General Assembly Special Session Adopts Resolution Recognizing Persisting Health, Safety, Well-Being Challenges Posed by World Drug Problem
Several Delegations Question Absence of References to Application of Death Penalty for Narcotics-related Crimes
In a special session today, the General Assembly adopted a resolution recognizing that despite tangible progress, the world drug problem continued to present challenges to the health, safety and well-being of all humanity.
Acting without a vote in adopting the outcome document entitled “our joint commitment to effectively addressing and countering the world drug problem” (document A/S-30/L.1), the Assembly recognized the need for a comprehensive, integrated and balanced approach to address the multifaceted challenges presented by drugs around the world. In doing so, it emphasized that particular focus should be placed on individuals, families, communities and societies.
By other terms of the text, the Assembly recognized that tackling the world drug problem was a common and shared responsibility that should be addressed through greater and more effective international cooperation. Further, the drug issue demanded an integrated, multidisciplinary, mutually reinforcing and scientific evidence-based approach.
Opening the special session earlier, United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson declared: “The world drug problem affects virtually every nation and all sectors of society.” Drug trafficking and organized criminal networks fed corruption and weakened institutions and the rule of law, while profits from those activities funded terrorism and violent extremism. The global drug problem required a broad response that was effective, compassionate and humane, he said, while also stressing the need to address new challenges, including the emergence of new psychoactive substances. “We should not shy away from new approaches that challenge traditional assumptions.”
Reinforcing that point, World Health Organization Director-General Margaret Chan said the harm caused by psychoactive drugs included damage to physical and mental health. “You don’t need me to remind you,” she said, noting nonetheless that an estimated 27 million people had drug-use disorders and that more than 400,000 of them died every year. International drug conventions placed an obligation on Governments to prevent abuse, diversion and trafficking, but the very same conventions required Governments to ensure the availability of controlled substances for medical purposes, such as surgery and treatment of mental disorders, she said, pointing out that 80 per cent of the world population lived in countries with little access to medicines for alleviating moderate to severe pain.
Yuri Fedotov, Executive Director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), said that if one message had emerged from the many discussions held in the lead-up to the special session, it was that global drug policy must “put people first”, which required reaffirming the cornerstone principles of the international drug control system. As the lead entity in combating the global drug problem, UNODC was working with Member States to put their commitments into practice, he said, pointing out that the Office counted on political and financial support to carry out its efforts efficiently and effectively.
General Assembly President Mogens Lykketoft (Denmark) said no society could claim to be completely free from the dire consequences of illicit drugs, and no country could deny that addressing the world drug problem was a common, shared responsibility. It was a problem with many dimensions, from human rights to sustainable development, from health impacts to corruption and organized crime, he noted.
Werner Sipp (Germany), President of the International Narcotics Control Board, welcomed the evolution of drug-control policy and practice from a primarily criminal-justice approach relying on incarceration to a more health-oriented approach, stressing that the relevant conventions had never called for a “war on drugs”. Policies associated with militarized law enforcement in some countries, disregard for human rights, over-incarceration, denial of medically appropriate treatment and other inhumane or disproportionate approaches were not in accordance with the principles of the conventions, he added.
Following the resolution’s adoption, several delegations said they had joined the consensus on that action, but regretted that the outcome document contained no reference to the application of the death penalty for drug-related offences. They included Armenia, Switzerland, Brazil, Costa Rica, Norway, Uruguay, Jamaica and Indonesia — whose representative said he was speaking on behalf of countries including Singapore, Yemen, Brunei Darussalam, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Iran and Sudan — as well as the European Union.
In other business today, the Assembly elected Mr. Lykketoft President of the thirtieth special session. It also appointed Argentina, Austria, Barbados, China, Côte d’Ivoire, Kazakhstan, Russian Federation, South Africa and the United States to the Credentials Committee of the special session, maintaining the membership of the current seventieth regular session.
At the outset of the meeting, the Assembly adopted the provisional agenda for the special session (document A/S-10/1). It also took note of a letter dated 8 April 2016, from the Secretary-General and the President of the General Assembly (document A/S-30/2), concerning Article 19 of the United Nations Charter and pertaining to the voting rights of Member States in arrears in paying their financial contributions to the Organization.
