 Hello, good afternoon. We are sitting here at the Vienna International Center where the 60-verse first session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, the annual meeting of the United Nations on Drug Policies, is taking place and ten years ago in 2009 the United Nations adopted a political declaration and an action plan and according to this action plan drug use and drug trafficking should be significantly reduced or eliminated in ten years and this this action plan will expire next year So the the governments will have a high ministerial high-level ministerial meeting here in Vienna to discuss how to go forward and now governments actually are discussing how to assess the impacts of what has been done and how to evaluate global drug control policies and I have here Mari Nugie from the International Drug Policy Consortium and Stieger Exorheim from Norway from the Eurad Organization and we will discuss their views about where this process is leading us so my first question to you is How do you evaluate this this this process which is going on right now here at the CND like where we are now and What we can expect from the from the next year's high-level meeting Hi Peter hi everyone so So this is an interesting time now at the CND here because there's a lot of discussions around what the modality is for 2019 segment should be There is also a lot of controversial points one of them is about What should be the focus of the meeting should it be around the 2009 political declaration or should it be around the 2016 UNGAS So, you know the UNGAS was a key moment for drug policy in particular for people promoting drug policy reform But I think for every single civil society really in the field It gives more prominence to human rights. It gives more prominence to health to criminal justice reform and to development and so For many member states there they agree with us on this But many other more conservative member states do want to keep the focus on the 2009 political declaration and the sole objective of achieving a drug-free society So so the debates are around this so now the negotiations here at CND are around these modalities and what the debate is going to be about There's also a lot of discussions around what the evaluation is going to be about So for now, there's no mechanism around what the if the evaluation of the 2009 goals and targets are So we're I mean we're trying to work with member states on setting up a process that would be open and objective So these are bits like the the issues that we see so far, but I'll let Stigaric respond this lot Yeah We agree very much with the Maria here that the UNGAS document was a key step forward I Mean I know a lot of organization felt that it should have gone further I think it was as far as the international consensus could go and I think that what we're seeing is a slight reversal We heard from the floor today this morning a lot of the regional organization talking about the 2009 objectives Talking more about the 2009 document and about the UNGAS document Which I think is a pity because I think the you know for for one We spent a lot of time and resources into the UNGAS process and we wanted to make a better document We wanted to make a more updated document that was more in line with the challenges that we are facing and now we see sort of a Backpedaling from from a lot of organizations or not a lot of countries, which I think is is is a pity and I think for us as civil society actors, I think that you know we can support our Governments or Intergovernmental organizations like the EU in calling for a greater focus on on the UNGAS document than on the 2009 document so I think that that's Probably where the discussion or the the difficult discussions are going in the next couple of weeks and months and you know 2019 is not so far away. So, you know, it's yeah How do you see what are the main issues where the the opinion of governments is is not the same? So where you know where are there are diverse opinions? So where where are these opposing views? There are a few of these so the first one is around the death penalty and and more broadly on human rights so death penalty extrajudicial killings the overall approach of very strong prohibition without any regard for human rights basically and those that want to promote a much more humane Oriented approach. Yeah, so you see a lot of more conservative member states saying that the death penalty for drug offenses is a deterrent approach It works in their country and so they want to continue promoting this approach and they are very very strong on this So for example, the use of the death penalty was not included at the UNGAS Within the UNGAS outcome document, I mean because a lot of member states actually called for the abolition of the death penalty within the general debates so that's one of the Very difficult points of contention. The second one I guess would be around harm reduction So harm reduction remains a controversial topic in Vienna It has never been included in any of the CND resolutions since ever And some member states still go So more and more member states go in favor of harm reduction But there are still member states who just come up and say we are against harm reduction It doesn't work in our country or we don't need harm reduction in our country I think if you have drug use, you need harm reduction. That's as clear as this And the final topic is civil society. I mean where are still, you know There's still member states who do not want civil society in the room and they make it very clear and a lot of the Debates or side debates within the modalities for 2019 are around. What is the role of civil society? How is it going to be incorporated into the debates and and how are even affected populations and communities Gonna be incorporated into the debates and the and the final products of the UN. So I think these are for me the key kind of Issues, but I don't know if you have anything else No, I agree and I think that the the Ungas document even though it didn't mention harm reduction The term harm reduction it actually mentioned a lot of the key harm reduction interventions Which was you know a step in the right direction. I think for for that document There was also a semi-structured Organization of civil society involvement, so we want to see a continuation of that and of course, I mean The issue of the death penalty and human rights in general is is a key point And I think that one of the challenges is that this touches on Broader issues such as non interference in national affairs. So some countries are Very strong on this issue. They do not want