Get to know the work of Drogenberatung e.V. Bielefeld | Interview with Jan-Gert Hein

Drogenberatung e.V. Bielefeld joined Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network as a Member and Focal Point supporting the data collection for the Civil Society Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe in 2023. Below we bring an interview with Jan-Gert Hein, a member of the board of directors, to introduce the work of the organisation and why they find it relevant to be part of our Network.

Could you tell me about the work of your organisation?

The Drogenberatung has been running for about 50 years already. We are running several facilities that offer services for people who use drugs. We have different advice centres in Bielefeld and also in a town in a more rural area around Bielefeld called Detmold.  Besides these, we run a drug consumption room (DCR) that is connected to an advice centre and a doctor’s office that offers opiate substitution. In one of our advice centres in Bielefeld, we have an office for prevention work as well. We also have an advice centre that works on a more structural level and is focused on gambling addiction in North Rhine-Westphalia.

What harm reduction activities do you carry out?  

The biggest one is the DCR we are running where we have about 40,000 consumption processes per year. We also do street work where we offer syringe exchange programs and deliver harm reduction material to people who want our help. In terms of harm reduction, we are also running a very low-threshold hepatitis C detection program. People can get a PCR test for hepatitis in our DCR, and know if they are hepatitis C positive and if it needs to be treated.

What populations do you focus on? 

Our main focus is on people who use drugs, not only in the Bielefeld area but also in Detmold. We also work in several prisons around here, there is also a big group of clients we are focusing on. Most of them are currently using drugs or are relatives of people who use drugs. We also work with people who used drugs before but quit.

Would you tell us more about the work that you do in prisons?

In Germany, prisons have to offer advice to people from outside of prisons, they have to work together with drug advice centres and organisations like ours. We work in several prisons with different structures. Some of them are closed, but some of them have an open structure. Inside the prisons, we offer general advice. We inform people about harm reduction services outside of prison, but also of methods they can use inside the prison.

Another basic thing we do is to help people get into therapy. In Germany, there’s a law that offers the option to do therapy instead of staying in prison if a person commits a crime because of an addiction. That needs to be clarified by the court. If that happens, people have the option to do therapy and leave prison. We help people to get out of prison and into therapy.

Are there any other interventions that are not directly harm reduction-related that you would like to highlight? 

I think the biggest standout in our facility, the Drogenhilfezentrum (drug aid help centre) is that we combine different aspects of our work there. We combine treatment with the doctor’s office and care options for people with the possibility to get food, drinks, relax and rest. Besides that, we offer a drug consumption room and an option to seek advice. So we have an inclusive offer that people can use.

When we look around in Germany, we see that this concept works out, to have it all in one place so people don’t have to visit different facilities to get the help they need. Combining these key factors, treatment, care, and advice, is a very effective way to promote health for people who use drugs and especially for people who are experiencing homelessness. That’s what makes us kind of unique, and we have very good experiences with having everything in one place.

Is there any aspect you are especially proud of and would like to share about?

The Drogenberatung itself has been running, as I said, for about 50 years already. We started with opiate substitution in the 80s and we have a really good network in Bielefeld that is run by the Drogenberatung. I think what makes us special is that we are a really good networker. We have networks with prisons, with doctors, with people from almost every community. That is something we really benefit from as an organisation.

We have a really good network around Germany as well, we also keep in contact with other organizations which are not in or around Bielefeld. That’s how we got in contact with the European Harm Reduction Network, for instance.

Why do you find it relevant to be part of the Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network?

Our motivation to join the network was that we noticed that networking is everything, especially in fields of work where you don’t have that many organizations or structures you can rely on. I think that is something that the harm reduction network provides, to seek information and talk to people who have the same struggles as you do. That is something I look forward to.

I’m excited about meeting everyone else and getting in contact because it’s on us. In Germany, we have a far-right party that did well in state elections last year and we see that our work is getting politically and therefore financially under pressure. I think that is something that a good network can help you to endure.

What does harm reduction mean to you?

Harm reduction is the basic pillar of our work because if we can’t reduce harm, people endanger themselves. Harm reduction is the first thing that needs to happen for people to get more options. Harm reduction is the first step, not only when we look at the population in Bielefeld, but also if we look into prisons and other settings. It is the first step of everything.

C-EHRN Activity Report 2023 – Summary of Activities and Impact

C-EHRN is proud and grateful to present its 2023 Network Report, providing a summarised version of the activities undertaken last year. In this document, we are looking back at a year full of tasks, challenges and opportunities.

