Assessing Civil Society Involvement in Drug Policy – European Case Studies

A conversation with Péter Sárosi

In 2021, the Civil Society Forum on Drugs (CSFD) established guiding principles for meaningful civil society involvement in decision-making regarding drug policy. These principles were published in the Quality Standards for Civil Society Involvement in Drug Policy. Currently, four case studies are being conducted in Ireland, Hungary, Greece, and Finland to assess the implementation of these standards.

THE CASE STUDIES

Péter Sárosi, the executive director of the Rights Reporter Foundation and head of the Civil Society Involvement Working Group of CSFD, explained that two focus group discussions are being held in each country, one involving decision-makers and another involving civil society representatives. The Chatham House Rule ensures confidentiality and open discussion, and the conversations address the 9 overarching quality criteria described in the Quality Standards for Civil Society Involvement in Drug Policy and how these are applied in the respective countries and cities. “In June, we went to the first country [Ireland]. In July, we visited Athens. We are now working on the Hungarian one and the Finnish visit will be at the end of August.

Péter noted active participation in Ireland and Greece, highlighting the importance of such dialogues to build openness and mutual trust between civil society and governments. “This project is really useful for the organizations in those countries because it creates some channels or forums to speak about very sensitive issues for civil society and also for decision-makers. […] It was really interesting to see the different perspectives of the two parties.” He also observed a need for more dialogue on general subjects like what is civil society and its role, as there are many misunderstandings.

Another lesson learnt was that the level of efficiency and quality of the government’s communication with NGOs is not necessarily better in the case of more formal systems. “Sometimes the informal channels can work very well. And sometimes you have formal channels which don’t work very well. […] If you have an official forum to discuss with governments, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it’ll create a good quality involvement of civil society.

The case studies will offer valuable insights, including positive and negative examples from different mechanisms in the selected countries, with forward-looking examples like the Citizens’ Assembly on Drug Use in Ireland.

Besides some of the progressive examples of Ireland and Finland, where governments are more open to civil society voices, lessons can be learned from Hungary and Greece. In Greece, despite the not-so-developed government system, civil society advocacy had a very positive impact. A drug consumption room and a specific shelter for homeless people who use drugs were created and take-home Naloxone is being provided to prevent drug overdoses. In Hungary, where there is no existing dialogue between the government and civil society, there are still some positive developments at the city level in Budapest, which is an example on how civil society can still use local mechanisms when there are no available national ones.

Transforming Perceptions: Harm Reduction Efforts to Combat Stigma

When it comes to addressing drug consumption and its associated risks, the stigma surrounding people who use drugs negatively impacts their access to support and health services. When stigmatised, people feel discouraged from seeking the care they need due to feeling judged and degraded.

Harm reduction services approach drug use in all its complexity, upholding the rights of people who use drugs while searching for evidence-informed strategies of care and support. Harm Reduction aims to empower and support people who use drugs in regaining agency and leadership, contributing to their meaningful participation in reducing the potential harm of their drug use. Among others, examples of strategies to reduce stigma and improve access to treatment and support services include advocating for and contributing to the decriminalisation of drug use or the implementation of alternatives to incarceration.

For the International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, we have collected some updates from the harm reduction field touching on addressing stigma.

→ 2023 #SupportDontPunish Global Day of Action
June 26th marks the 11th #SupportDontPunish Global Day of Action. The Support. Don’t Punish. Campaign unites initiatives working towards sustainable alternatives to the ‘war on drugs’ and supporting strategies to drug- and drug-policy-related challenges that are based on solidarity and the rights of the communities they represent. The campaign aims to connect and visibilise these local efforts as part of a global movement.
Find out more here.

→ Recommendations for tackling stigma and discrimination – joint statement by the EUHPP Thematic Network
The European Health Policy Platform Thematic Network on HIV, TB, viral hepatitis, and STIs, led in collaboration with the EU Civil Society Forum, is working to involve non-governmental organizations in policy development, implementation, and sharing of information. They released a joint statement in June that has been supported by 40 European organizations.

The statement points out the gaps in addressing the needs of individuals affected by HIV/AIDS, viral hepatitis, and tuberculosis in the EU. It also provides recommendations to tackle the stigma and discrimination faced by key populations, including people who use drugs.
You can read the statement here.

Statement from UN experts addresses stigma and discrimination and calls for people-centred alternatives to the ‘war on drugs’
A recent statement by United Nations experts underscores the detrimental effects of stigmatization and urges the exploration of alternative approaches to address the global challenge of drug-related issues. The experts advocate for a comprehensive and restorative justice framework, alongside inclusive and community-based measures. By challenging the paradigm of the ‘war on drugs,’ they emphasize the importance of adopting a more compassionate and efficient response. For further insights, you can access their statement here.

→ New toolbox to initiate harm reduction in prisons will be available by October
A toolbox to give guidance on the application of harm reduction approaches in prisons is under development. The toolkit, developed by C-EHRN in consultation with relevant stakeholders and experts, will be launched in October and presented at the C-EHRN Member and Expert Meeting in Budapest in December.

→ Civil society involvement in Finland, Ireland, Hungary and Greece – What stage are we at?
In 2023, C-EHRN and the Rights Reporter Foundation will conduct a study to assess the level and quality of civil society involvement in four EU countries, Finland, Ireland, Hungary and Greece. The case studies will reflect on the application of quality standards based on the Quality Standards for Civil Society Involvement in Drug Policy, developed in 2021 as part of the Civil Society Forum on Drugs (CSFD) Project. The study will also address how CSO are involved in the implementation of drug policies in each country.

Rafaela Rigoni on Civil Society-led Monitoring for Harm Reduction @ISSDP 2023

The 2023 Conference of the International Society for the Study of Drug Policy (ISSDP) took place in Leuven, BE between the 30th of May – the 1st of June 2023, gathering around 250 participants including researchers, academics and some civil society organizations.

As part of the event, Rafaela Rigoni, C-EHRN’s Scientific Officer presented the Civil Society-led Monitoring for Harm Reduction, one of C-EHRN’s most significant achievements from recent years, with the title Frontline perspectives: Civil society-led monitoring of harm reduction in Europe.

Rafaela discussed the crucial role of civil society organisations (CSOs) in the development and implementation of measures to reduce the harms of drug use and in monitoring and evaluating program policies. Her presentation analysed the challenges and experiences in building a framework to monitor the implementation of harm reduction in Europe from the viewpoint of frontline harm reduction workers.