The General Assembly will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 20 April, to continue its special session on the world drug problem.
Opening Statements
MOGENS LYKKETOFT (Denmark), President of the seventieth session of the General Assembly, recalled that a little more than six months ago the international community had gathered in the Assembly Hall to send a signal to people everywhere that a transformation towards a more sustainable and just world was under way. Today, a similar message was being sent: that the world drug problem could be more effectively addressed. No society could claim to be completely free from the dire consequences of illicit drugs and no country could deny that addressing the world drug problem was a common, shared responsibility, he said. It was a problem with many dimensions, from human rights to sustainable development, from health impacts to corruption and organized crime.
The world drug problem called for coherence among public health, social aspects, education issues, sustainable development and law-enforcement policies, he continued. It also called for cooperation at the local, regional and international levels, as well as in multilateral responses. Leaders must listen to civil society, the scientific community and academia, parliamentarians, youth, women, children and affected communities. Despite the ever-increasing efforts and progress made by States, international organizations, including the United Nations, and civil society, the world drug problem continued to affect the lives of millions of people worldwide, undermining sustainable development, political stability and democratic institutions, he noted. It was time to evaluate the progress made and reflect on new approaches to evolving and emerging challenges associated with the world drug problem.
JAN ELIASSON, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, spoke on behalf of the Secretary-General, saying that the special session offered an opportunity to assess the achievements, shortcomings and challenges of the international drug control regime. “The world drug problem affects virtually every nation and all sectors of society,” he noted, adding that drug trafficking and organized criminal networks fed corruption and weakened institutions and the rule of law, while profits from those activities funded terrorism and violent extremism. Drug policies had serious human rights implications, as some affected people dared not seek care for fear of punishment. Drug abuse killed and injured millions, he emphasized, pointing out its links to the spread of HIV, tuberculosis and hepatitis. It was vital to engage at the highest levels to provide care and treatment for those affected and to end the exploitation of the most vulnerable.
He went on to state that international drug conventions aimed to ensure the health and welfare of humankind, requiring States to balance security and public safety concerns with those relating to health, human rights and development. Some aspects of the drug agenda were controversial, and some countries and regions had suffered more than others, he noted, stressing the importance of learning from the experiences of others. Addressing the drug problem required the continuing involvement of all Governments and sectors of society, as well as all parts of the United Nations system. Now was the time to implement what had been agreed during productive negotiations. Going forward, drug prevention and treatment would require human rights-based approaches that recognized the need for access to vital medicines.
At the same time, respect for human rights and the ability to enforce the law were critical. It was important to consider alternatives to conviction and punishment, when appropriate, as well as to refrain from applying the death penalty, in accordance with human rights obligations. With poverty and inequality driving illicit drug production and use, the best prevention was to work decisively towards the Sustainable Development Goals, he said. “We have new tools in our hands which we must use.” Challenges required a global response that was effective, compassionate and humane, as well as a mobilization of efforts in that spirit. Looking ahead to 2019, he called for a focus on new challenges, including the emergence of new psychoactive substances, and a flexible United Nations response. Decisions should be based on research, data and scientific evidence, he stressed. “We should not shy away from new approaches that challenge traditional assumptions.”
VLADIMIR GALUSKA (Czech Republic), Chair of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs at it fifty-ninth session, explained that that body was the United Nations organ with prime responsibility for drug control matters. It had focused its recently intensified discussions on how to implement programmes and policies effectively on the ground, taking into account the very different nature that the world drug problem presented in different regions, he said. More than 1,800 participants from Governments, United Nations entities and specialized bodies, intergovernmental and regional organizations, civil society, the scientific community, academia and youth had taken part in the last Commission session, held last month in Vienna.
The Commission continued to act in a spirt of consensus, he continued, adding that it was through consensus that the Commission had contributed to substantive dialogues among Governments and fostered international cooperation in effectively addressing and countering the world drug problem, despite differences in national legislative approaches and policies. The multiple dimensions of the world drug problem and enhanced cooperation among various stakeholders was reflected in the outcome document adopted by the Commission and transmitted for adoption at the current special session. In that outcome document, Member States had committed to taking the necessary steps to implement the operational recommendations contained in the document and to share their progress with the Commission in a timely fashion, he said.