Recording – Roundup Webinar | Civil Society Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe

 

The video is the recording of the webinar organised to celebrate the core publications for the C-EHRN Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe that took place on the 7th of March.

The event brought together four volumes of the 2023 Data Report:


Moderator: Rafaela Rigoni (C-EHRN)

Speakers:
Iga Jeziorska (C-EHRN) – Essential Harm Reduction Services
Tuukka Tammi (THL) – Eliminating Hepatitis C in Europe
Daan van der Gouwe (Trimbos) – New Drug Trends
Guy Jones (TEDI) – Drug Checking Observations and European Drug Checking Trends via TEDI

 
Following a new format, Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network’s Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe 2023 Data Report is launched in 6 volumes: Hepatitis C Care, Essential Harm Reduction Services, New Drug Trends, Mental Health of Harm Reduction Staff, TEDI Reports and City Reports (Warsaw, Bălţi, Esch-sur-Alzette, London, Amsterdam). The Executive Summary can be accessed here.

Essential Harm Reduction Services: Report on policy implementation for people who use drugs

In 2023, C-EHRN and its members assessed the state of essential harm reduction services in European cities for the fourth time as part of the Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction In Europe, with 35 cities responding to our survey in 30 countries. You can now download the resulting publication, Essential Harm Reduction Services: Report on Policy Implementation for People Who Use Drugs, and read the interview with Iga Jeziorska, C-EHRN’s Senior Research Officer and the primary author below.

Which type of harm reduction services are most lacking in the cities that contributed to the report?

The ones that are not that well established are those not related to the prevention of infectious diseases as closely as needle and syringe programmes and are not aiming to minimise injecting use like opioid substitution treatment does. Namely, drug consumption rooms and drug checking are lacking in Europe overall the most. This underdevelopment of DRCs and drug checking may become a serious problem, especially in the context of the opioid crisis that we might be facing very soon.

Another problematic issue is harm reduction services in prison. Except for opioid agonist treatment (OAT), this is also an area where there are very big gaps in the service provision in terms of harm reduction. OAT is officially available in prison in most cities, but that doesn’t mean that it is easily accessible everywhere. We know that in Budapest, Hungary, for example, it is theoretically available, but there are no records of people using the service, and definitely not because there are no people who use opioids in prisons.

What would you highlight regarding the barriers in the outreach of harm reduction services based on the findings?

Funding, lack of political will and lack of or insufficient involvement of people who use drugs in services were reported as the main barriers to reaching out to specific subgroups of people who use drugs. Of course, all of these aspects are related to one another. Funding is an evergreen topic which is always there, and the lack of or insufficient funding is a direct consequence of the lack of political will. If there was political support for harm reduction, there would have been funding as well.

 

Are there any main differences in the availability, accessibility and quality of the services between the cities of the focal points?

On the one hand, we have opioid agonist treatment, needle distribution programs and all of the infectious diseases-related services, such as testing and treatment. These are well-developed in general in terms of availability, accessibility and quality.

On the other hand, there are some more innovative services that maybe, as I said before, are not that much connected, at least in the minds of the general public and the policymakers, with direct prevention of infectious diseases. These services that go beyond the ‘traditional’ harm reduction and focus primarily (but not exclusively) on overdose prevention are the drug consumption rooms (DCRs) and drug checking. These are in general more available in Western European countries. Snorting kits, kits for smoking, and fentanyl strips are also less available and accessible.

There are no DCRs in Central-Eastern Europe and Western Balkans. They are quite well developed as a network in Germany, Switzerland, Spain and maybe two other countries. In some countries, such as Greece or Portugal, there are one or two services. Drug checking is similar. There is a clear division between Central-Eastern Europe and Western Balkans on the one hand and Western Europe on the other,  in terms of service scope, service accessibility, low versus high threshold of various services, and the very service existence in the first place.

Harm reduction is chronically underfunded everywhere, but that means something different in the West and in Eastern-Central Europe and Western Balkans. In the East and Southeast, underfunded means that an insufficient number of services are operating or – in extreme cases – they are not funded for several months in a year because there are gaps between grants. Underfunded in the West seems to mean mostly that services don’t have enough funds to develop the offer, scale up activities and broaden their scope. We can also see that in the West, in general, services are more integrated into the health and social care systems, and in the East, they are more standing alone. One of the worrying phenomena that we observed this year, however, is the extremely low availability and accessibility of social integration services, such as housing, income generation and employment, and legal support. Furthermore, for the two latter types of services, we’ve observed significant deterioration in availability over the last couple of years.

