 Welcome everybody. Thanks for attending, joining this virtual side event, promoting evidence-based drug policies and interventions enshrined in human rights in Eurom, in the 64th session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs. My name is Orioles Colias, I work in association with Tombre, which is organizing this event, but on behalf of the EU Civil Society Forum on Drugs. And it has the support, special support of precisely the European Union, the governments of Portugal and Spain, and the Council of Europe and Pompidou Group. First of all, I would like to inform that the side event is being recorded, and also that please feel free to pose any questions or remarks using the Q&A section instead of the chat, and we will try to answer them at the end of the presentation, depending on the time left. Without delay, I would like, I'm so delighted to introduce Marie Noguil from International Drug Policy Consortium. She is the coordinator of the Working Group for International Relations of the Civil Society Forum on Drugs, and she's been working so hard organizing this initiative with us. So, we ask her to give the preliminary remarks on behalf of the Civil Society Forum on Drugs. Please, Marie, the floor is yours. Thanks so much, Orioles, and good morning everyone, good afternoon, good evening, depending on where you're based. So I would like to start by thanking Orioles and everybody from Association Proyecto Andre for hosting this side event on behalf of the EU Civil Society Forum on Drugs and to all of our co-sponsors for their ongoing support. As Orioles said, so I'm Marie Nugé and the head of Research and Communications at the International Drug Policy Consortium, but I'm also a member of the core group of the CSFD. And as he said, I'm chairing a working group on international drug policy issues. And so it's within the sphere of this working group that we are organizing this side event today. In this event, we wanted to showcase some of the work done by the CSFD and its members in the areas of evidence-based and human rights-informed drug policy advocacy and service provision. But we also wanted to provide an opportunity for European policymakers to present some examples of drug policies, strategies, and programs that are grounded in the fundamental principles of human rights and health promotion. So I'm really, really happy that we have with us representatives from the EU, from the Pompidou group and the Spanish government, all of which are really strong promoters of civil society engagement in drug policy debates. The CSFD itself has a strong history of advocating for a human rights-based approach to drug policy. It was established in 2007 and it's now recognized as an expert group of the European Commission. It's composed of 45 member organizations from across Europe. And although the CSFD members may have different views on some aspects of drug policy, we can all agree that drug policies and programs should be grounded in health and should be grounded in human rights. And in particular that the voices of those most affected should be meaningfully reflected in policy design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. And so in this regard, the CSFD has been engaged in regular dialogue with the EU to bring our experience and expertise to the decision-making table. And I would only like to mention just two examples here of our work. So first of all, the CSFD has been closely engaged in the evaluation of the EU Drug Action Plan for 2017 to 2020. And after that we sought to influence the new EU drug strategy for the period 2021 to 2025. And so in that process we provided detailed inputs and recommendations on various iterations of the document. And we are really grateful to the EU and in particular the German presidency for reflecting our views in the final document. And we look forward to further engaging with the EU and the Portuguese presidency in particular on the accompanying Action Plan on Drugs. But it's probably in the area of international drug policy that we've created the closest ties with the EU. During and since the 2016 UNGAF on drugs, the CSFD has been regularly consulted by the EU. And we were grateful to see our recommendations very well incorporated in various EU statements at the 2016 UNGAF, the 2019 Ministerial Fifth Segment and the Yearly Sea Endings. Our concerns in particular about civil society space and international debates or the visibility given to the UNGAF outcome document, the UN system common position on drugs and international guidelines and human rights and drug policies have been taken on board by the EU. And although we don't agree on everything here again, we're very grateful for the ongoing opportunities provided to the CSFD to engage in EU decision making processes on drugs. However, and despite all the progress that we have made over the past few years, none of us can afford to be complacent. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown everyone the urgent need to put human rights and communities at the center of drug policies. Firstly, to reduce prison overcrowding and the ongoing over-incarceration of people who use drugs. Secondly, to consider prevention, risk and harm reduction, treatment, care and recovery programs as essential services in particular at times of COVID-19. And thirdly, to promote and protect but also to resist moves that may hamper civil society space at all levels of policymaking. So it's important to stress here that these issues did not arise because of COVID-19, they predate the pandemic, and I'm afraid that they will continue well beyond the health crisis. And Peter Saruzzi is going to provide a bit more information on these issues in his own presentation, so I'm not going to go into more detail here. I'm going to finish with a plea for all policymakers in Europe, but beyond as well, to bring visibility to these issues, to put reforms forward when they are urgently needed, and to continue to involve civil society at every step of decision making, implementation, monitoring and evaluation on drugs issues. So thank you so much once again, and I look forward to the discussions. Thanks, thanks a lot, Marie. Brilliant as always trying to frame briefly but detailing precisely the subject in this case of this initiative. Thank you so much. Our second speaker is Peter Saruzzi, Executive Director of the Rights Reporter Foundation from Hungary. I think that he will raise the voice of civil society as one of the members of the civil society forum on drugs. Peter, you have the floor. Good morning and thank you, Ariel. As Mary pointed out in her introduction, I will address three pressing human rights issues from the perspective of European civil society that were exacerbated by the ongoing COVID crisis but as Mary pointed out, neither of these problems are the result of the COVID epidemic. The situation was far from ideal even before the crisis. What is more, this crisis provided us civil society some new opportunities by creating a room and need for innovation. So the first problem, although mass incarceration is not as severe in Europe as in America, prisons are overcrowded in many EU member states with Belgium, France, Italy and my own country, Hungary on the top of the list. I think a number of prisoners are imprisoned for minor drug related offenses in Europe. In most countries, these prisoners have no or very limited access to treatment and harm reduction services. Prisoners are one of the most vulnerable groups when it comes to COVID, but are often forgotten when it comes to vaccination or other health responses. With the introduction of lockdown measures, prisoners are deprived of basic human rights such as access to a lawyer, family members and even hygienic products and quality food in many member states. There are 16 year old inmates who could not speak to their parents for several months. The violation of the right to fair trial is also regular, one in five prisoners in Europe are in pretrial detention and their rate is increasing during the COVID crisis. Despite the call of many international organizations to examine ways to release prisoners to reduce the risk of COVID infections, only a few European countries responded positively. But the positive impact of early release programs if the reentry to communities supported is documented in many countries, including Ireland. Even countries that have implemented decongestion measures have failed in many cases to prevent or reduce the continued and disproportionate arrest and imprisonment of people for mining minor drug offenses. This undermines attempts to reduce criminal overcrowding. This crisis underlines the desperate need for criminal justice reform as well as introducing and scaling up those alternatives to coercive sanctions that are promoted by the European Council. Why is it that member states are reluctant to provide alternatives of incarceration when we know that they are more cost effective than imprisonment? Why is it more important to enforce drug laws than to ensure the rights of prisoners to life and house? The second problem, social and health services for people who use drugs remain chronically and disproportionately underfunded, especially in comparison with supply reduction measures. The EU drug strategy required member states to scale up harm reduction services, but what we witnessed in some member states was scaling down and not scaling up. In countries like Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, needle and syringe programs had to close down due to lack of funding and lack of political commitment, leaving tens of thousands of injecting drug users without any access to healthcare system in the deadly grip of poverty and social exclusion. Why is it that some member states enthusiastically enforce drug laws against drug users, but their enthusiasm disappears when it comes to ensuring their basic human rights to accessing life saving treatment? Why is it always treatment and harm reduction programs are the first victims of budget cuts during the crisis? Again, although the COVID epidemic further limited the access to health services, we can also see inspiring examples of innovations too. Harm reduction programs were always in the forefront of supporting the most marginalized groups of society from the worst effects of the epidemic and lockdown measures. For example, restrictive rules of opiate substitution programs were relaxed in several countries, allowing clients to access their medications without the obligation to show up every day. In several European cities, homeless people use drugs were provided with special emergency shelters with links to treatment and sometimes safe supply of medications. Third problem, the space for civil society has been shrinking in many European countries and around the world. In the period when it is a growing challenge to raise sustainable funding for civil society organizations, some member states are increasingly hostile to civil society organizations. For example, in my own country, Hungary, independent organizations that receive