She presented the monitoring framework developed by C-EHRN’s research group since 2018, which collects data on the accessibility and acceptability of harm reduction services, hepatitis C care for people who inject drugs, and drug trends. The monitoring tool operates through a network of Focal Points, harm reduction services in 36 European cities in 34 different countries.

Mapping the situation on a city level, the approach provides the foundations for the critical evaluation of harm reduction implementation against European policy goals and reflects the CSO’s perspectives, which is critical for optimising the local planning of services and developing effective and respectful drug policies.

 

Curious about the results of last year’s monitoring? Check out the Monitoring Data Report and the Executive Summary!

New Publication: Contribution from the Civil Society Forum on Drugs to enhance the gender perspective into EU drug policy

The Civil Society Forum on Drugs (CSFD), the expert committee of the European Commission in the field of drugs, has identified the enhancement of a gender perspective in EU drug policy as one of the emerging issues of drug policies. In contrast with the previous EU Drug Strategy and Action Plan, the current one seems to incorporate a gender-sensitive approach to all aspects of EU drug policies, which is a significant advancement. However, the recommendations contained in this analysis can help enhance the gender perspectives in the EU drug policy documents. Read the full analysis here.

Image: Freepik.com

FP Meeting / C-EHRN Monitoring 2023, Lisbon

C-EHRN hosted this year’s FP Meeting in Lisbon on 30 – 31 March and launched the Civil Society led Monitoring of Harm Reduction 2023 work plan with new opportunities for exchange, consultation and synergy to continue our shared goals of Networking, Monitoring, Capacity Building and Advocacy.

Notable updates include:

  • HR in Prison practical toolbox building on previous years’ activities and existing guidelines and good practices
  • Civil Society Involvement (CSI) Case Studies building on a tool developed as part of the CSFD Project, including quality standards and principles for meaningful CSI. Focus groups and interviews in four different countries/cities to assess the level and quality of CSI will be arranged.
  • Establish an advocacy network of HR allies (mayors, MEPs, national MPs, national drug coordinators and journalists) to support our advocacy activities, with the support of the UNITE Network of MPs.

The meeting was grouped by sessions:

  • ‘Monitoring 2023’ session covered the framework for the C-EHRN Monitoring 2023 as well as monitoring developments and modifications. This includes the addition of new FPs, bringing the number to 43. Modifications include for HR Essentials and Hepatitis C, which will remain collected via a survey; for the data collection of New Drug Trends; and the new addition of city reports; as well as the framework for the report on the mental health of harm reduction staff (FPs have been contacted for interviews).
  • ‘City Reports’ sessions presented the basic framework and content of the city reports and selection criteria for 5 pilot cities for 2023; as well as the aim of the reports: advocacy, data collection and capacity building. Volunteer cities include: Warsaw, Luxembourg, London, Cracow, Lille, Dublin, Amsterdam, Athens and Rome.
  • Monitoring and Advocacy sessions focused on the needs of FPs to support / improve advocacy and how C-EHRN has been using the Monitoring results for advocacy.
  • FGDs capacity building and New Drug Trends 2023 sessions introduced the ‘Monitoring New Drug Trends in 2023’ plan – a newly introduced section of the survey – as well as ran focus groups following the FP decision in Athens in 2022 to collect data on this topic via Focus Group Discussions (FGD) to ensure more quality and reliability of data. These sessions included  capacity building on how to run an FGD, which several FPs are currently organising.

The next Expert and Member Meeting takes place in Budapest on 4 – 5 December.

Monitoring Executive Summaries 2022

Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network, together with its Focal Points, presents the Executive Summary of its Data Report 2022 in ten languages to support increasing the impact and reach of our work on the local and national levels. The executive summaries are available in English, Spanish, French, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Polish, Czech and Greek. Download the executive summaries below.

Monitoring Data Report 2022

2022 was one of the most consequential in recent European history, witness to a series of overlapping crises: the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, fast-growing population displacements, the MPOX outbreak, shrinking civil society spaces and the deepening of socioeconomic inequalities, among others.

Within this context, C-EHRN’s monitoring activities have been embedded with increased urgency. Whilst the effects of these developments have been felt in nearly everyone’s life, people who use drugs, as well as other marginalised and underserved communities, have particularly and disproportionately experienced its negative consequences. Equally, harm reduction organizations in Europe have been put to the test.

In combination with advocacy, the application of civil society-led monitoring tools is crucial to hold governments accountable and to improve the care and support that people who use drugs receive and their environments.

Together with more than one hundred organizations and individuals from thirty-four European countries, C-EHRN set up for itself the task to provide an in-depth look at Harm Reduction in Europe. To this end, the annual 2022 Data Report focused on three main themes: harm reduction essential services, Hepatitis C, and new drug trends. In addition to the data collected, this year C-EHRN conducted in-depth interviews with all its Focal Points, allowing for a richer picture of the developments from last year.

Read the Data Report 2022

Online Launch Data Report 2022

Civil Society Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe

Webinar Announcement

Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network is hosting an online launch and discussion of the fourth annual report of its civil society-led monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe. The webinar will take place on the 23rd of February, 2023, from 16:00h to 17:00h CET.

2022 was one of the most consequential in recent European history, witness to a series of overlapping crises: the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, fast-growing population displacements, the MPOX outbreak, shrinking civil society spaces and the deepening of socioeconomic inequalities, among others.

Within this context, C-EHRN’s monitoring activities have been embedded with increased urgency. Whilst the effects of these developments have been felt in nearly everyone’s life, people who use drugs, as well as other marginalised and underserved communities, have particularly and disproportionately experienced its negative consequences. Equally, harm reduction organizations in Europe have been put to the test.

In combination with advocacy, the application of civil society-led monitoring tools is crucial to hold governments accountable and to improve the care and support that people who use drugs receive and their environments.

Together with more than one hundred organizations and individuals from thirty-four European countries, C-EHRN set up for itself the task to provide an in-depth look at Harm Reduction in Europe. To this end, the annual 2022 Data Report focused on three main themes: harm reduction essential services, Hepatitis C, and new drug trends. In addition to the data collected, this year C-EHRN conducted in-depth interviews with all its Focal Points, allowing for a richer picture of the developments from last year.

During this webinar, C-EHRN will launch and discuss its annual 2022 Data Report, including key findings, results and opportunities for civil society advocacy, service provision and policy development.

The webinar is open to harm reduction activists and service providers, civil society representatives, researchers, policy-makers and the media. The event will be held in English.