We also know from the previous Monitoring edition that there are divisions between the urban and rural areas. Services are focused and concentrated in big cities, and they are lacking in the countryside. The question is also to what extent they are needed in the rural areas, as we also know that the concentration of people who use drugs is also in bigger cities. Some level of services is necessary in rural areas, but what level of availability and accessibility is necessary is something that would require additional assessment.

 

How do you think that harm reduction organizations can use the report? 

We are trying to follow the requests of the Focal Points in terms of the focus and to make our assessments address the topics that are important to people at any given moment.

When it comes to using the report in advocacy efforts, harm reduction organisations can use it to highlight cities and countries that can serve as good practice examples, like Bern or Amsterdam, with holistic, integrated services. The report is a general overview of the situation in Europe, and it can serve as a starting point in orienting oneself in what’s happening in different cities.

In the context of talking to policymakers, the report – in conjunction, for example, with the European Drug Strategy, which calls for scaling up harm reduction services – can help to showcase the gaps in harm reduction services at the city level compared to what is declared by a country or a city in official policy documents. This can potentially be quite a powerful tool in helping organisations in their advocacy efforts.

 

What do you think is the added value of civil society-led monitoring in comparison with other types of monitoring done by major agencies?

One of the added values is trust and the hands-on experience of our Focal Points, and the related kind and detail of the information collected. Civil society organisations are close to people who use drugs, and people who use drugs trust them enough to share honest information. For example, from the point of view of drug checking, this means that we can have very detailed information on how people use drugs, what drugs they use, in what contexts, etc. This is in sharp contrast, for example, to wastewater analysis that can tell us how much cocaine is in the wastewater but cannot provide information about the people who used it and the circumstances, if they used it at all.

For our monitoring, we collect data in a way that is contextualised. This is quite different from data collected, for example, by the national Reitox focal points that focus on the existence of services and perhaps the number of services.

On the other hand, when we ask to what extent particular types of services are available to specific communities and to what extent they are accessible, we implicitly include the element of the needs. That is this contextualisation of data that I mentioned, which includes additional information. For example, seven services existing in one city can mean something completely different than the same number of services in another city because the needs are different, and this is what we address with our monitoring. This is one of the main values of C-EHRN monitoring compared to other data.

Another point is focus on the city level. Most data is collected by European agencies and country governments is collected at the national level. Our data is collected at the city level, which is important primarily because the implementation of drug policies is done mostly at the local level in European countries.

We are also quite timely with our data. We are now at the beginning of 2024, and we are reporting on the data between 2022 and June 2023, a bit over one year of delay in reporting. This is also something that makes us different, less bureaucracy and resulting quicker data processing give us the possibility of being quicker with our reporting.

 

Would you pick one graph that you find significant and explain why it is relevant?

All of them are significant in their own way. What I would suggest is Figure 9 on service delivery for ageing people who use drugs, a category that we introduced last year.  Ageing people who use drugs are becoming a more and more significant group among the clients of harm reduction services all over Europe. The people for whom the first harm reduction services were established in the 1980s are ageing, and there is an increasingly recognised need for developing and adjusting services to their needs, which significantly differ from those of the other subgroups, and there hasn’t been sufficient focus on them so far.

Another question that we asked last year for the first time is the extent of involvement of people who use drugs in service governance, service implementation and evaluation. There are very few cities where people with living and lived experience are involved in the governance of services. They are involved in implementation and, to some lesser extent, in evaluation but not really in the governance of organisations and services. This is something that we need to keep monitoring. The debate about community involvement, community empowerment and community-led services is very lively across the continent, but we are still not there yet in terms of practice of harm reduction services functioning. We should keep a close eye on this and possibly combine the monitoring with capacity-building efforts to improve the involvement of people with lived and living experiences in services.

 

Following a new format, Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network’s Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe 2023 Data Report is launched in 6 volumes: Hepatitis C Care, Essential Harm Reduction Services, New Drug Trends, Mental Health of Harm Reduction Staff, TEDI Reports and City Reports (Warsaw, Bălţi, Esch-sur-Alzette, London, Amsterdam). The Executive Summary can be accessed here.

Executive Summary | Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe 2023

Following a new format, Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network’s Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe 2023 Data Report is launched in 6 volumes: Hepatitis C Care, Essential Harm Reduction Services, New Drug Trends, Mental Health of Harm Reduction Staff, TEDI Reports and City Reports (Warsaw, Bălţi, Esch-sur-Alzette, London, Amsterdam). 

Roundup Webinar | Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe

To celebrate the core publications for the C-EHRN Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe, we invite you to join the roundup webinar on the 7th of March, 1:00 PM (CET)!