international funding have to register and are scapegoated as foreign agents. The authorities are increasingly restricted due to COVID related measures, and this together with economic hardships has a disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations, especially organizations representing and advocating these groups need more protection support and funding from the EU. The situation has been documenting the responses to COVID crisis in European cities. Our findings clearly indicate that civil society has shown incredible resilience and has proven to be very valuable partner of policymakers during the crisis. In cities and countries where civil society was meaningfully involved in responding to the crisis, more innovative and more effective solutions were introduced. I see that many member states are more afraid of those civil society organizations that raise awareness on social problems than of the social problems themselves. Why is it that too often human rights remain nice ideas put on paper, but they are not taken seriously when it comes to the least popular groups of society. This exposed and escalated the pre-existing inequalities and human rights violations in our society. Instead of returning to the false and fragile normalcy of the pre-COVID period, we need to learn from the mistakes of the past and make sustainable changes for the future. The innovations introduced during the COVID crisis, such as the early release of prisoners, the relaxation of OST rules, or providing homeless people with shelter food and medicines are reported to improve their health and well-being of vulnerable people. So why don't we keep and mainstream these innovations after the crisis ends. We need drug policies that do not deprive people of their human rights, but empower communities to stay healthy and safe, especially if they are poor and marginalized. Thank you very much. Thanks a lot, Peter. I think the audience appreciates your concerning, but also optimistic report of the situation nowadays. Thank you so much. Now, our next panelist is Edith Hofer, team leader of the drug policy team in the European Commission, from whom we are very honored that she has invited the invitation to speak today with us. Thank you so much, Edith. Thank you very much, Oriol. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, or I don't know, good night to all of the participants, wherever you are in the world. It's also a pleasure for me and an honor to be here today at this event organized by Associate Project Ombre on behalf of the Civil Society for Human Drugs, together with the other distinguished speaker and of course with this invisible audience which makes life a bit more complicated. The policy is a particularly dynamic and international concern that has seen significant reforms over the last 30 years and more Europe and the rest of the world have developed implemented and adapted measures and policies to reduce the demand and supply of drugs, as well as implemented harms. Our collective experiences, especially including the civil society experience over the past this case, this case have shown that the drug phenomenon is very fast changing. We are now facing different evolutions and new patterns of consumption, increased production and new transit channels, not to mention new substances. As we just heard, we don't, we continue to face a set of all the issues that persist, but we also have many new problems coming up or phenomenons coming up. The new EU drug strategy 2020 2021 to 2025 is ever based on a detailed assessment of what actually the previous strategy document and its action plans have delivered. Evaluation is evidence evaluation is an essential element for any political action, because it gives us a parameter of the effectiveness and the relevance of policies done and a compass for future drug policies. The drug strategy provides the overarching political framework and the priorities for the European Union for its drug policy for the next five years. It is, it takes as previous strategies and evidence based integrated balanced and multidisciplinary approach to the drugs phenomenon, not only at the European level but also national and international level. It incorporates a gender equality and an health equity perspective as well. The strategy aims to protect and improve the well being of society and of the individual to protect and promote public health to offer a high level of security and well being for the public, and to increase health literacy. It is built on three main strands, which are supported by three gross cutting frames, the main strands or pillars are one, its drug supply reduction, enhancing security to drug demand reduction prevention treatment and care service, and free addressing drug related hearts. It is important for me to underline that the strategy for the first time develops and highlights a harm reduction framework and their self standing pillar, and the same level of importance as demand and supply reduction. The first pillar addresses drug related harms by focusing on measures and policies that prevent or reduce the possible health and social risks and harm for users for society and in the prison setting and we just heard from Peter how important the last one is as well. As part of this harm reduction framework, we also place more focus on alternatives to incarceration for non-violent low level participants and illicit drug markets. The EU continues very firmly to advocate for the worldwide abolition of the death penalty for drug related offenses. This