YURI FEDOTOV, Executive Director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), said that if one message had emerged from the many discussions held, it was that global drug policy must “put people first”, which required reaffirming the cornerstone principles of the international drug control system, with an emphasis on the health and welfare of humankind. Putting people first required balanced approaches centred on human rights, looking to the future and recognizing that drug policies must protect the potential of young people. It also required acknowledging common responsibility for the world drug problem, including by helping countries with limited capacities to address challenges to peace and security, supporting alternative livelihoods and enhancing prevention and treatment services.
But such balanced approaches would stand little chance of success unless political commitments were backed by adequate financial resources, he said, emphasizing that the special session marked a critical moment in which to build a more comprehensive understanding of the common challenge. Hopefully, the recommendations to be adopted today could help to promote urgent, united and concerted action. As the lead entity in combating the global drug problem, UNODC was working with Member States to put their commitments into practice, he said, pointing out that the Office counted on political and financial support in order to carry out its efforts efficiently and effectively. It was fully engaged in helping Member States to promote prevention, treatment, rehabilitation and integration through approaches rooted in science, health and human rights, as well as in countering illicit drug cultivation, production and trafficking.
WERNER SIPP (Germany), President of the International Narcotics Control Board, said remarkable successes had been achieved through implementation of the international drug control system, including the creation of programmes for the prevention and treatment of drug abuse and considerable improvement in international cooperation on drug-related matters, he said, adding that promoting health and welfare was the ultimate goal of the drug control conventions. However, there was a grave imbalance in availability of, and access to, medicines containing controlled substances, with about three quarters of the global population lacking proper access to pain-relief treatment, he noted.
He went on to state that drug control and treatment implementation efforts had historically focused on supply reduction, although there was a growing recognition of the importance of implementing treaties in a comprehensive, integrated and balanced manner, with full respect for human rights. Investing in demand reduction, including through prevention, education, treatment, rehabilitation and reintegration of drug users, promoted public health and well-being while reducing the potential number of users, he said. “Demand reduction is perhaps the best form of supply reduction.” Preventing and reducing the adverse health and social consequences associated with drug abuse, such as the transmission of HIV among drug-injecting users, should be essential to a comprehensive and balanced approach, he emphasized.
The evolution of drug-control policy and practice from a primarily criminal-justice approach relying on incarceration to a more health-oriented approach was welcome, he said, stressing that the relevant conventions had never called for a “war on drugs”. Policies in some countries that were associated with militarized law enforcement, disregard for human rights, over-incarceration, denial of medically appropriate treatment and other inhumane or disproportionate approaches were not in accordance with the principles of the conventions. The future of global drug policy was not a false dichotomy between a so-called “war on drugs” on the one hand and legalization or regulation of non-medical drug use on the other, he said, underlining the need for the international community to better implement drug-control treaties. That would require a balanced and comprehensive approach that placed health and welfare at the core of policy.
MARGARET CHAN, Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO), said the harm caused by psychoactive drugs included damage to the physical and mental health of users. Drug use also harmed families and communities, and, through crime, contributed to domestic injuries, child abuse and gender-based sexual violence. “You don’t need me to remind you,” she said, noting nonetheless that an estimated 27 million people had drug use disorders, of whom more than 400,000 died every year. Injected drug use contributed to 30 per cent of new HIV infections outside sub-Saharan Africa, and had led to new epidemics of hepatitis B and C in all regions, she said. About 10 million people who injected drugs had been infected with hepatitis C, an expensive disease that even the richest countries could not afford to treat.
She went on to emphasize the need to broaden drug policies focused exclusively on criminal justice approaches to include a public health approach based in science and evidence. The data showed that drug use could be prevented and treated, and that the dependency that contributed to crime could be diminished. Some of the most effective interventions aimed to reduce the harm associated with injections and recommended the use of sterile materials through needle-exchange programmes. Such programmes benefitted individuals and communities alike through reduced crime and public disorder, she said.