international or intergovernmental organization to interfere in their internal affairs Even even though they might even be Agree with the with the issue they are on principle against interference So there there are some sort of macro political issues involved as well Yeah Okay, so So what we see is that the the United Nations is more and more divided on on on drug policy issues And what we see is actually that's why in some countries we have like extra judicial killings for for growing cannabis and trafficking of cannabis Other countries are actually making cannabis legal for for for even for recreational use so What is your organization's position on on on this debate about about cannabis policies because Some of some organizations are now urging governments to To actually revise cannabis policies some organizations would like to keep the status quo So can you please talk about the position of your your organizations on that? Yeah, I think that the the issue of cannabis is sort of challenging now for for the UN Because in the plenary there's no discussion about cannabis, you know in the within the consensus of the of the UN There's no discussion about legalization in cannabis, but at the same time things are happening on the ground and on the one hand you have States in the United States there are legal. I think not on the federal level, but on state level You have Uruguay and you have now Canada and starting to legalize and And this these developers are clearly by in violation of the conventions So I think that the big issue for for The UN system is how to deal with this because so far there's no There's no mechanism really to to to prevent this or to accept this I mean we we as a network support the the conventions and we don't want to see legalization of cannabis at least Until until we're forced to accept it But we want a public health oriented policy and we want a humane approach to cannabis and we want to see Sort of more sensible and not a war on drugs approach to the issue But we are following the the discussions in On the UN level and we were sort of curious sort of questioning what's happening because the IMC be the international narcotics control Board are clearly saying that this is in violation of the conventions and It doesn't seem to have any consequences and we've seen a lot of European countries have Experimented somewhat with their policies, but they've always been very clear to stay within the bounds of the come of the conventions so now that the This this consensus is fracturing, you know, you know This might have consequences also on the European side of the Atlantic I Totally agree with Stig Erich Sorry, I mean we're all clear cannabis legalization is against the treaties the treaties are clear about what is Prohibited and what is permitted within the conventions the the issue and as Stig Erich said It's it's that there is absolutely no mechanism here to have an honest discussion about the global states of drug control And member states do acknowledge that this is happening They need to discuss on the what this means in terms of the drug control treaties Most of the international drug control mechanisms have review mechanisms to reflect ongoing realities and to make sure that they're fit for purpose This doesn't exist for the UN drug control conventions and now we're in a Situation where member states just don't talk about it with the hope that it's not gonna happen Or that's just doesn't exist and we're far beyond that now So so I mean, you know within civil society We've been starting to talk about two elephants in the room The first one is cannabis legalization The second one is the death penalty and extra judicial killings and for some reason these are happening But no one really wants to talk about it. No one names any country. No one has any kind of incentive to reflect upon the fact that the drug control conventions really need a thorough review to make sure that these are acknowledged and addressed the fact that People vote in favor of cannabis regulation means that there is a need so if there is a need how can the international drug control system ignore it In terms of the human rights violations There is a need to acknowledge dues and make sure that they don't happen So so I think there is a fundamental problem with what is happening in the room here because these discussions are not happening And they should be So you are touching a very very very sensitive and crucial issue here like if we don't really you know Implement these conventions then they become insignificant actually and then the same can happen with like human rights Conventions so do you think that there is a real danger of that that you know that That the government will ignore the conventions and they will lose all significance and every government will do a drug policy Which they they want to do and and and is it a problem in your opinion or should we just leave governments to pursue a drug policy Which they want to pursue I Think this is this is a key issue because there is It sets a precedent that a country can can ignore Binding documents And you know there's there should be procedures to revise and to discuss and review stuff And there are and but in this in this case there It's it's not being taken advantage of it's just been that the changes have been carried out with regardless of these procedures and and I think it does set a risky precedence I don't want to sort of exaggerate it, but I think there is that there is this risk That if governments are a field that they are or see that they can do what they like Then the the effect of the global agreements are very limited Yeah, I agree with that I think the the fact that you would ignore the global drug conventions would or any other Convention really undermines international law and so that's why we need to find a way forward to make sure that International law remains where it is, but it needs to be fit for purpose so if it has to be reviewed then members they shouldn't shy away from from reviewing them and Even if it is difficult, I mean I think for the drug control treaties now I mean the way the discussions are going here in Vienna There is no more consensus. It's clear members states just do not agree on the way forward some member states want more repression some members states want to legalize and then there is a massive spectrum in the middle and Maybe it's time to acknowledge that this is a reality and that there may need to be other Conventions being signed on drug control that are either between like mind in countries or within regions which are more Close to the realities of people on the ground and