is also a very important principle included in the new strategy. The international documents such as the free UN drug conventions, the 2016 Ungas outcome document, the 23rd get gender for sustainable development, and the international guidelines on human rights and drug policy, just to name a few, are important paces for our strategy. The Ungas outcome document is and remains the most comprehensive policy document on international drug policy, and I would like to congratulate to the five year anniversary of its adoption. We will have another side event today, which will pay tribute to this outcome document and its impact in the afternoon. Based on the strategy which has been adopted in December as also Marie said, the Council of the US currently negotiating under the leadership of the Portuguese presidency and action plan. It should be adopted by mid year. We recognize that the impact the impact that drugs have on quality of life and health of so many people and how complex and invasive the drug markets really are. This is why the drug strategies are adapted response to this situation, and will be implemented with a focus on public health on the protection of youth and of the vulnerable populations, a fight against stigma and discrimination human rights, but why also fighting against organized crime and money laundering within the UN internationally. The action plan itself has not been implemented and has not been adopted yet and as I said before it's probably to be adopted only by mid 2021. We believe that we have to urgently move to implementation of the strategy. And for that we will rely on civil society as a crucial partner, because they are the ones working most closely with the people who use drugs. The Department of Human Rights Forum on drugs provided important input in the evaluation of the previous strategy and the development of the current strategy. And for that, I would really like to thank you all for your inputs and for your constant involvement. And this is also something we want to continue the active involvement of civil society in the future in the context of drugs policy. I would like to mention something, even if it's maybe not 100% in the human rights area. We still have to look at the bigger picture in terms of drug trafficking, also, especially we're looking at where the money is used, what the money is used for. We also have to step up actions against organized crime so that they cannot infiltrate, infiltrate, for example, legal economies and continue the work. Therefore, the Commission has adopted yesterday and you strategy to tackle organized crime, which responds to these increasing challenges. It was adopted yesterday as I said, and I'll welcome, I'll invite you to also look at this. It's part of our new drug strategy as well. I'll stop here. Thank you very much for your attention. And I'm happy to answer any questions in the chat or afterwards if there's time. Thank you. Thank you so much, which is also brilliant to fit within this tight time such a complex issue and trying to to share with us a bit the US strategy on drugs. And afterwards, discuss about how COVID pandemic will, I mean, will menace in a way the purpose of the reason, the objectives of this new plan, which is excellent. Okay. The next speaker is Dr. John Ramon, BLB. I think it's certainly one of the greatest experts on drug policy. Today, as chief delegate of the National Plan on Drugs of the government of Spain, the Ministry of Health. Please, Dr. You have the floor. And thank you all for being here with us. It's really a pleasure to be together with all of you in this event. And I'm really happy to be part of this panel with Project Ombre. We have been colleagues and friends for decades. We have been working together to improve the situation on the drug scene and drug policies in Spain. I'm going to share some slides with you. So it's going to be more interesting than watching my face, I think. And what I will try to do is, let's see if I am able to do it. I hope it is being visible. What I'll try to do is to share with you some thoughts on how in Spain over decades, we have been evolving and fostering what we, in some way called the Spanish model. The Spanish model, which really is based on the idea that the international principles that the United Nations foster guide our policy. And this, of course, have to do with international drug control conventions, but they also have to do with the human rights. And these two principles, which are at the core of the international governance of our societies are within our current strategy and previous strategies. We are now with the current strategy, national strategy for drugs and addictions, which is built on a public health perspective, thinking about the person, the victim, setting its community, which tries to give a universal response with free coverage of services by the National Health Service, providing a response according to the needs and giving priority to the most vulnerable and trying to get some coherence and collaboration among all public administrations. The strategy and the plans that define it are always built from our office, the National Plan on Drugs Delegation, but also together with original governments, together with experts, together with NGOs. Together with researchers, together we design what are the objectives for the period, and we all provide inputs to progress towards reaching those objectives. We also try to mine diversity, and we also think that there's a public responsibility, but it's also a social