In addition, international drug conventions placed an obligation on Governments to prevent abuse, diversion and trafficking, she continued, adding that they also required Governments to ensure the availability of controlled substances for medical purposes, such as surgery and treatment of mental disorders. However, the obligation to prevent abuse received more attention than ensuring drug availability for medical care. Noting that 80 per cent of the world population lived in countries with little access to medicines that would alleviate moderate to severe pain, she appealed to States to remember the right to treatment and care, including for those who had died in agony of cancer for want of pain relief and the millions of injecting drug users whose misery had been compounded by HIV or hepatitis. WHO and its partners, especially the UNODC, were ready to implement the tasks that Member States would assign to them during the special session, she said.
KHALED SHAMAA (Egypt), Chair of the United Nations General Assembly Special Session Board, said that inclusiveness, openness and the sharing of substantive information had been the key feature of the preparatory process leading up to the special session. The Board had worked closely with a wide range of stakeholders who had exhibited dedication and determination to bring their experiences to the attention of Member States. The outcome document from the fifth-ninth session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, to be adopted during the special session, addressed the multiple dimensions of the world drug problem and contained a comprehensive set of operational recommendations covering an extensive range of issues, he said.
The preparatory process had demonstrated that there was no “one-size-fits- all” approach and that the challenges and situations on the ground varied from region to region, within regions and from country to country, he continued, adding that all those challenges required urgent attention. It was a matter of great importance to translate the outcome document into concrete actions on the ground. Emphasizing that the special session must be about human beings, he said it was the collective responsibility of the international community to ensure that the response to the world drug problem was built on international cooperation, solidarity, common and shared responsibility and concerted international action to promote and ensure the well-being of peoples and societies.
Action
Acting without a vote, the special session then adopted the outcome document titled “our joint commitment to effectively addressing and countering the world drug problem” (document A/S-30/L.1).
Explanation of Position
The representative of Armenia said that while his delegation had joined the consensus on the outcome document, the text failed to reflect fully the purposes of the United Nations Charter. Quoting Article 1, on the development of friendly relations with nations based on respect for human rights, he said Armenia would continue to take appropriate steps to strengthen international and regional cooperation to address the drug problem, citing in that context the right of self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter.
The representative of Switzerland expressed regret that the outcome document did not deal with the death penalty, which was still being applied by some countries for drug-related crimes. The Government of Switzerland was firmly opposed to its use, as there was no evidence that it had a dissuasive effect that was greater than other punishments, such as long-term prison sentences. When applied to drugs, the death penalty did not meet the criteria for serious crimes, and the Swiss Government wished to exchange views with others on good practices, especially the need for efficient police and prison systems that were free from corruption. He invited States that continued to apply the death penalty to consider a moratorium on executions, which would allow research to be carried out on more effective means for resolving problems.
The representative of Brazil said that while the outcome document provided a good basis for progress, he was concerned about the application of the death penalty for drug-related crimes, from a belief that no crime warranted its application, which Brazil considered a violation of human rights. Voicing regret that no agreement had been reached on addressing that issue, he proposed that countries consider adopting a moratorium on the death penalty for drug-related crimes, with a view to its eventual abolition.
The representative of Costa Rica said her delegation was in favour of the outcome document, which gave a new focus to efforts to address world drug problem, but regretted that it did not refer in any way to the death penalty. Costa Rica had abolished the death penalty, deeming it cruel and inhuman treatment constituting a violation of human rights. There was no crime for which the death penalty should be considered correct or justified, and there was no proof that it had a dissuasive effect on crime. It was fallacy to claim that it did.
The representative of Norway said his country was pleased that the outcome document placed greater emphasis on health and recognized the importance of different national situations, but regretted that consensus had not been reached on an efficient and human approach for national and global drug policies. Nor did it contain stronger language on human rights, particularly the death penalty issue, he said, emphasizing the need for greater coherence between drug control and security, human rights and development policies.
The representative of Uruguay expressed his delegation’s regret that the outcome document did not include any reference to a moratorium on the death penalty, which violated the fundamental human right to life. It was not a question of the effectiveness of criminal law, but of the protection of human rights. Uruguay also regretted the absence of significant reference to the issue of decriminalizing personal use of controlled substances, which although not a mandate under international conventions, was a human right that must be protected. Uruguay also regretted resistance to the harm-reduction strategy.
