Outcome of the panel discussion on the impact of the world drug problem on the enjoyment of human rights (A/HRC/31/45)

5. Concerning the right to health, the Deputy High Commissioner noted that, in its resolution 12/27, the Human Rights Council had previously recognized the need for harm-reduction programmes and that such measures, including syringe exchange programmes and opioid substitution therapy, were available in slightly less than half of all countries worldwide. Harm-reduction measures help to reduce substantially HIV infections and the transmission of other blood-borne viruses, and she encouraged States to embrace harm reduction approaches. She added that this was particularly the case in prisons, where access to harm reduction was far more restricted and urgently needed.

5. She [the Deputy High Commissioner] noted that access to essential medicines under international control was far too limited, particularly in developing countries. It was often restricted for fear that they would be diverted from legitimate medical use to illicit purposes.

6. The Deputy High Commissioner recalled that the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health had already called for decriminalization of the possession and use of drugs in his 2010 report (A/65/255), and that the World Health Organization and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) had taken similar positions. That was because the criminalization of the possession and use of drugs had been shown to cause significant obstacles to the right to health

6. Concerning the death penalty for drug-related offences, it was estimated that 33 countries or territories continued to impose the death penalty for such offences, resulting in approximately 1,000 executions annually. In some States, drug related offences accounted for the majority of executions carried out. However, according to the findings of the Human Rights Committee, the Secretary-General, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, drug-related offences did not meet the threshold of the “most serious crimes”.

7. (…) Consideration should be given to alternatives to prosecution and imprisonment of persons for minor, non-violent, drug-related offences.

12. It was important to recognize in the fight against drugs that the international system could not continue using the same policies to address different realities; the problems had changed and it was not possible to use a universal approach with a focus on punishment. Public health, development and human rights could not be placed on the sidelines in the fight against drugs

13. The Executive Director of the International Drug Policy Consortium said that the upcoming special session of the General Assembly on drugs would be an important opportunity to have an open and honest debate regarding the challenges and shortcomings of the global response to drug control and to acknowledge the widespread and devastating consequences of punitive laws and repressive law enforcement practices on human rights. She said it was encouraging that the links between drug policies and human rights were being increasingly addressed by the United Nations, but it was deeply concerning that the right to life was frequently compromised by aggressive supply reduction activities that had led to death sentences for drug offenders. The death penalty may under international law be applied only for the most serious crimes, and drug offences did not fall into that category. A number of States nevertheless executed drug offenders in ever-increasing numbers, while others had sought to reintroduce capital punishment for drug crimes. There were also serious concerns about extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions carried out in the name of drug control efforts.

14. Ms. Fordham added that the negative impact of the criminalization of drug use continued to be of grave concern. Individuals had a right to gain access to life-saving health services without fear of punishment or discrimination, but the fear of criminal sanctions had driven people who use drugs away from life-saving harm-reduction services, leading to avoidable infection and premature death from HIV and hepatitis C. Such criminalization also served to justify harsh measures, including torture, the denial of due process and compulsory placement in drug detention centres for the supposed treatment and rehabilitation of people who used drugs.

14. Finally, the burden of highly disproportionate sentences for drug offences was largely borne by vulnerable groups, including women and ethnic minorities. She added that incarceration fuelled poverty and social exclusion.

16. Those who used drugs were socially stigmatized, had low incomes and came from deprived families. Drug policies focusing on wide-reaching arrests and harsh sentences exacerbated the issue and drove offenders further to the margins of society. Drug enforcement efforts disproportionately affected the poor and in particular ethnic minorities and women. He noted that female drug users could face the loss of custody of their children and were sometimes forced to undergo abortions. Indigenous communities also suffered from misguided drug policies. He concluded that disregard for human rights had led to drug policies with unintended adverse consequences and that new evidenced-based policies were needed

16. He [Mr. Mohamedou] highlighted the macroeconomic impact of drug production on society and that the traditional approach had focused on alternatives to illegal production by farmers. He explained that it was also important to focus on the impact on individuals and noted that the majority of those who produced drugs were poor and did not become rich from that production. There was a need to identify other employment opportunities for such people