responsibility. And we've had 35 years now of consecutive National Plans on Drugs, and a good thing is that in general they have been grounded on consensus, a consensus that has made them relatively continuous over government changes and ideology in government, which doesn't happen in other spheres of public policy in our country, unfortunately perhaps. But let's say also that one of the big things we've learned is from difficulties, and our story begins with a disaster, a catastrophe that was the heroin epidemic in Spain, which began in the late 70s, but evolved tremendously over the 1980s. It was a new problem. We had no professional strength, we had no specialized centers. There was a very confused ideology and public image about drugs, mixing cannabis, heroin, everything seemed to be the same, and it was not the same. Most heroin users were rebuffed by the healthcare system, they were kicked out, they could find no help. And heroin began everywhere, but very quickly concentrated in the most deprived neighborhoods, and it was white heroin, which was injected, which dominated the market at the time, that's not true anymore. There was a mix now, and the North-South divide within the country. And these conditions made the ground for our tremendous HIV and AIDS epidemic in the 90s, which was a second disaster, hitting very hard the same population. So that was the context of our first national plan on drugs, and the national plan on drugs made big step forward. And I think the main challenges then and now are the same, and they're the same in fact for all public health issues. We must understand and measure problems. We must identify interventions that are useful, effective to respond to problems. We must test them, we must evaluate them all the time, and we must ensure that's very important that the most effective programs and interventions reach everyone. It's very nice to have a nice and effective program, but it remains very local and doesn't reach everyone. We miss opportunities that could be useful for any. Our first priority of course was to ensure that we had a network for care and treatment that was based on science. Because at the beginning, as I said, we had no trained professionals, we had no specific services, and care was based on charismatic responses, based on goodwill, but not very effective. So developing a network of therapeutic communities, detoxification units in acute hospitals. The first one was opened in 1981. It's going to be now 40 years since we opened our first unit in Hospital del Mar in Barcelona. And the backbone of the system are the ambulatory treatment centers for addictions, with professionals, with doctors, with nurses, with psychologists, with social workers. That's the backbone of the system. Also they centers some mobile units in metropolitan areas. Then we began to take care of or think more about those who did not reach treatment because they were not ready for it. So we began to develop dropping centers where they could shower or they could get coffee soup. And from there we developed into harm reduction interventions. Well, of course, opiate substitution therapy can be seen as the first basic, but beyond that, we developed low threshold treatment centers that would admit people who were not definitely on treatment but who could get some initial help. And we have developed some supervised consumption facilities in some of the major cities in Bilbao in Barcelona and its surroundings in Madrid. That's unfortunately no longer operational. And we're confronting now what is one of our big problems we haven't solved yet the residential needs of many drug users who are homeless and the pandemic has been important there. And I want to emphasize this method and maintenance therapy was crucial. This graph shows survival analysis of people in addiction treatment. And for most alcohol treatment, cocaine treatment, cannabis treatment, after one year of treatment, about 40% remaining treatment because addictions by definition are chronic and relapsing. Now for heroin users, only 5% were on treatment after a year. So we needed to find a way. And the response was method on maintenance therapy. Because with methadone maintenance therapy, we could maintain heroin users on treatment about the same rate than the other addiction patients, about 40% remaining treatment after one year. I think that's very important because that provided the ground to be able to work with them and improve their pronounced. Let me mention the harm reduction facilities. These are pictures from the Beload Center in Barcelona. These are spaces where drug users can walk in, bring their own substance, but they'll find clean material. They'll find health supervision. If they overdose, they'll have quick help. And they begin interaction with health professionals. And this beginning of interaction, we have many examples that show that it shortens the way to treatment for those people who were not ready for treatment. But once they begin contact with the system, it's much more likely that they'll be able to decide they will enter treatment and they will change. And mortality declined. Our estimates of mortality show it very clearly. It's now stable. We need to make further efforts, but it's not what it was years ago. Let me mention, let me insist a little bit, as Peter said, COVID has brought the issue of homelessness very much to the front. Because many drug users are homeless and very often substance use is a cause for exclusion from the mainstream social services such as shelters for