Further information:

Roberto Perez Gayo
rpgayo@correlation-net.org

Call for Code of Conduct for fair and effective engagement with civil society organisations

Together with more than 400 organisations and experts, we call the United Nations ECOSOC, and in particular the Committee on NGOs, to lead a UN-wide process to adopt a model Code of Conduct for fair and effective engagement with civil society organisations. Read the full call below.

Dear Excellencies,

The United Nations and governments around the world stress the important contributions of civil society organizations to help address challenges to human health, climate and the environment, human rights, peace, equity, access to nutritious food systems, access to clean water for drinking, sanitation, irrigation, and energy-generation the pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals to protect and improve those precious resources.

For instance, Article 71 of the UN Charter as well as ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31—which acknowledges “the breadth of non-governmental organizations’ expertise” and their capacity “to support the work of the United Nations”—stresses the value of NGOs.  Likewise, Secretary-General António Guterres vision on global collaboration for the next 24 years, Our Common Agenda, concludes as follows:

130. Finally, echoing calls made to the United Nations system, we have received suggestions on how to increase opportunities for engagement by civil society and other stakeholders across all the intergovernmental organs. These have included…calls for an updated resolution defining how organs like the Economic and Social Council, the General Assembly and the Security Council relate to civil society, local and regional governments and business actors, and for the President of the Economic and Social Council to convene a general review of arrangements for observer status or consultation in this regard. I encourage Member States to give serious consideration to these ideas, in keeping with our quest for a multilateralism that is more networked, inclusive and effective.

And on December 2, 2022, His Excellency Mr. Csaba Kőrösi, President of the 77th session of the General Assembly, urged participants in a town hall with civil society to inform and energize “transformational change” at the United Nations and to be “bold and provocative” in aid of achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in the spirit of global solidarity.

Though meetings of the ECOSOC Committee on NGOs are now webcast, and the number of ECOSOC-accredited NGOs has risen faster than the population—from approximately 2,000 to 6,000[1] between 2000 and 2019—there are many impediments to NGOs fully realizing their potential contributions to UN analysis and work.

A code of conduct for engaging with civil society organizations—if promoted by the good offices of the Chair of the Committee, President of the Economic and Social Council, President of the General Assembly, and the Secretary-General—could help ensure that CSOs have the resources, access, and transparency necessary to effectively contribute to UN and member state work. Engagement with CSOs should not be arbitrary and contingent on the idiosyncrasies of leaders in governments and UN institutions.corpor

Many civil society organizations bring extensive topic-specific expertise, implementation experience, corporate memory, free advice, and accountability functionalities that, often, governments and UN institutions often cannot perform.

The endorsing groups, below, urge the Committee on Non-Governmental Organization to lead or collaborate in consultations on and negotiations of a model code of conduct for engaging with civil society and promote its use by UN institutions and national governments.  Without effective engagement with CSOs and journalists, UN institutions and governments will be deprived of valuable insights and legitimacy that are necessary for them to be effective.

As a starting point, please consider the following elements for a zero draft of a United Nations Code of Conduct for Interacting with Civil Society in Standard-Setting and Research Talks (UN CCIC-SSTART) with the following elements:

Key governance elements

  1. Establish clear conflict of interest safeguards. Require financial conflict-of-interest declarations from participants by either requiring that they self-identify as business interest organizations or specify the amount and percentage of funds they received from commercial organizations in the four most recent fiscal years in written and oral submissions.  Also, stipulate considerations for recusing parties with conflicts of interest to ensure they cannot put such interest above public interests, globally and nationally.
  1. Facilitate granting temporary travel visas for CSOs to participate in international consultations.  Create a protocol for granting timely temporary visitors’ visas for citizens or residents (usually from developing countries) to participate in in-person UN meetings except in unusual circumstances.
  1. Establish a special envoy on CSO participation. Appoint a Special Envoy for Civil Society to work for civic space at the UN.  (This was recommendation #5 in “Un-Mute Civil Society” by the Permanent Missions of Denmark and Costa Rica, the UN Foundation, CIVICUS, Action for Sustainable Development, Global Focus, and Action Aid International and Forums.)
  1. Prepare and publish annual progress reports. Table annual progress reports prepared by the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in the ECOSOC Council (and corresponding governing bodies of the United Nations and national government institutions) describing:
  1. the status of uptake of elements of the Code;
  2. a time-delimited plan for fully implementing the Code, and
  3. results of an opinion survey of ECOSOC-accredited CSOs (or national NGOs as the case may be) on the status of implementation of the Code.
  1. Establish a travel fund to facilitate in-person participation in complex longer meetings by CSOs based in lower-income countries and technology transfer to facilitate remote participation from places where access to Internet access and computer and communication technology are expensive or unreliable.  A significant impediment to participation of low- and middle-income countries is the expense of foreign air travel, including room and board in the host destination.  Securing inexpensive or free airline transportation and lodging for NGO representatives from low-income countries from major airline carriers (whose operations are subject to international regulations) and, for instance, trading meeting space opportunities in UN institutions for living space in hotels and university lodging (when they are largely vacant during high vacancy periods) might be possible.  Likewise, coordinating penalty-free donations of frequent flyer points to a fund to offset travel expenses for low-income country NGO delegates might be feasible.  All of the elements of the proposed Code of Conduct would disproportionately advantage low-income-country NGOs.  Civil society organizations are major sources of free advice to governments.
  1. Protection of public interest advocates and civic space:  Establish an expert mechanism on the investigation, prevention, and redress of reports of intimidation and retribution visited upon civil society organizations for public interest advocacy about health, human rights, environmental protection, press freedom, and other matters and receive and investigate individual reports

 

Common courtesies

  1. Ensure timely notice of opportunities to participate in consultation and other activities. Ensure CSOs get adequate notice of meetings, e.g., more than 14 days for fully remote/virtual meetings and more than one month for hybrid or face-to-face international meetings, and two weeks for national meetings.  NGOs based in low-income countries often require even more notice to participate in consultations, especially if doing so requires mobilizing scarce financial resources for travel or extra time to obtain approval of temporary visas.
  1. Enable NGO contact with news media.  Enable and facilitate CSOs’ access to UN news correspondents in UN institutions.
  1. Facilitate open communication when online digital communication tools are used. By default, set MS Teams, Zoom, and other digital interaction tools to optimize communication of opinions and information resources (e.g., ensure visibility of chat/Q&A to all participants, enable chat and transcript saving by all participants, and enable bilateral and reply-all communications).
  2. Make meetings accessible to people who experience visual and hearing impairments. Ensure that, at least meetings serviced by simultaneous interpretation are also supported by closed-caption text and sign language.

