oregon where M110 detractors took advantage of the valid frustrations with public suffering and blamed it on decriminalization:

The overdose crisis fueled by fentanyl has affected every area of the United States, regardless of varying drug laws, but Measure 110 has been blamed for the overdose crisis in Oregon. After 110, Oregon’s overdose death rate closely 

 the national average and remained lower than states that impose harsh criminal penalties for drug possession.Moreover, two longitudinal studies (available 

) found no association between Measure 110 and fatal overdoses.

Despite evidence that rates of homelessness were directly tied to Oregon’s 

 politicians and drug war sympathizers found 110 to be a convenient target to deflect public frustration with the increased visibility of unhoused people.

did not lead to an increase in crime rates

major crime rates in Oregon are declining

 – the new policy was blamed for the public’s anxiety about increased criminal activity.A driver of this perception was public drug use, which has risen in tandem with increased homelessness.Opponents argued that Measure 110 caused an increase in drug use, which resulted in an increase in homelessness.Though this politically toxic message was not born out by the evidence, it was a key factor in the push to reinstate criminal penalties.

Implementation of decriminalization is as important as establishing the policy

Reshaping existing systems to implement a new policy is critical to the policy’s success.In Oregon, state officials were slow to implement key components and undercut the full potential of Measure 110 in a number of ways:

The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) provided 

, which resulted in significant delays in allocating funding for needed services.We know from successful health-based models how critical it is for decriminalization measures to be implemented in parallel with expanded and fully-funded health and recovery support services. Unfortunately, the delay in Oregon impeded access to needed services.

The state did not educate the public about the drug treatment screening hotline that the measure created, and failed to provide training to law enforcement, many of whom were opposed to Measure 110.Law enforcement can sabotage the policy in both obvious and subtle ways if they are hostile to it, and it was important to educate them about the benefits of the policy and ensure they are not obstacles to successful implementation.

Implementation of Measure 110 unfortunately coincided with a number of other crises:

The COVID-19 pandemic, which had ripple effects throughout Oregon, especially for evictions, housing policies, and taxing an already overburdened health system.

The proliferation of fentanyl across the United States, starting in 2019 on the West Coast (including Oregon), led to a sharp increase in overdose rates.

National fearmongering concerning crime was exploited by longstanding opponents of drug policy reform.

Despite setbacks, M110 will have lasting impacts for the decriminalization movement

 for thousands of people by decreasing arrests and barriers to jobs and housing that result from those records.

increased access to and engagement with services

the number of people accessing the addiction services and social supports they need, including substance use disorder treatment, housing services and overdose prevention services.The services created by M110 will stay in place even after drug possession is recriminalized.

There has been a decrease in criminal penalties for drug possession even after recriminalization – cutting the potential maximum sentence in half - compared to the state of the law before Measure 110.

Criminal penalties are not the answer to problematic drug use.Decades of research and experience have made this clear. Politicians who, in an effort to find cover from public anger, turn to the criminal system for answers will quickly relearn this lesson. Though the legislation will prevent the full benefits of decriminalization from being realized, M110 remains an important step in taking drug possession out of the criminal system. The experience in Oregon also highlights the need for safer supply, drug consumption facilities, and why legal regulation based on health and human rights is essential for a true health-based approach.The legacy of Measure 110 is far from over – it will continue to grow and the lessons learned from it will strengthen the movement to reduce the role of the criminal legal system in drug policy.

Backpedalling on progress: Understanding Oregon’s U-turn on drug decriminalisation

There have been several recent commentaries which have highlighted the relevance of the postcolonial perspective to drug prohibition and called for the decolonisation of drug policy (Daniels et al., 2021; Hillier, Winkler & Lavall´ee, 2020; Lasco, 2022; Mills, 2019). While these are significant interventions in the field, sparse drugs scholarship has engaged more directly with well-developed literature and concepts from Critical Indigenous Studies (Moreton-Robinson, 2016) and Indigenous Standpoint Theory (Moreton-Robinson, 2013; Nakata, 2007) and reflected on its applicability to the drug and alcohol field. In contrast to the postcolonial perspective, which understands colonisation as a historical event with contemporary impacts, Indigenous scholarship conceptualises colonisation as an active and ongoing part of how the settler-state continues to impose itself. From this vantage point I explore coloniality as a system of power and reflect on the way prohibition acts as a key arm of the settler-colonial state. The paper explores the way concepts like vulnerability, marginality, overrepresentation, disproportionality and addiction involve colonial violence, knowledge practices and narratives which are central to the way coloniality is maintained and continues to assert itself in contemporary settler societies

The coloniality of drug prohibition

Background: As the overdose crisis unfolded, narratives mischaracterizing neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) as “addicted babies” with echoes to the “crack babies” panic proliferated in mainstream media. his study examines NAS misinformation dynamics and characteristics over a seven-year period. 

Methods: Based on a comprehensive query, Media Cloud was used to compile mainstream media content relating to NAS between 2015 and 2021. Articles were redundantly coded on key parameters such as speakers represented, publication source, and scientific accuracy. 

Results: Of the 348 articles meeting search criteria, 264 (76 %) featured misinformed narratives, 70 (20 %) featured informed narratives, and 14 (4 %) featured both informed and misinformed content. Most frequent misinformation elements related to misrepresentation of babies as “addicted” at birth and exaggeration of NAS symptomatology and long-term harms. Least represented voices were people most affected, with just 11 (2 %) featuring mothers who used opioids prepartum. 

Discussion: Since misinformation contributes to punitive legal responses and harms patient care, efforts to prevent, monitor, and address inaccurate and stigmatizing narratives are essential to improving policy and practice.

Popular media misinformation on neonatal abstinence syndrome, 2015–2021 

The EVAWUD23 campaign brings together women who use drugs in all our diversity together with our allies around the world to address the gendered and violent impacts of punitive drug policy. Coinciding with the United Nations Elimination of Violence Against Women and Girls 16 days of action (25 November to 10 December), EVAWUD participants are united by a shared determination to end violence against women and gender diverse people who use drugs.

Women and gender diverse people who use drugs are subject to extreme rates and a wide range of violence due to patriarchal norms combined with punitive prohibition of some drugs. State-driven stigma, criminalisation, harmful gender norms, and corruption drive substantive health and safety harms and pose access barriers between women and gender diverse people who use drugs and critical harm reduction and gender-based violence services.

In 2023 there was an unprecedented record number of grant applications for the EVAWUD23 campaign as well as several organisations participating without small grant support. Summaries were documented, as below, on actions in Brazil, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Australia, Serbia, Greece, Italy, India, Kenya, Catalunya, Mexico, Myanmar, Nigeria, Peru, Portugal, Sierra Leone, Ukraine, and Indonesia. Acknowledgements also to partnering organisations: YouthRISE, EuroNPUD and IDPC.

Violence, policing & punishment