The representative of Jamaica said she had supported the consensus, citing such advances as the need for balanced strategies and alternatives to incarceration for minor drug offences, yet she was disappointed that the text did not allow countries sufficient flexibility to design national policies to fit traditional practices, such as the use of cannabis for religious purposes. Also, there was no mechanism to review the drug architecture and how best to recalibrate the global response. Jamaica was committed to dialogue and encouraged the international community to address the world problem in a manner reflecting contemporary evolving realities.
The representative of Indonesia said there was no consensus on the abolition of the death penalty, a practice that was not prohibited under international law. Rather, it was a criminal justice matter for States to decide through competent national authorities. States had a sovereign right to decide on their justice systems and to consider their own national circumstances, he emphasized. The initiator of the outcome document had decided that there could be only one view, he noted, while reiterating that the death penalty was an important component of Indonesia’s justice system, imposed only for the most serious crimes and serving as a deterrent. Drug production and transportation was run by ruthless syndicates, whose traffickers imposed the death penalty on their victims, he noted, adding that his country had legal safeguards in place to prevent a miscarriage of justice. He delivered his statement on behalf of countries including Singapore, Yemen, Brunei Darussalam, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Iran and Sudan.
The representative of the European Union Delegation voiced regret that the outcome document contained no language on the death penalty, emphasizing his delegation’s strong opposition to its application in all circumstances, because errors made in its application were irreversible. Imposing the death penalty for drugs contravened international legal norms, especially the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The support generated by the Assembly resolution on a death penalty moratorium in 2014 had shown the international momentum behind efforts to limit the application of capital punishment, he recalled, urging all States that had not yet done so to implement a moratorium as a step towards abolition, and to adopt safeguards to prevent criminal justice systems from applying the death sentence.
Round Table 1
The Assembly then held a round table discussion on “Demand reduction and related measures, including prevention and treatment, as well as health-related issues; and ensuring the availability of controlled substances for medical and scientific purposes, while preventing their diversion (drugs and health)”.
It featured presentations by the following panellists: Svatopluk Nemecek, Minister for Health, Czech Republic; Roberto Moro, Secretary of Programming for the Prevention of Drug Addiction and Fight Against Drug Trafficking, Argentina; Bernt Høie, Minister for Health and Care Services, Norway; Hafidha Okbi, Regional Pharmacy Inspector in charge of the Bureau of Narcotics, Ministry of Health, Tunisia; K. Shanmugam, Minister for Home Affairs and Minster for Law, Singapore; and Touré Lamine, civil society representative, Sopi Jikko, Senegal.
Mr. NEMECEK, discussing developments in the Czech Republic, said the death penalty’s abolition had been driven by a belief that no human or organization had a right to kill. The country had a quarter century of policy based on the three international drug conventions and long evaluated by science. Prevention, treatment, harm reduction and law enforcement were four tools of equal importance, he said, adding that by taking those approaches, the Czech Republic had one of the lowest rates of fatal drug overdoses at 5 per 1 million. It also had the lowest prevalence of HIV/AIDS among injecting drug users, and organized violent drug crime was virtually non-existent. In reaching those milestones, non-governmental organizations had played an “immensely positive” and “completely irreplaceable” role, he said. In addition, opiate substitution treatment had been introduced, and in 2013, the Government had legalized the use of medical cannabis where other treatment agents were not sufficient or had dangerous side effects. He called for greater coordination between UNODC and other United Nations entities, especially the WHO, in helping countries to develop a list of drug-policy interventions and to assess compliance with United Nations treaties.
Mr. MORO said that in the 90 days since the new President of Argentina had taken office, he had focused on a law that would allow people to access measures to prevent drug use. In addition, an observatory had been opened with the aim of offering data to inform public drug policy, a significant step since the country had not had a public drug policy to date. The President had also created space for the health and other ministries to exchange views, while 15 care centres had been opened and a pilot project was being carried out in various universities. Against that backdrop, the Government must strengthen its efforts, starting at the municipal level, he said. Argentina was also following what most developed countries had advanced to generate preventive actions, he said, adding that in such efforts, it must work with neighbouring countries to ensure agreement on public policies. The Government was also focusing on increasing service accessibility for women, especially in Lujan.