 

Elements that are consistent with best practices in national governance

  1. Create, promote, and maintain a public consultation register. Create a UN-wide (or government-wide, as the case may be) public consultation registry so that CSOs can automatically be notified (e.g., by email alerts) of consultations related to topics of their interest and do not have to risk being accidentally omitted from ad-hoc consultation lists or risk being intentionally excluded by cherry-picked consultation lists.
  1. Ensure transparent rules for in-camera meetings.  Establish standards for member states going in-camera (i.e., private meetings from which CSOs and journalists are excluded) and urging that the default approach is fully public meetings.  When governments appear secretive about setting strategies, policies, or laws that affect 8 billion people, it can breed cynicism about the predominance of private, self-serving interests.
  1. Ensure that non-governmental organizations can participate in standard-setting or strategy-development consultations prior to decisions being taken. Relegating non-governmental organizations to comment on decisions after they have been taken is disingenuous and deprives decision-makers of the benefit of CSOs’ insights, belittles their perspectives, and diminishes the legitimacy of the resulting decisions.
  1. Automatically post NGO written and oral submission online. Ensure that the actual content (not summaries) of CSO submissions is available on decision-makers’ websites in video and text format and, ideally, automatic uploading directly by registered participants subject to a bar on abusive comments or a threshold of inaccuracy that governments are willing to tolerate by all parties.
  1. Ensure transparency about government positions in UN standard-setting consultations.  Urge  governments of member states to characterize the steps they took to arrive at member state positions even with just a URL reference to the consultation website.
  1. Create a lobbyist registry. Create a lobbyist registry indicating when, where and by whom UN officials (or governments) meet with outside parties in meetings that are not broadcast on https://media.un.org/en/webtv  If people believe that public and international institutions make decisions on the basis of secret, unilateral meetings—especially with those with vested or undisclosed interests—the legitimacy and effectiveness of those UN agencies or governments will suffer.
  1. Create an access-to-information mechanism. Create access to information (also known as freedom of information) entitlements to records held by United Nations institutions (or national governments) and a process for obtaining such records and appealing decisions to redact or withhold them.
  1. Ensure that granting ECOSOC accreditation adheres to objective criteria and is not subject to arbitrary political interference by individual Committee members.  In particular, to protect the integrity of the CSO vetting process, ensure that:
  1. UN institutes resolve arbitrary, repetitive deferrals of ECOSOC NGO applications by holding Committee votes.  Discontinue arbitrary deferrals of ECOSOC approvals of ECOSOC accreditation by the Committee on NGOs by stipulating that decisions must be put to a vote after two deferrals to reduce the risk of the tyranny of the minority (e.g., certain member states repeatedly delaying accreditation decisions on groups that might be critical of their human rights record) while retaining oversight in the accreditation process;
  2. Elections of NGO committee members are effective. All regions propose competitive slates of candidates at least two months prior to elections to replace retiring Committee members to facilitate vetting and screening of candidates by the Economic and Social Council;
  3. ECOSOC institutes term limits for membership in the Committee on NGOs:  As with other UN bodies, states and individual members should be required to leave the Committee for a specified interval of time after serving for a stipulated maximum period. Term limits would encourage greater diversity and youth in membership over time.

19. Promote transparency, accountability, fairness, inclusiveness, and conflict of interest safeguards, worldwide.  Respect and promote the aims of this Code mutatis mutandis by all public institutions.

 

While this is a non-exhaustive list of enabling factors for improving the integrity and effectiveness of UN and government engagement with civil society organizations, a robust, focused consultation on a code of conduct and vetting of best-practices nationally could help ensure that UN institutions make the best use of civil society engagement.  Doing so will be even more vital in the short time remaining to make up lost time in achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and mobilizing to meet their successors.

 

