Basic HTML Version
According to executive director of
the UN Office on Drugs and Crime
(UNODC), Yury Fedotov, the recent
57th session of the Commission on
Narcotic Drugs (CND) in Vienna
enabled UN member states come
together to strengthen their
responses to world drug problems.
However it seems the event was
characterised more by increasingly
entrenched positions than any kind
of agreement.
Although held against a backdrop of
shifting drug policy – in places like
Colorado, Washington state and
Uruguay – much of the event’s
feedback has been negative, with talk of
progressive nations giving in to hardline
states like Russia (see news story page
5, and comment facing page). Harm
Reduction International (HRI) and the
STOPAIDS network of organisations
even urged the UK government not to
sign the joint ministerial statement
adopted at the end of the first ‘high-
level’ segment of the event.
However, although that statement
may have ended up an unsatisfactory
compromise – with states unable to
reach agreement on the death penalty,
for example – much of what was act-
ually said in Vienna may indicate
something of a shift towards a more
progressive approach.
‘We went to the high-level segment
with the expectation of being quite
disappointed because the statement
was so watered down,’ International
Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC)
executive director Ann Fordham tells
DDN
. ‘But it was heartening this time
to see countries like Switzerland,
Norway and the EU operating as a
block being very firm on the need for
the abolition of the death penalty.’
Many of the individual country
statements in the CND sessions were
similarly progressive, she points out.
‘Obviously because the joint ministerial
statement is a consensus document,
their positions were watered down but
they did make quite strong statements.
All the EU countries were talking about
health-based policies, most of them
speaking out against the death penalty
and many being very frank about the
failure of criminal sanctions in deterring
people from drug use. That’s huge
progress. It’s unprecedented to have
that many countries come out and say
we need to decriminalise drug use.’
What was particularly surprising
was the position of some Latin
American countries, she stresses.
‘They were really digging their heels in
and being really strong and
outspoken. The big surprise for us was
Ecuador. We weren’t expecting them
to be quite so strong but they said
“we need to review the UN
conventions, they’re outdated” – most
countries wouldn’t go that far. Mexico
was also making it very clear that they
felt there needs to be an honest and
open debate on drug control.’
There remain a significant number
of nations maintaining that no debate
is needed, however, including, Russia,
Iran, Pakistan and others. ‘But then
you’ve got Europe who’ve been
strongly basing their drug control
policies on health of late and I think
they were more open this time about
the need for a debate. Then of course
we had Uruguay who are on the brink
of finalising their cannabis regulation.’
While Fedotov has been dismissive
of Uruguay’s move, stating that it was
‘very hard to say that this law is fully in
line with legal provisions of the drug
control conventions’, Uruguay used the
CND to claim that it was within the
spirit
of the conventions as its aim was
to ensure public health and security. ‘It
was interesting to see that dynamic
play out, but what was also interesting
was that the other Latin American
countries aren’t necessarily completely
As ever, this year’s meeting of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs proved a
controversial affair. But despite failure to reach agreement on major issues like the
death penalty, hears
DDN
, things may be changing below the surface
News focus |
Analysis
CONSENSUS POLITICS
6 |
drinkanddrugsnews
| April 2014
www.drinkanddrugsnews.com
‘All the EU countries were talking
about health-based policies... many
being very frank about the failure of
criminal sanctions in deterring people
from drug use. That’s huge progress.
It’s unprecedented to have that many
countries come out and say we need
to decriminalise drug use.’
ANN FORDHAM
supporting Uruguay because they have
to be quite careful,’ adds Fordham.
‘I think you have to read between
the lines. Obviously we’re
disappointed, but the global political
process does move at a glacial pace
and if you’re watching closely then you
can see the nuances, of which there
are many. If you take the cannabis
regulation initiatives, in Uruguay and
the US states, that trend is irreversible.
Vienna is still a very closed-minded,
consensus-based model of working
that makes progress very limited, but