the homeless. They're kicked out of these facilities. And during the time of extreme confinement because of COVID, this issue was pressing. And in our large cities, there's been two options in some more flexible rules. So they could get into general shelters, perhaps with external support from addiction services, intensive external support from addiction services, medication, or professional help. But in some other cities, we've had specific facilities for substance users, and sometimes involving integrated harm reduction schemes. For instance, providing beer or wine for those who otherwise would leave the facility to get it, or for instance, providing a space for safe and supervised consumption of drugs. This is an issue we need to address better. We need more facilities like this. COVID has confronted us with this need and its key for improving treatment outcomes. Because if you are homeless, the likelihood that you will continue on treatment and progress is much lower. And I think that's all. We have very tight schedule in this panel, and I just want to say that we will continue. Thank you all. Muchas gracias and we're writing towards the future, hopefully improving together. So thanks a lot, Dr. Villalbe, for sharing this, I mean, the adjusting model in Spain, and also recognizing the challenges that we all must deal with, not only Spain, but today talking about Spain. Thank you so much. So I will introduce now Dennis Haber. For a last minute in convenience, he will speak on behalf of Hanna Bardell. He is executive secretary of the Pompidou group, so I take also this opportunity to congratulate for the 50 years of this amazing journey, 50 years of the Pompidou group, and he will speak on behalf of the Council of Europe. Thank you so much. The floor is yours. Thank you very much for this introduction. I will speak on behalf of Hanna Bardell, because the author of the report that she has made on human rights and drug policy, even if we have contributed to a large extent to the production of such a report. We rather use the opportunity of this unfortunate problem that Hanna Bardell has not been able to connect to bring to the audience a wider scope. Of course, including the recent report of the parent assembly, which has been adopted in October 2020, under the responsibility of Hanna Bardell, but also more largely of our recent developments in the Pompidou group. And we are celebrating this year, the 50th anniversary of the Pompidou group. It has been created in back in 1971, through initiative of the late French president George Pompidou. This is the first time that European countries have brought their efforts together to tackle the issue of what was at the time an emerging problem is the use of drugs within European population and also to fight the trafficking of drugs. The creation of the Pompidou group in 1971 was against the background, which has changed a lot over the last 50 years because the most important objective of the Pompidou group was at the time to fight against drug trafficking and to tackle address the issue of drug abuse among European population. At the time there were seven countries which created the Pompidou group, the six countries which were members of the European community, plus the United Kingdom, because George Pompidou, as you all know, had already decided at the time that he would not veto anymore the candidate of the United Kingdom to the European community. So he wanted to include the United Kingdom from the start in this new European framework. The focus of the Pompidou group has changed when it has been integrated in the framework of the Council of Europe that was in 1980. For the only nine years the Pompidou group has lived its own life as an autonomous body, but after 1980 was decided to integrate it into the framework of the legal and political framework of the Council of Europe. And this of course has changed the approach, because as you know the Council of Europe is about democracy, human rights and rule of law. This is the DNA of the Council of Europe and so the approach of the Pompidou group has changed after its integration into the Council of Europe and especially over the last decade. There have been a lot of strong focus has been given to human rights in drug policies. This includes cooperation with civil society, because also it is in the DNA of the Council of Europe to cooperate with civil society. And when you want to address an issue such as human rights, you need to work with civil society, civil society at large but also of course, and in particular the organizations which are the voices of drug users and their relatives in Europe. In the, in the last years, a policy paper has been adopted on interaction with civil society that was in 2015, and then in 2017 a policy paper on human rights and drug policies that governments should implement in their drug policies. And then it came to an initiative of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which was, should have been the main subject of this intervention, because Anna Bardell as a reporter has produced a very interesting and important report which has been adopted by the committee on 12 October 2020. And this report led to the adoption of two important texts. The first one is a recommendation by the Parliamentary Assembly to the committee of ministers, where the Parliamentary Assembly is asking to the ministers of the Council of Europe to take collective action in the field of drug policy and human rights. This is currently being discussed within the committee of