Mr. HØIE said the international community remained far from being capable of sufficiently addressing the world drug problem. There must be broader recognition that the perspectives of public health and human rights were essential to limiting the problematic use of and demand for drugs. Harm reduction measures were still insufficiently recognized as being essential to addressing problems caused by narcotic drugs, he said, adding that they had an important role to play and constituted a tool that could help drug users manage abstinence. Investment in drug treatment, rehabilitation and support were key components of Norway’s drug policy and helped those burdened by addiction to lead a better life without drug abuse and its adverse consequences. Poverty, drug use and poor health were strongly interlinked, he said, noting that the core value of demand reduction was the right of all people to enjoy the highest attainable standard of health. It was intolerable that millions of people suffered severe pain, despite the availability of effective, inexpensive treatments. There were important fears and prejudices that must be overcome, including those related to mental health disorders and end-of-life situations, he emphasized.
Ms. OKBI said Tunisia had ratified all three international drug conventions and was working to balance their obligations on the prevention and treatment of drug use, while also ensuring access to controlled substances for rational scientific and medical uses. Interministerial cooperation on drug policies was aimed at putting in place strategies to combat drug use in schools and raise awareness among young people about the harm it caused. Civil society’s involvement and dedication had strengthened the Government’s prevention efforts, and a draft law had been proposed to address drug-related incarceration with a view to considering drug users patients needing treatment, she said. Steps had been taken to ensure drugs were available for legitimate scientific and medical purposes, while also providing for strong legislation to prevent the abuse of medicines. A dedicated national commission delivered such drugs to large hospitals and oversaw their distribution, she said, stressing her country’s determination to promote greater regional and international cooperation to effectively combat drug use.
MR. SHANMUGAM said Singapore’s focus on demand reduction had been a success measured in part by the number of drug use arrests. During the 1990s, Singapore had arrested more than 6,000 people annually. Today, arrests numbered just over 3,000 per year, amid increased prosperity and in a region where drug production had mushroomed. Recidivism rates had been halved, measures that stood in stark contrast to other countries that had tried to reduce demand. Those results were part of a balanced approach focused on preventive education, tough laws, comprehensive rehabilitation and partnerships with families, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and communities, including initiatives to reintegrate drug users into society. Singapore had not seen the need to go down the route of harm reduction, a path to pursue only in a belief that demand reduction would not work. Providing drugs to users would not solve the problem, he said, adding that countries focusing on demand reduction should not be forced to go into harm reduction. Each country had a right to choose what was best based on its unique circumstances, he said.
Mr. LAMINE said drug demand policy would be effective only when based on scientifically valid and reliable data, which was lacking in many countries. He urged States to increase capacity for first responders to ensure that quality health services could be provided for children and youth and to reduce risks of HIV and viral infections spreading among drug users. Social reintegration should also be a priority because there was stigma associated with drug use, including for families. “Drug users are human beings and should be treated as such,” he stressed, urging that both South-South and North-South cooperation be enhanced in order to ensure that multi-stakeholder approaches were taken to close the gap between advanced and lesser advanced countries. Cannabis was associated with mental health problems, including in displaced families, and he urged that attention was paid to that issue.
MICHEL SIDIBÉ, Executive Director of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), said the world was facing a defining moment, and the question that leaders must grapple with was whether it would continue with a “war on drugs” that prioritized law-enforcement and criminal-justice responses or restore the balance towards the basic principle of improving health and well-being. After 40 years of repressive responses, it was time to transition towards a more comprehensive health and human rights-based approach, he said, emphasizing that there was a world drug policy problem and it was time to “right the wrongs” of global health policies. The world was failing to protect the health and human rights of those who abused drugs, yet it had not succeeded in reaching the agreed target of 50 per cent reduction in HIV transmissions among those who injected drugs by 2015. Discussions on insufficient harm reduction programmes and the policies that criminalized and marginalized those who injected drugs must be brought to the forefront of the debate, he said. “The war on drugs is in fact a war on people and it is not working,” he stressed. People were being left behind because of prejudice, discrimination and poverty. There must be a people-centred and human-rights based approach that would restore dignity to people who used drugs, bringing them out of the shadows and into services, he said.