 
The event will bring together four recently published volumes of the 2023 Data Report:
 
During the interactive webinar, the primary authors of each publication will join  Rafaela Rigoni, C-EHRN’s Head of Research, to debate positive developments and the main advocacy asks arising from the reports’ conclusions. We’ll invite participants to interact via a Q&A session.
 
Moderator:
Rafaela Rigoni (C-EHRN)
 
Speakers:
Iga Jeziorska (C-EHRN) –  Essential Harm Reduction Services
Tuukka Tammi (THL) –  Eliminating Hepatitis C in Europe
Daan van der Gouwe (Trimbos) – New Drug Trends
Guy Jones (TEDI) – Drug Checking Observations and European Drug Checking Trends via TEDI

To join the webinar, register by the 6th of March on this link!

 

Following a new format, Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network’s Civil Society-led Monitoring of Harm Reduction in Europe 2023 Data Report is launched in 6 volumes: Hepatitis C Care, Essential Harm Reduction Services, New Drug Trends, Mental Health of Harm Reduction Staff, TEDI Reports and City Reports (Warsaw, Bălţi, Esch-sur-Alzette, London, Amsterdam). The Executive Summary can be accessed here.

Understanding Drug Use in Dutch Prisons: A Call for Improved Research and Care

The European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) recommends the promotion of research and monitoring of drug use and health incidents in prisons. However, little or no research has been done on drug use in prison settings in the Netherlands in recent years.

International research shows that people in detention have used drugs substantially more often and are more likely to use drugs regularly. Incarcerated persons also experience drug-related problems more often than those not incarcerated. Drug use in prisons worldwide is relatively high. Yet, drug policies in prison mainly aim to combat the drug trade rather than provide care for those using drugs in prison.

In 2021, the Netherlands had nearly 30,000 people in detention across 29 penitentiary institutions. Understanding current drug use among people incarcerated in Dutch prisons is essential. In response, Correlation – European Harm Reduction Network (C-EHRN) and Trimbos Institute conducted an exploratory study in late 2022. The study, funded by the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport, investigated drug use in the Penitentiary Institution (PI) in Ter Apel.

Synthetic Cannabinoids (SCRAs)

The reason for the research in collaboration with Trimbos Institute is the continuous innovation in the way drugs and, in particular, synthetic cannabinoids (SCRAs) are smuggled into prison as impregnated on letter mail. There are signs of widespread synthetic cannabinoid use in Dutch prisons, which has been seen in foreign prisons for some time. One of the main reasons is that these substances are more difficult to detect than traditional drugs such as cannabis or cocaine. SCRAs impregnated on paper are odourless, and their use cannot be identified in conventional urine tests. The effects of SCRAs are similar to those of THC, making the user feel relaxed and intoxicated. However, the effects can vary considerably in strength and duration and can cause other side effects that can even be life-threatening in extreme cases.

 

Ter Apel

The qualitative research in the Penitentiary Institution Ter Apel is an initial exploration through a questionnaire distributed among employees and people in detention, as well as in-depth interviews held with key informants from the institution. The findings suggest high usage of SCRAs and inappropriate use of prescription pain, sleep and sedative medication, besides cannabis and alcohol use. Although drug use in the PI in Ter Apel does not seem to lead to visible significant safety or health incidents, likely, people in prison do not readily turn to the medical service for drug-related health problems, partly for fear of sanctions or stigmatization.

“The investigation results have made us realize that we have been looking at the subject of drugs for too long from a safety point of view only. We do our best to prevent drugs from being smuggled in one way or another. It is also important to look at drugs from the perspective of health, care and the professionalization of our employees.” – Laurens Huizenga, branch director PI Ter Apel.

 

Recommendations

In order to have a better understanding of substance use in Dutch prisons, more research is needed. Additionally, it is essential to gain better insights into the care needs of people in detention and the challenges faced by prison staff regarding drug use.
Such new research insights are necessary to implement more targeted and appropriate care and to improve access to addiction care.

The researchers advise keeping up-to-date and neutral information about drugs’ effects and health risks available to staff and people in detention. It is also desirable to have a broad and open discussion about substance use and SCRAs, particularly within the prison system.

For detailed information and more recommendations, read the research report.

 
 

Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Health and Digital Executive Agency (HaDEA). Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.

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.

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.

Call for Rights-Affirming Drug Policies

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.

CEHRN have co-signed the below letter directed to Ms Ghada Waly (Executive Director, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime), ahead of International Human Rights Day;

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

30th November 2022

Dear Ms. Waly

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.

 

Yours sincerely,

Ann Fordham
Executive Director
International Drug Policy Consortium