ministers. So there is no reply yet to this recommendation. What will be the position of the committee of ministers, and there is also a resolution, which is directly addressing to the member states of the Council of Europe so that means that each individual member states can make the follow up which it deemed useful or necessary with this resolution. And I would say that the the most far reaching and ambitious proposals of the report are in the resolution because we know in the Council of Europe that it's not always very easy to have a collective action taken by the committee of ministers. There are 47 member states and they have quite different approaches and it's not easy to come to a collective action. But when you address individually to all member states, then you may expect that at least some of them will take action on the basis of these proposals. Then we also have an important issue which is currently being discussed by the committee of ministers. It is the revised statute of the kind of the computer group. It has been my main work over the last two years to let lead the discussions together with the Portuguese presidency on the new statute of the computer group. We have reached an agreement within the computer group member states on a draft revised statute, and I can maybe say a few words about this draft revised statute which is at this stage only a proposal by the member states of the computer group to the committee of ministers. So it's also still under discussion and I would not reveal a secret by telling you that the discussions are a little bit complicated. By the way, this afternoon we will resume the discussions on the revised statute. But for the moment the text as it stands contains quite important steps forward. First of all, it reaffirms the multidisciplinary nature of the drug problem. So we need to tackle the drug issue with different fronts on different fronts. Of course, we have the activities on law enforcement, but also we need to foster prevention training. We need also to work together with education ministries, for example, the health ministries so it's a very transversal issue and it's important to reaffirm this multidisciplinary nature. The second important thing is the strong focus on human rights, which is in the revised statute. Of course, as I mentioned, the computer group has already been working on human rights and drug policies, especially over the last decade, but if the statute is adopted by the administrative ministers, this would become a statutory mission of the computer group to promote human rights in the conception, adoption, implementation and evaluation of drug policy. So this would be a very important qualitative step forward if it is adopted and we hope it will. Then the third important issue in this statute is the fact that the mandate of the computer group would be extended beyond the issue of illicit drugs. So we will be able to tackle also other forms of addictions, like especially the new forms of addictions through internet like gambling or gambling. Another very important step forward is to reaffirm very strongly in this new statute, the identity of the computer group as a Council of Europe entity, which brings at the same time the added value of the computer group. And we will, we are already doing, but we will strengthen a lot the synergies that we have with a number of other Council of Europe entities such as the Commissioner of Human Rights of the Council of Europe, the Committee on the Prevention of Torture, the Committee on Human Rights, Intergovernmental Body and other important entities of the Council of Europe, and of course also the Parliamentary Assembly who has just adopted the report that I mentioned and Mrs. Merkel has been entrusted by the Parliamentary Assembly to follow up the report. Then we are also. Yeah, Dennis. Yes. I'm afraid that you should be ending. Yes. Thanks for that. Just one last word among synergies that we want to establish is also to strengthen our synergies with civil society. And I see at least one person here who knows that I'm serious about that. It's not all it's also not a very easy issue to discuss currently there are some resistances but I'm very committed as executive secretary and the Portuguese presidency to move forward on this front. Thanks a lot, Dennis Hubbard, and we appreciate your willingness to take part of this side event in this condition. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Well, this is still, I think, three, four minutes for questions. I would like to raise at least two. To the panelists. The first one says it's from Regina. Madsen says prevention is an integral part of the new EU's the EU agenda in action plan on drugs. I am lacking this perspective in the webinar, could you elaborate or how the civil society forum on drugs is working with prevention in different areas. There's also another question from on Fernandez, but maybe we will you could first try to reply this one would like to answer me Peter Maria. Yeah, maybe I can answer that. The civil society forum on drugs has several experts who have extensive knowledge and expertise on the field of prevention. And in our official positions and and recommendations we always emphasize the need for evidence based prevention interventions in member states. So the civil society forum on drug has and which maybe has the most, you know, strong focus on prevention is the one on the quality standards of demand reduction. So we have four for working groups and one working group is working on how to