Respectfully submitted,

  1. Accao Nacional para o Desenvolvimento Comunitario (ANADEC), Ginea-Bissau
  2. Access Info, Spain
  3. Accountability Lab, Global
  4. ACEH-les Compagnons Solidaires Action Terre d’Afrique, France
  5. Achievers Mission Foundation, Nigeria
  6. Action on Smoking and Health, United States of America
  7. Action pour le Developpement du Sahel ( ADESA), Niger
  8. Adaamasunle Foundation, Nigeria
  9. Adolescent Breast and Pelvic Cancer Awareness Intiative, Nigeria
  10. Advocacy Initiative for Development (AID), Sierra Leone
  11. Advocates for Youth, United States of America
  12. Africa Development Interchange Network (ADIN), Cameroon
  13. Africa Forum For Primary Health Care, South Africa
  14. Africa Freedom of Information Centre, Uganda
  15. African Centre for Global Health and Social Transformation (ACHEST), Uganda
  16. African Centre for Human Advancement Social and Community Development, Nigeria
  17. African Council on Narcotics, Nigeria
  18. African Citizens Development Foundation (ACDF), Nigeria
  19. African Heritage Foundation Nigeria, Nigeria
  20. Afrihealth Optonet Association (AHOA) – CSOs Global Movement, Nigeria
  21. Afrikanische Frauenorganisation, Austria
  22. Agence des droits de l’Homme (Human Rights Agency), Belgium/Switzerland
  23. Aicode-Agencia Internacional de cooperación y desarrollo, Peru
  24. Aid for Trade Logistics, Tanzania
  25. AIHMS-Global, India
  26. AIM Education and Research Society, India
  27. Alfred de Zayas, JD, PhD, Professor of International law, Geneva School of Diplomacy, Switzerland
  28. Alianza Clima Vida y Salud Internacional, Argentina
  29. Allison Kelley, Senior Fellow, Results for Development, United States of America
  30. American Human Rights Council, United States of America
  31. American Indian Law Alliance, United States of America
  32. Amis des Etrangers au Togo (A.D.E.T.), Togo
  33. Amman Center for Human Rights Studies, Jordan
  34. Ana M. Parrilla, MD, MPH, FABM – Physician, Public Health Specialist, Breastfeeding Medicine Practice, Puerto Rico
  35. Anglican Consultative Council, United Kingdom
  36. Anglican Rite Roman Catholic Church, United States of America
  37. Anti-Slavery International, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
  38. Apostle Padi Ologo Traditional Birth Centre, Ghana
  39. Appui Solidaire pour le Renforcement de l’Aide au Developpement, Mali
  40. APRE! Portuguese Association of Retirees and Pensioners, Portugal
  41. Ariel Foundation International, Switzerland
  42. Armenian Association of Women with University Education, Armenia
  43. Armenian Constitutional Right – Protective Centre (ACRPC), Armenia
  44. Association d’Aide à l’Éducation de l’Enfant Handicapé (AAEEH), France
  45. Association de la continuité des générations, Tunisia
  46. Association de l’Unité Spéciale Républicaine (ASUS RELUC), Cameroon
  47. Association de Lutte Contre les Violences Sexuelles et Appui à la Promotion du Développement Durable ALUCOVIS-APDD, Burundi
  48. Association For Life of Africa-Liberia, Liberia
  49. Association for Promotion Sustainable Development, India
  50. Association for the Protection of Women’s and Children’s Rights (APWCR), United States
  51. Association Ma’onah for Human Rights and Immigration, Yemen
  52. Association of Christian Counsellors of Nigeria, Lagos
  53. Association of Community Social Volunteers International, Nigeria
  54. Association of Professional Social Workers and Development Practitioners, India
  55. Association of World Citizens, United States of America
  56. Association on sustainable development and investment climate improvement, uniting investors and creditors “World Organization for Development”, Russian Federation
  57. Association pour la Diffusion des Droits humains aux peuples autochtones (Humanitarian Law Agency), Cameron
  58. Association pour la Promotion de la Lutte Contre les Violences faites aux Femmes et la Participation au Développement de la Femme Africaine (LUCOVIFA), Cameroun
  59. Association pour la santé environnementale du Québec/Environmental Health Association of Québec, Canada, Canada
  60. Association pour l’Intégration et le Développement Durable au Burundi, AIDB, Burundi
  61. Australian Graduate Women Inc, Australia
  62. Australian Lesbian Medical Association (ALMA), Australia
  63. AWTAD Anti-Corruption Organization, Yemen
  64. Babatunde Development and Empowerment Initiatives, Nigeria
  65. Baby Feeding Law Group, Ireland
  66. Baby Milk Action IBFAN UK, United Kingdom
  67. Bahraini Transparency Society, Bahrain
  68. Bahrain Transparency, Bahrain
  69. Belady US: An Island for Humanity, United States of America
  70. Belize PEACE Movement, Belize
  71. Ben Verboom, DPhil, Lecturer, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
  72. Biovision Foundation, Switzerland
  73. Blessed Aid, Democratic Republic of Congo
  74. Brain Sluice Africa Child’s, Congo
  75. Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India , India
  76. Bridgers Association, Cameroon
  77. British Federation of Women Graduates, United Kingdom
  78. Burundi Rugby League Rugby a XIII Cooperative, Burundi
  79. Casa Hunter, Brazil
  80. Center for Egyptian Women’s Legal Assistance, Egypt
  81. Center for Fiscal Transparency and Integrity Watch, Nigeria
  82. Centre Africain de Recherche Industrielle, Democratic Republic of the Congo
  83. Centre for Democracy and Development, Nigeria
  84. Centre for Health and Society, Aston University, United Kingdom
  85. Centre for Health Science and Law, (corresponding author: BillJeffery@HealthScienceAndLaw.ca), Canada
  86. Centre for Peace and Development Initiatives (CPDI), Pakistan
  87. Centre for Youth and Development, Malawi
  88. CHEN (Patient Fertility Association), Israel
  89. Chikka Federation of India, India
  90. Child’s Destiny and Development Organization (CHIDDO), South Sudan
  91. Citizens Intervention & Accountability Network (CIAN), Nigeria and the United States of America
  92. Claudio Schuftan, MD, a founder of the People’s Health Movement and the World Public Health Nutrition Association, Global/Vietnam
  93. Coalition des Volontaires pour la Paix et le Développement (CVPD), Democratic Republic of Congo
  94. Coalition of Activist Lesbians Inc, Australia
  95. CO-HABITER, Switzerland
  96. Community Health Initiative Research, Nigeria
  97. Community Restoration Initiative Project, Uganda
  98. Company of the Daughters of Charity  of Saint Vincent de Paul, Brazil
  99. Compassion Soul  Winners Outreach International (CSWOI), Ghana
  100. Compassion Soul Winners Outreach International (CSWOI), South Africa
  101. Concile Mondial de Congrès Diplomatiques des Aumôniers pour la Paix Universelle des Droits Humains et Juridiques, France
  102. Congregation of the Mission, Italy
  103. Consultation Education Evaluation, Inc., United States of America
  104. Cooperation for Peace and Development (CPD), Afghanistan
  105. Coordinating Assembly of NGOs, Eswatini
  106. Coordination des Associations et des Particuliers pour la Liberté de Conscience, France
  107. Cork Forest Conservation Alliance, United States of America
  108. Corporación Humanas, Chile
  109. Correlation European Harm Reduction Network, Netherlands
  110. Creators Union of Arab, Egypt
  111. Dalgarno Institute, Australia
  112. Deepti Bhuban, Bangladesh
  113. Dementia Alliance International, United States of America
  114. Denis Miki Foundation, Cameroon
  115. DESSI International, Pakistan
  116. Dianova International, Switzerland
  117. Dina Balabanova, Professor of Health Systems and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom
  118. Divine Act Charitable Trust, Nigeria
  119. Do for Children, Malawi
  120. Donum Animus, Latvija
  121. Dr Uzo Adirieje Foundation (DUZAFOUND), Nigeria
  122. Drug Policy Network South East Europe, Serbia
  123. Dynamique des femmes juristes, Democratic Republic of Congo
  124. Eagle Vision Charity, Inc., United States of America
  125. Earth, India
  126. EarthDay.org, United States of America
  127. Education and English for You, Côte d’Ivoire
  128. EG Justice, United States of America-Equatorial Guinea
  129. EMI (an international scientific organization), Philippines
  130. Entrepreneurship Development and Support Initiative, Nigeria
  131. Eurocare (European Alcohol Policy Alliance), Belgium
  132. European Forum of Muslim Women (EFOMW), Belgium
  133. Evangelização Geral de Ajuda aos Necessitados (EGAN, Thorough Evangelism For All–Help The Needy), Moçambique
  134. Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians, United States of America