17. Mr. Saxena said that drug users and people with drug-use disorders experienced discrimination in gaining access to appropriate health-care services and suffered from a lack of adequate treatment. They faced significant stigma, prejudice and non-professional conduct in health-care settings and suffered from a general lack of information and training of health-care professionals in meeting their health-care needs. Drug-use disorders were health conditions associated with substantial mortality, morbidity and social problems and were both preventable and treatable. The right to health must be extended to all population groups, including the vulnerable and marginalized, and also to people deprived of their liberty

18. Harm-reduction interventions, such as needle exchange programmes for injecting drug users or outreach services aimed at prevention, had proven to be effective in the prevention of drug-related blood-borne infections. People with drug dependence should not be punished for their drug-taking behaviour, which was a result of their disease, and as such should not be treated as criminals. Female drug users often did not receive appropriate care or support for their drug use disorder, in particular during pregnancy, because of stigma, lack of timely referrals and discriminatory attitudes of health professionals and society at large. He added that children must benefit from policies, programmes and services to prevent and reduce substance use and from measures to prevent their involvement in illicit production and trafficking.

20. Mr. Lale-Demoz said there was a need to recognize that drug use and associated health conditions, such as HIV, hepatitis C and drug overdose, were public health issues that had to be addressed by qualified and trained personnel. Drug use required treatment, not punishment, which led to violations of the drug user’s right to health. Member States should use alternatives to imprisonment for drug-related offences of a non-violent nature. Imprisonment in such cases was ineffective, led to prison overcrowding and exacerbated the transmission of HIV and other diseases. Alternatives to imprisonment increased recovery and reduced recidivism

21. Finally, it opposed the death penalty in all circumstances and encouraged every country to establish a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. The Deputy Executive Director added that UNODC strongly advises States that retain capital punishment not to impose it for drug-related offences, as they are not considered to fall under the category of “most serious crimes”.

22. Mr. Srisamoot said that full compliance with human rights law and with the international drug control framework went hand-in-hand. At its session in March 2015, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs emphasized the importance of human rights in a number of resolutions on various topics, such as evidence-based treatment and care for children and young people with substance use disorders, the quality and the reliability of drug analysis results, and alternative development. Respect for human rights was identified as one of the cross-cutting issues in preparations for the special session of the General Assembly on the world drug problem, which included drugs and human rights, young people, women, children and communities.

26. A number of States noted that the world drug problem constituted a challenge to safety, national security, socioeconomic and political stability, the health and well-being of populations and sustainable development. These challenges were compounded because of the illicit activities of criminal organizations connected to drug trafficking. Others underlined the negative impact of drugs and drug trafficking on peace, human rights, stability and security. One State commented that it was important to address the drug problem through a holistic and human rights-based approach, protecting the human rights of all, including drug offenders. Another State noted that, while drug use was harmful, the means to address it were not always equally effective, proportionate or legitimate.

32. A number of States stressed that the death penalty should be abolished for drug related offences, while others emphasized that their goal was the universal abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances, including for drug users. (…) One non-governmental organization voiced concern about the large number of executions for drug-related crimes in the Islamic Republic of Iran

33. Access to justice, the importance of proportionality in sentencing and alternatives to imprisonment were highlighted by a number of States. One State said that, while drugs remained a threat to the well-being of individuals and security, addiction to drugs was an illness and should not be treated as a criminal offence. One non-governmental organization said that the enforcement of overly punitive laws for drug offences had not proven effective in curbing the production, trafficking and consumption of illicit substances. One nongovernmental organization regretted the expanded use of the military in combating drug trafficking in Mexico.

34. (…) One State underlined that it was making great efforts to strengthen its drug policies, while at the same time taking into account the rights of indigenous peoples and their use of coca leaves.

36. It was important that the special session be an open debate that would consider all options, for different parts of the United Nations system to make their voices heard and for consideration to be given to the views of civil society.

40. (…) She [the panel moderator] also stated that the participation of civil society was essential to ensure a better protection of human rights in drug policies and noted that it was especially important for those who were directly affected by such policies to be involved.

40. In her concluding remarks, the panel moderator (…) called for flexibility in the application of the conventions on drugs.