implement the minimum standards for drug demand reductions in member states so they produced several surveys and reports on this issue. So we can find more information on on our website the civil society forum on drugs website, but it's a very good point and we think prevention is very important. Thanks, Peter thanks. And Juan Fernando says, there's currently multiple countries in the EU and its neighborhood considering very different legal regimes for the cultivation and use of cannabis. These include government initiatives in Luxembourg, Malta, North Macedonia and Spain by one of the coalition partners and pilots and pilot supply projects in the Netherlands and Switzerland. The question is, is the EU fostering any spaces for discussing and reflection between member states and neighbors to discuss the human rights potential of these initiatives. I'm happy to take a first go, but I'm not going to be able to answer the question, obviously, totally. I would just like I wanted to reply to the question already saying we have a lot of fora to discuss cannabis policies in the widest sense because of course as you know there is not just the let's call it illegal part of cannabis but there are loads of these products which are coming on and sold in across Europe in in shops and so on so there are loads of discussions. And we will certainly also address the issue of human rights and I think what the colleague has raised in this context about for example incarceration in some countries still for these minor issues and so on so there is plenty of discussion and we will definitely continue this and if I remember some of the meetings of the civil society forum on drugs, this was also there already discussed extensively, but I'm happy if the colleagues add to the more human rights dimension. Yeah, I mean, I can continue I mean I think within the civil society forum on drugs. There is some division in terms of the way forward on cannabis regulation in general. I'm going to respond in my personal capacity as IDPC so now that some models of legal regulation have been applied I think the main debate is not about whether or not to legally regulate it's about their countries now legally regulating cannabis and maybe other plants as well. So we're looking into the social justice issues related to legal regulation and also the human rights components of it. The social justice of gender equality so that's what we're trying to push for now to make sure that the legally regulated models that are applied response to these issues. So there are debates ongoing within civil society on the specific issues and I hope that we can continue the debates with the Commission as well and bring some of the findings that we have found in some of the examples of good and bad practice as well to inform that debate. Maybe I can add a few words on my side. We had the company does does not have a stand on the issue of regulating cannabis we just are following what is happening and of course, many things are happening. What we have been doing is that we have invited a representative of the Canadian government to have an exchange of views with the company group member states. It was supposed to take place in November last year but due to the health situation it was not possible to do it but it's forthcoming probably for October this year. Then I would like to say something else also on the issue of human rights and drug policies is that we have created an expert group, which is building self assessment indicators for member states. Again, analyze through this tool, how much the their drug policies are in line with their human rights obligations under the consular of conventions and not only the consular conventions but also UN human rights conventions because in the public group we have three countries which are not members of the consular which are not binded by the consular conventions Mexico, Israel and Morocco. And then I would like also to to raise another issue and draw your attention to something which is not directly linked but there is a link. It is the issue of drug consumption rooms. And we are organizing with the first of July, the second European seminar on drug consumption rooms which will bring together the countries and the cities which are hosting a drug consumption room in order to show it as a practice and maybe encourage other countries to use the same models which are existing already today in 10 European countries. This will happen on the first July in Strasbourg and the plan is to establish a network of European drug consumption rooms in order to share good practices and also as I say encourage other cities which are considering hosting such a room to set up such a drug consumption room. Thank you so much Dennis. I think we don't have more time. There are more questions so maybe I promise that I will send them to the speakers and maybe later on they can answer if they consider so. And okay to conclude on the start of the side event. Someone told me that there were 150 people on. So, I really want to thank all the participants to get engaged to these side events but also especially the speakers and the to be here with us for your transferring your knowledge of your expertise on this issues which are very, very complex. We all have to end of all this. I mean, it's for us a pressure to organize these kind of initiatives and we just wish you be safe. Please be safe. And let's see if next, the next commission on aquatic drugs we can meet in person. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Goodbye.