  135. Federation of Environmental and Ecological Diversity for Agricultural Revampment and Human Rights, The (FEEDAR & HR), Cameroon
  136. Fields of Green for ALL NPC, South Africa
  137. FITILLA, Mali
  138. Fondation pour un Centre pour le Développement Socio-Eco-Nomique (Foundation for a Center for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development), Switzerland
  139. Force juvénile pour un avenir rassurant, Bénin
  140. Forum des Femmes Autochthones du Cameroun ( FFAC), Cameroon
  141. Forum des ONG, Côte d’Ivoire
  142. Frontline AIDS, United Kingdom
  143. Foundation for Rural Development (FRD), Pakistan
  144. Fundación Multitudes, Chile
  145. Fundacion Para el Desarrollo del Conocimiento Suma Veritas, Argentina
  146. Fundación para la Mejora de la Vida, la Cultura y la Sociedad, Spain
  147. Fundación Retorno a la Libertad, Colombia
  148. Ghana Integrity Initiative (TI Ghana), Ghana
  149. Ghida Anani, Founder & Director, ABAAD, Resource Center for Gender Equality, in a personal capacity, Lebanon
  150. Global Distribution Advocates, Inc., United States of America
  151. Global Environmental and Climate Conservation Initiative (GECCI), Nigeria
  152. Global Integrated Education Volunteers Association, Nigeria
  153. Global Peace and Development Organization, Liberia
  154. Grzegorz Makowski, PhD, Warsaw School of Economics, Poland
  155. Habib M. Latiri, Dr., President of Global Health International Advisors, in a personal capacity, United States of America
  156. HADAM (Right to Food Malaysia), Malaysia
  157. Haitelmex Foundation, Mexico
  158. Halley Movement Coalition, Mauritius
  159. Hamraah Foundation, India
  160. Healthy Start Initiative, Nigeria
  161. Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation, India
  162. HIV Legal Network | Réseau juridique VIH, Canada
  163. Human Rights Advocates, Inc., United States of America
  164. Human Rights Sanrakshan Sansthaa, India
  165. Ikkaido Ltd, United Kingdom
  166. Imani Works Corporation , United States of America
  167. Impact Bridges Group, Canada
  168. Improve Your Society Organization (IYSO), Yemen
  169. Inclusion Ghana, Ghana
  170. Indigenous Peoples Global Forum for Sustainable Development, IPGFforSD (International Indigenous Platform), Germany
  171. Indonesia Corruption Watch, Indonesia
  172. Initiative for Health & Equity in Society, India
  173. Institute for Democracy and Mediation (IDM), Albania
  174. Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI), Georgia
  175. Institute for Development Research and Alternatives, Albania
  176. Institute for Multicultural Counseling & Educational Services, United States of America
  177. International Baby Food Action Network Italia (IBFAN), Italy
  178. Institute for Security Studies, South Africa
  179. Instituto Caminho do Meio, Brazil
  180. Instituto de Desenvolvimento e Direitos Humanos (IDDH), Brazil
  181. Instituto RIA AC, Mexico
  182. Intercambios Civil Association, Argentina
  183. International Association For Hospice and Palliative Care, United States of America
  184. International Association of Sport and Leisure Infrastructure Management Leisure Infrastructure Management (IASLIM), Slovenija
  185. International Centre for Peace Charities and Human Development, Nigeria
  186. International Committee For Peace And Reconciliation, United States of America
  187. International Council of Jewish Women, Mexico
  188. International Council of Psychologists (ICP), United States of America
  189. International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), United Kingdom
  190. International Institute for Child Protection, Gambia
  191. International Lawyers Project (ILP), United Kingdom
  192. International Longevity Centre Canada, Canada
  193. International Medical Crisis Response Alliance, United States of America
  194. International Movement for Advancement of Education Culture Social & Economic Development (IMAECSED), India
  195. International Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse (INPEA), United States of America
  196. International Network of Liberal Women, The Netherlands
  197. International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, United States of America
  198. International Radio Emergency Support Coalition (IRESC), United States of America
  199. International Society for Peace and Safety, Nigeria
  200. International Sociological Association, Spain
  201. International-Lawyers.Org (INTLawyers), Switzerland
  202. Internationale Gemeinschaft für die Unterstützung von Kriegsopfern (International Community for the Support of War Victims), Germany
  203. Iraqi Journalists Rights Defense Association, Iraq
  204. Irena Zakarija-Grkovic, MD, FRACGP, IBCLC, PhD, FABM, Assoc. Professor, University of Split School of Medicine, Croatia
  205. ISEA Foundation, Republic of Korea
  206. ISIZIBA Community Based Organizations of South Africa
  207. Japanese Association for the Right to Freedom of Speech, Japan
  208. Jewish Renaissance Foundation, United States of America
  209. Jihad Makhoul, DrPH, Full Professor, American University of Beirut, Lebanon
  210. Jose Maria Paganini, Professor, MD, MPH, DPH, retired academic, Argentina
  211. Justice for Girls Outreach Society, Canada
  212. Just Planet, Switzerland
  213. Kagwiria Muturia, Senior Advisor, Justice, Rights and Gender Equity, World Renew, Canada/Global
  214. Kathleen Lahey, Queen’s National Scholar and Patricia Monture Distinguished University Professor, Queen’s University, Canada
  215. Keunghee (Kathy) Kim, Ed.d, SJD, Indiana University Maurer School of Law, United States of America
  216. Khmer National Liberation Front, Denmark
  217. Knowledge for the Blind Initiative, Nigeria
  218. Knowledge Mill Int’l Foundation Nigeria, Nigeria
  219. Kosova Democratic Institute, Kosovo
  220. Kosovo Law Institute, Kosovo
  221. Kuwaiti Transparency Society, Kuwait
  222. Lama Gangchen World Peace Foundation, Italy
  223. La Proteccion de la Infancia, Inc., Philippines
  224. l’Association pour la Protection de l’Environnement et du Développement Durable de Bizerte (APEDDUB), Tunisia
  225. Leadership Watch, Nigeria
  226. League of Women Voters of Nigeria (NILOWV), Nigeria
  227. Liberian United Youth for Community Safety and Development LUYCSD, Liberia
  228. Liberians United to Expose Hidden Weapons (LUEHW) in special consultative status with UN-ECOSOC since 2010 to present, Liberia
  229. Lifelong Learning Platform, Belgium
  230. Liliane Foundation, The Netherlands
  231. Madhira Institute, Kenya
  232. Mandela Center International, South Africa
  233. Media Education Centre Serbia, Serbia
  234. Meera Foundation, India
  235. Mélissa Mialon, PhD, Research Assistant Professor, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
  236. Member Care Associates, Inc., United States of America
  237. Mijoro Mandroso, Madagascar
  238. MIROSLAVA International Alliance, Ukraine
  239. Misère Option Zéro, Togo
  240. Mouvement d’organisation des ruraux pour le développement (M.O.R.D), Togo
  241. Movement for protection of African Child (Mopotac-Africa), Nigeria
  242. Najet Karaborni, former Senior Interregional Adviser in policy development, governance, public administration and NGO sector development, Tunisia
  243. National Council of Catholic Women, United States of America
  244. National Council of Women, Malta
  245. National Foundation for Peace, Development and Human Rights, Egypt
  246. National Old Folks of Liberia, Liberia
  247. Ndingicam Equity, Cameroon
  248. Neda’a Foundation for Development, Yemen
  249. Neethi Rao, Dr., Adjunct Faculty, Institute of Public Health, India
  250. New Era Educational and Charitable Support Foundation, Nigeria
  251. NF Civic Alliance, Montenegro
  252. NGO Computer Literacy Shelter Welfare Rawalpindi, Pakistan
  253. NEXUS Global, United States of America
  254. Nigeria-Togo Association, Nigeria
  255. Nigerian Association of Commercial Commuters (NACC), Nigeria
  256. Norsaac, pro-marginalized and policy influencing organization working for social transformation and enhanced living conditions, Ghana
  257. Northern CCB, Pakistan
  258. Nusroto Al-Anashid Association, Lebanon
  259. Nutrition and Catering Institute, Australia
  260. Obesity Health Alliance, United Kingdom
  261. Observatoire de Gestion de la Formation et Administration Scolaire, Democratic Republic of Congo
  262. Occupational Knowledge International, United States of America
  263. Okogun Odigie Safewomb International Foundation, Nigeria
  264. One Voice Initiative For Women and Children Emancipation, Nigeria
  265. ONG Afrique Esperance, Benin
  266. Open Data Charter, Argentina/Mexico