Mr. SIPP addressed the availability of internationally-controlled narcotics, noting that 92 per cent of morphine was consumed in countries where only 17 per cent of the world’s population lived. As a result, three quarters of people worldwide were left with limited or no access to proper pain relief. Insufficient or unequal access to medicines seemed to be most prevalent in low- and middle-income countries where four out of five people needing relief for mental or neurological disorders did not receive appropriate treatment. The reasons for that dynamic had evolved over time, he said, pointing out that fear of addiction and onerous regulations had declined considerably as obstacles to access. Predominantly, countries now pointed to high costs as major obstacles, and burdensome regulatory requirements, including harsh penalties and delays in the supply chain, were also primary causes for the limited availability of necessary narcotics. Impediments to access included lack of training and awareness among health-care professionals, fear of addiction, limited resources, sourcing problems, cultural attitudes and fear of diversion. The training of health-care professionals remained a priority and an area that needed further development. Many Governments were not in a position to implement new policies and needed advice, training and resources to address the limitations of their systems, he said.
In the ensuing discussion, speakers described measures that should be taken at the national, regional and global levels to improve the coverage and quality of drug prevention interventions. Drug policies should promote evidence-based and cost-effective measures, speakers agreed, with many highlighting national policies and actions, especially those to ensure better accessibility of controlled medicines for medical purposes.
The representative of the Republic of Korea described a national system to monitor narcotics, which was helping to control the use and abuse of controlled substances. It was expected to be fully operational by the end of 2016. Her Government supported the use of proactive prevention systems and was ready to share its experiences.
The representative of Canada said her country was the second-highest consumer of opioids in the world, which increased illicit drug use. Its largest province had seen overdose deaths increase by 450 per cent in less than 15 years. Innovative, evidence-based solutions were needed.
The representative of Australia pointed out that his Government’s approach to demand reduction included a focus on information and education, early intervention, diversion programmes, psychosocial therapies and social integration.
The representative of Cyprus said Parliament had passed legislation that would refer drug users to treatment rather than prison.
Among the challenges, speakers said, were varying national capacities to tackle drug abuse, with several supporting the right of Governments to decide on the appropriate response without interference, which some said should better involve local authorities.
The representative of the Russian Federation supported non-interference in that context, stressing that his Government was pursuing demand reduction, treatment and prevention measures. The problem was that in some areas, there were not enough pharmacies that delivered medicine. He said anti-drug policies based on the three conventions had been successful.
Others cited a growing demand of new substances, such as amphetamines.
The representative of the Dominican Republic advocated shared responsibility in that regard, saying there was also a need to stop production of synthetic drugs and their precursors.
Still others said drug use was a public health problem that required a public health solution.
The representative of the United States stressed that addiction was not a moral failing, but rather a chronic illness that must be treated with skill, urgency and compassion. “We cannot prosecute and incarcerate our way out of this programme,” he said, urging investment instead in education, prevention and treatment that led to long-term recovery.
A speaker representing the UNODC added that interventions to ensure the right to health required resources to upgrade professional qualifications. Plans must be anchored in budget investments at national and international levels.
The representative of Colombia joined calls to make cannabis available for medical purposes, noting that his country was producing cannabis derivatives for medicinal use and would soon grant licences for the production of medicinal cannabis. Such efforts required that “we are clear on our goals”, he added.
The representative of Trinidad and Tobago said cooperation was essential in such efforts, yet the United Nations and the WHO seemed to contradict each other, pointing out an overlap between substances under the control of the international conventions, and those described as essential medicines by the WHO. States faced the challenge of increasing misuse of prescription drugs, rising popularity of precursors that were not internationally controlled, but were easy to export for the manufacture of illicit drugs, and an upsurge in new psychotropic substances.
Also speaking during the discussion were ministers and other senior officials from Panama, New Zealand, Cuba, Switzerland, Zambia, Mexico, Italy, Philippines, Indonesia, United Kingdom, Singapore, Chile, Brazil, China, Spain and Slovenia, as well as speakers representing the European Union, World Health Organization, the Scottish National Party from the Parliament of the United Kingdom and Active Europe.