Basic HTML Version
Wednesday 22 April 2009 – DAY THREE –
Daily Update
– 3
THE UNITED KINGDOM GOVERNMENT
is often perceived as a
leader in the implementation of harm reduction initiatives and in its
pursuit of ensuring treatment as a cornerstone of any drug policy.
There is no doubt that the UK is far ahead of many other countries,
and that the financial investment in treatment since 1998 has been
unprecedented. However there has been little discussion of the
worrying infringement of the civil rights of drug users, infringements
that would be considered completely unacceptable for any other
section of society.
Since 2005 a number of new laws have been introduced which
have directly targeted drug users. They have included drug testing
on arrest and mandatory treatment if found positive, pre charge
detention for up to eight days, the closure of premises for up to six
months where there is suspicion of Class A drug use and
confiscation orders in respect of those found guilty of minor drug
offences. These new laws have gone unchallenged and some have
been quietly introduced to the wider public – it seems drug users are
being treated as guinea pigs.
The criminal justice arena is not the only area where drug users
face unusual and degrading treatment. In the provision of their
healthcare they can receive treatment that would not be acceptable
to the rest of society. Guidelines issued by the National Institute for
Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), the body responsible for
ensuring good practice in healthcare, have clearly stated that
everyone should receive treatment if diagnosed with hepatitis C – this
includes those actively using drugs. Yet many senior medical
consultants still refuse to provide this treatment, based on their own
prejudice.
Release, the UK’s centre of expertise on drugs and drugs laws, is
positioning itself to challenge some of these laws through strategic
litigation. This is a process whereby test cases are used to change
policy or positions. It is important for the legal field to work closely
with those in drug treatment to identify areas of potential action.
Today’s major session looking at legal interventions as part of harm
reduction will consider this issue and that of providing legal services
directly to drug users. There will also be a meeting at 12pm today to
discuss the development of an international legal network working
with drug users – anyone interested is welcomed to attend.
A question of liberty
Time for a human rights approach to drugs policy
A human rights based approach had not
yet been applied to drug policy
, UN
special rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak
told delegates in Tuesday morning’s
Harm
reduction and human rights
plenary session.
Most UN human rights treaties had
reached universal ratification, he said, the
main principles being participation, non-
discrimination and the accountability of
states. However, human rights needed to be
mainstreamed into all policy areas of the UN.
Regarding the human rights implications
of international drug policies so far, the
victims were not just farmers and drug
consumers, but also people in need of pain
relief and palliative care, he stressed. ‘These
are people totally out of this scene. Up to 80
per cent of the world’s population has little or
no access to pain relief – there are many
reasons for this, but the war on drugs is one.’
There were numerous ways in which drug
consumers were victims of human rights
violations, he told delegates. These included
arbitrary detention, torture, inhuman prison
conditions and excessive punishments,
including the death penalty. Alongside these
were antiquated methods of forced
treatment and detoxification, as well as
exposure to increased risk of HIV and
hepatitis C.
A human rights based approach to drug
policy, however, would be based on the
principle of participatory decision-making,
involving not just drug users but people in
need of palliative care. Harm reduction itself
was a human rights policy, he told the
conference. In terms of the UN, however, the
situation was that ‘Geneva doesn’t talk
about drugs and Vienna doesn’t talk about
human rights’. It was essential to break this
cycle, he said.
Among the comments from delegates
were a questioning of the consistency of the
language used by the UN, including
‘derogatory language in well meaning
documents’ and calls for ‘meaningful
involvement of people who use drugs on
every level’. On the question of whether
human rights issues were merely discourse
for ‘lawyers and academics’, however,
Nowak asserted that ‘human rights is a
bottom up approach and multi-disciplinary –
all kinds of people are fighting for human
rights, and risking their lives.’
Ahead of this morning’s
Legal interventions:
reducing harms and improving rights
major
session, head of legal services and deputy
director of Release,
Niamh Eastwood
, looks
at how the civil rights of drug users are
being eroded