  267. Organisation apposition et engagement civique (OAEC), Tunisia
  268. Pacific Islands Association of Non-Governmental Organisations (PIANGO), Fiji
  269. Passionists International, United States of America
  270. Pakistan Rural Workers Social Welfare Organization, Pakistan
  271. Pan African Health Systems Network, Germany
  272. Parlement Africain de la société civile, Côte d’Ivoire
  273. Partnership For Justice, Nigeria
  274. Peace and Life Enhancement Initiative Intonational, Nigeria
  275. Peace Foundation Pakistan, Pakistan
  276. Peace Initiative Network, Nigeria
  277. Peace One Day, Mali
  278. PEACE Trust, India
  279. People’s Cultural Centre (PECUC), India
  280. People’s Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR), India
  281. Plateforme des Organisations de Femmes Haitiennes pour le developpement (POFHAD), Haiti
  282. Pleaders of Children and Elderly People at Risk  (PEPA), Democratic Republic of the Congo
  283. Pompiers Humanitaires, Bénin
  284. Pop Culture Hero Coalition, Inc., United States of America
  285. Prahar, an organization to provide and encourage primary education among rural and Tea Tribes without any distinction of caste, creed, religion and gender, India
  286. Precious Gems, United Kingdom
  287. Prevent Cancer Now, Canada
  288. Promotion of Maternal and Infant Health, PROSAMI, Democratic Republic of Congo
  289. Public-Private Integrity, Gambia
  290. Recovering Nepal, Nepal
  291. Rede Nacional de Combate ao Tráfico de Animais Silvestres (RENCTAS), Brazil
  292. Release L.E.A.D.S, United Kingdom
  293. Réseau des Organisations Féminines d’Afrique Francophone (ROFAF), Togo
  294. Reseau Jiko Kinga Mazingira (REJIKIMA), République démocratique du Congo
  295. Richmond Aryeetey, University of Ghana , Ghana
  296. RightOnCanada, Canada
  297. Road Safety Russia, Russia
  298. Romanian Academic Society, Romania
  299. Romanian Independent Society of Human Rights (SIRDO), Romania
  300. Salesian Missions, Inc., United States of America
  301. Samarthanam Trust for the Disabled, India
  302. Sanid Organization for Relief and Development (SORD), Yemen
  303. Sara Kirk, PhD, Scientific Director, Healthy Populations Institute, Dalhousie University, Canada
  304. Sathi Amuha (Friends Group), Nepal
  305. Save the Climate, Democratic Republic of Congo
  306. SB Karmakar, Chairman, Chairman, International Committee For Peace And Reconciliation, United States of America
  307. School News Nationwide, United States of America
  308. Sewa Development Trust Sindh, Pakistan
  309. Shaanxi Patriotic Volunteer Association, China/Shaanxi/Xi’an
  310. Shikshit Yuva Sewa Simiti, India
  311. Shine Africa Foundation (SAF-Teso), Uganda
  312. Silambam Asia, Malaysia
  313. Sirius Global Animal Organisation, New Zealand
  314. Sisters of Charity Federation, United States of America
  315. Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur, Rome Italy
  316. Social and Healthy Action for Rural Empowerment, India
  317. Sociedad Mexicana de Criminología capítulo Nuevo León, A.C., México
  318. Society for Conservation and Sustainability of Energy and Environment in Nigeria (SOCSEEN), Nigeria
  319. Society for Development and Community Empowerment, Nigeria
  320. Society for Economic Empowerment and Entrepreneurship Development (SEEED), Nigeria
  321. Society for Orphan, Neglected and Youth (SONY), India
  322. Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child, Pakistan
  323. Somali Help Age Association, Somalia
  324. Soroptimist International Great Britain and Ireland (SIGBI), United Kingdom
  325. Soskolne, Colin, PhD, Professor Emeritus, University of Alberta, Canada
  326. SOS Urgence, Mauritania
  327. South African Coloured Corps Brigade, South Africa
  328. South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario (SALCO), Canada
  329. South Sudanese Women Mission for Peace, South Sudan
  330. Spanda Foundation (Stichting Sanda), Netherlands
  331. Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future, United Kingdom
  332. Statewide Waste and Environmental Education Foundation, Nigeria
  333. Strength in Diversity Development Centre, Nigeria
  334. Sustainable Development Council, India
  335. Sustainable Environment Development Initiative, Nigeria
  336. Sylvia Earle Alliance / Mission Blue, United States of America
  337. Synergy Care Development Initiative, Nigeria
  338. Syrian Environment Protection Society (SEPS), Syria
  339. Tavirai Marega, Programmes Coordinator, Lower Guruve Development Association, in a personal capacity, Zimbabwe
  340. Tchad Agir Pour l’Environnement (TCHAPE), Tchad et Suisse
  341. The Coalition for Accountability and Integrity (AMAN), Palestine
  342. The Cosmos Foundation , Democratic Republic of the Congo
  343. The Healthy Real Initiative for Valued Entrepreneurship  (THrive), Nigeria
  344. The New Generation Girls and Women Development Initiative (NIGAWD), Nigeria
  345. The Office of the Overseer Over/4 Amonuriel Sanctuary, United States of America
  346. The Peacemaker Corps Foundation, United States of America
  347. The Reformed Drug and Substance Abuse Initiative, Nigeria
  348. The Secure Aid Relief Foundation, United States of America
  349. The Sustainable Life Project NPC, South Africa
  350. The Vision for Teenagers Adolescents and Youths Wellbeing Initiative, Nigeria
  351. Thomas Schwarz, Executive Secretary, MMI Network, Switzerland
  352. TI-Chinese Taipei (TICT), Taiwan
  353. Tim Lang, Professor, Centre for Food Policy, City University of London, United Kingdom
  354. Tiruzer Ethiopia for Africa (TEA), Ethiopia
  355. Transparency International Anticorruption Center, Armenia
  356. Transparencia por Colombia, Colombia
  357. Transparency International, Bangladesh
  358. Transparency International, Cambodia
  359. Transparency International, Germany
  360. Transparency International, Malaysia
  361. Transparency International, Nepal
  362. Transparency International, Portugal
  363. Transparency International, Republic of North Macedonia
  364. Transparency International, Russia
  365. Transparency International, Uganda
  366. Transparency International, Zimbabwe
  367. Udisha, India
  368. UNANIMA International, United States of America
  369. UNCAC-COALITION, a global network of over 350 civil society organisations (CSOs) in over 100 countries committed to promoting the ratification, implementation and monitoring of the UN Convention against Corruption, Austria
  370. Union of Disabled People Organisations of Azerbaij, Azerbaijan
  371. Union pour la Promotion/Protection, la Défense des Droits Humains et de l’Environnement-UPDDHE/GL, République Démocratique du Congo
  372. Unitarian Universalist Association Office at the United Nations, United States of America
  373. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Nigeria
  374. Universal Versatile Society, India
  375. Uzbek Forum for Human Rights, Germany
  376. Vikash Samukhya, India
  377. Vision GRAM-International, Canada
  378. Vision Mondiale de la Santé, France
  379. Vision Welfare Group, Kenya
  380. Vision Welfare Group, United States of America
  381. Vital Strategies, United States of America
  382. Vouliwatch NGO, Greece
  383. Vulnerable Persons Rights Protection Foundation, Nigeria
  384. Wemos, The Netherlands
  385. Wild Migration, Australia
  386. Women Against Violence and Exploitation Foundation, Nigeria
  387. Women and Modern World Social Charitable Center, Azerbaijan
  388. Women’s Intercultural Network, United States of America
  389. Women’s Resource Centre, United Kingdom
  390. World Association for Sexual Health, United Kingdom
  391. World Indigenous Tourism Alliance (WINTA), Australia
  392. Women Educators Association of Nigeria, Nigeria
  393. World Federation for Mental Health (WFMH), United States of America
  394. World Federation of Public Health Associations (WFPHA), Switzerland
  395. World Information Transfer, United States of America
  396. World Peace Foundation, United States of America
  397. World Public Health Nutrition Association, United Kingdom
  398. World Silambam Association (WSA), Malaysia
  399. World Yoga Association, Malaysia
  400. World Union of Catholic Women’s Organisations, Italy
  401. Yayasan Pendidikan, Indonesia
  402. Yerima Balla International Education Initiative, Nigeria
  403. Young Professional Development Society of Cyprus (YPDSN), Cyprus
  404. Young Professional Development Society Nepal (YPDSN), Nepal
  405. Young Professional Development Society of Sweden (YPDSN), Sweden
  406. Youth Foundation of Bangladesh, Bangladesh
  407. Youth Transforming Africa Narratives (YOTAN), Monrovia, Liberia

