Views and priorities of the INCB in the lead-up to UNGASS 2016 Briefing to Permanent Missions to the United Nations (Vienna)

Currently, some options are being proposed and discussed which would be clearly outside of the three drug control conventions. Of course, States Parties are the “owners” of the treaties, they have the freedom to question the international drug control conventions, and to amend and change them if they feel a need.

In implementing a comprehensive, integrated and balanced approach to elaborating drug policy, Governments must: (..)

• Ensure that narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances are available for medical and scientific purposes in adequate amounts. (…)
• Adhere to international human rights standards in all fields of drug control activities and respect human rights when implementing drug control measures.
• Undertake not only crop eradication in addressing illicit cultivation, but to combine efforts in promoting alternative development strategies.
• Facilitate greater participation and cooperation between all relevant stakeholders, including civil society groups, in the implementation, delivery and monitoring of drug control policies
  • Human rights
  • Access to controlled medicines
  • Alternative development
  • Civil society engagement

The Conventions have sometimes been criticised as overly punitive instruments, an argument which does not withstand critical review. While it is true that some States have made extensive use of incarceration of low level drug offenders, this approach is not mandated by the drug control Conventions. Here, it is essential to distinguish between the normative content of the Conventions and criminal justice policy measures which have been taken by some Governments.

The Board has repeatedly reminded States that, according to the Conventions, drug related criminal offences, including those involving the possession, purchase or cultivation of illicit drugs when committed by drug users, (to quote the treaties directly) do not automatically require the imposition of conviction and punishment. Rather, the Conventions provide discretion for Parties to provide, either as an alternative to conviction and punishment or in addition to conviction and punishment, that these individuals undergo measures of treatment, education, after-care, rehabilitation and social reintegration. Accordingly, there is no obligation stemming from the conventions to incarcerate drug users having committed minor offences.

The Board in its Annual Report criticizes the practice of many States of imposing unconditional imprisonment on drug users for such offences. The Board notes that, in some countries, such offenders often account for a significant proportion of the prison population and that young and first offenders are incarcerated not as a last resort but as a first resort. The Board underlined that this practice is contrary to the United Nations standards in crime prevention and criminal justice.

In this context, it is worth recalling that last year the Board made a statement concerning its positions regarding the death penalty, in which we declared that, “Taking into account the relevant international conventions and resolutions pertaining to the death penalty, the Board encourages the State Parties that still provide for the death penalty for drug-related offences in their national legislation and practice it, to consider the abolition of the death penalty for drug related offences”.

Governments, the United Nations system, regional organizations, civil society and the private sector should develop a renewed sense of shared responsibility in drug control – based on the fundamental values of inclusiveness, a clear definition of purpose and roles, and an integrated, balanced and multi-sectoral approach aimed at achieving sustainable results and promoting accountability among all actors.

Governments should promote greater involvement of their citizens, nongovernmental organizations and other members of civil society, as well as the private sector, to develop new avenues for strengthening shared responsibility in drug control efforts.

The availability of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes is one of the core obligations for Governments to comply with the international drug control conventions. This topic constitutes also the core of the mandate of the Board.

Around 5.5 billion people – that is three quarters of the world population – still have limited or no access to medicines containing narcotic drugs, that means little or no access to adequate pain relief medications. On the other hand, 92 per cent of morphine used worldwide is consumed by only 17 per cent of the world’s population, primarily those living in the United States, Canada, Western Europe, Australia and New Zealand.

This discrepancy is one of the central concerns of the Board. In 2010 INCB published a report entitled: “Availability of Internationally Controlled Drugs: Ensuring Adequate Access for Medical and Scientific Purposes3 “. The follow-up report will be published at the beginning of next year as a supplement to our Annual Report for 2015.

Firstly, it is a balanced system, driving toward improving public health and welfare, based on the underlying principles of proportionality, collective responsibility and compliance with international human rights standards. The Conventions also provide for a certain degree of flexibility. However, drug policies in many countries do not comply with these principles, often leading to deficiencies in the drug control system.

Contrary to criticism, the current drug control system based on the Conventions and the Political Declarations is not synonymous with a ‘war on drugs’. Although there are policies in some regions of the world which indeed could be characterized as such – namely: (..) Policies which do not ensure the availability of adequate medication for the treatment of medical conditions, including for palliative care, pain treatment and mental health.

The global drug problem is not likely to be solved by a fundamental change of the international system. As we prepare for UNGASS 2016, the Board encourages Governments to fully implement the current Conventions and Political Declarations taking into account the priorities I have just outlined, namely: (..) promoting human rights standards, in the cases of all individuals affected by drug use;