New Drug Trends Webinar – Reflections

Processes and Progress of Civil Society Monitoring of New Drugs Trends

On the 12th October, Rafaela Rigoni [CEHRN] hosted a webinar on the civil society monitoring of new drug trends, alongside Lies Gremeaux [Sciensano]  |  Laura Smit Rigter [DIMS – Trimbos-instituut], Mireia Ventura [Energy Control – ABD], Tony Duffin [Ana Liffey], & Daan van der Gouwe [Trimbos-instituut].

Daan van der Gouwe, who has been analysing the new drug trends data for the last three years, presented the Progress of Monitoring New Drug Trends from a Civil Society perspective. The presentation described the ability of civil societies to collect grassroot level data, which is often missed by larger organisations, which can be complementary to larger scale data collection organisations.

Daan discussed the unique approach to collecting data at a city instead of national level, and the stronger focus on looking at trends instead of specific substances. In conclusion, the topic of the timescale of data collection was introduced.

Discussion

During the discussion segment, Mireia Ventura emphasised the added value of civil society monitoring as they have direct contact with the people who use drugs; thus allowing for more honest and transparent responses. This sentiment was reinforced by Tony Duffin who described the importance of trust in these interactions, as this increases the willingness to share information – “Harm Reduction services tend to have great relationships with people who use their services and, in so doing, have access to some of the earliest qualitative information that anyone can gather”.

“Collecting data at a city level instead of a national level is important to allow for the detection of very early signs of change and trends at a very local level.” – Laura Smit

Lies Gremeaux described the ability of civil society monitoring to be able to capture new situations and rapid interactions, creating a better symbiosis in the value of knowledge exchange. These small signals and rapid interactions can become trends, and allows us to gain foresight.

Q&A with participants

“How often should we collect data?”

“How can monitoring be improved?”

Closing remarks

“C-EHRN gathers ‘Harm Reduction Intelligence’ from frontline services across Europe.  This is not empirical evidence, but valuable information, from a number of sources, which is gathered at a very early stage in new drug trends.  This is the strength of C-ERHN’s monitoring process and the resultant yearly reports.” – Tony Duffin.

Mireia added the importance of monitoring young people, as they were largely affected by covid. Currently, drug checking services are detecting the new trends in this target group.

We would like to thank all of our focal points who helped contribute to the monitoring data. Also, thank you to Rafaela Rigoni for moderating this webinar, and to Lies Gremeaux, Laura Smit Rigter, Mireia Ventura, Tony Duffin, & Daan van der Gouwe for their contributions and participation.