better reflect what is currently needed But that requires leadership and strength. I guess I think I think that this what is very clear when you come to Vienna for a couple years You see that this is a very slow moving process and I think that you know for me The development up towards the Angus was it was glacial in its pace, but it was still a Shift towards something that's more progressive more up-to-date more fit for purpose So it's sort of discouraging to see that there is actually some countries are we really working to reverse some of this progress and I think that one of the tasks of civil civil society is to challenge and expand the discussion and I think that a lot of questions can't really be handled in the plenary you need to shift the The cons you need to shift the consensus you need to do sort of the very slow work of shifting the consensus by by Developing new ideas developing new themes on the margins and this is where I think that the civil society can play a role I think anybody who comes from a civil society organization Coming to a UN meeting and thinking that they can you know change something will be very disappointed very quickly But that doesn't that's not the same as saying that is it's it's a futile Yeah, sorry just on this because I I agree like things move slowly here. I mean, it's my ninth CND. It's a bit scary I mean you've gone too many or more, but yeah, I think Things change slowly and but they change and I remember in my first CND in 2010 I think two people mentioned harm reduction and one person mentioned human rights, you know now we go here and It's almost the norm to mention human rights, you know And it's it's the norm to mention public health and to mention the needs of communities and there is such a vibrant Group of civil society coming to CND now and you know, we've done a lot of progress and that's been reflected at the unguess I mean the unguess debates were amazing the roundtables The fact that we moved away from the three pillars of the UN which were demand reduction supply reduction international cooperation Now we talk about health we talk about human rights. We talk about development. We talk about security whatever all of that stuff gender Youth, you know, all of that stuff that was just not mentioned before so we make progress, but I think it's the consensus is more and more difficult to achieve and it's It's getting tricky and I think 2019 will be Another moment where we'll see that get reaching consensus on drug control is becoming more and more difficult So people who are watching us now probably at home. They have Several problems huge problems such as like the opiate crisis in America with a lot of people dying in overdoses or People are killed in the Philippines in the name of the Voron drugs New psychoactive substances are coming to the to the markets of European countries So Is is this meeting can this meeting contribute to solving these problems in individual countries? Can you explain people like how this meeting is contributing to that like what kind of decisions are made made here? Is there any input given to to to those topics and what would you like to highlight from the discussions coming going on here? Well, I mean we always need to remind people that most of drug policy is shaped on the national level and The within the conventions the countries have quite Quite a large degree of freedom to shape their policies I mean that the the most repressive regimes and the most liberal regimes are still within the bounds of that of the Conventions, so, you know, we shot you shouldn't always blame the UN For for the failures of the national governments But I think there are some issues that are touched on I think that the the issue of human rights violations is difficult because the member countries are very protective of their own national policies, so But I think this is again and a reminder for the Philippines that what they're doing is unacceptable It's a reminder for the countries that still have the death penalties that they actually have to go get up there and and defend their their policies But on the more practical level you talk about overdoses fentanyl One of the the resolutions that are discussing today or not today this week is about the control of fentanyl So this is sort of a practical way that the governments or this the member states collaborate on on restricting access to To these substances, so there are some some some practical or more more practical aspects of this Where they actually agree on some some procedures some rules Some common guidelines and that's one example Yeah, so The resolution so every year the C&D adopts a series of resolutions So Cigaric mentioned the one on on fentanyl and opioids synthetic opioids. I think that's where it's framed So these aim to guide governments on their national policies for the year the years ahead so There are a few resolutions that are of interest to the fentanyl one is one of them the opioids One Unfortunately for now it doesn't include much on health It's a very focused on law enforcement And so we're working really hard with member states to make sure that they can rebalance that Resolution to make sure that yeah, there is a component on law enforcement, but most of it is health We see it in the US. We see it in Canada the way you need to trust these issues is with harm reduction treatment services, right? Then there's another resolution that's really interesting this year That's presented by Canada and it's around reducing or addressing stigma in access to health care settings and and that's really important because there's just so much stigma around the world on drug use and People it's it's a massive deterrent on accessing services and on making sure that people get the need that they need that that they Yeah, you know get the need that they require and Yeah, so I think C&D is good for this because it we can put some good wording in there And make sure that the resolutions guide member states in the right direction But then in the plenary session, I know that the plenary can be very inaccessible and it can also be very dry But it's also a possibility for member states to condemn some of the things that are not acceptable So for example the EU this morning, I mean, I don't know if you guys listen to it I think you filmed it, but it was very strong against Extraditial killings and very strongly against the death penalty and very you know strong in favor of a health approach of a humane approach towards drugs So yeah, I mean, I think these are good opportunities and then there are side events I went to an amazing side event today that was organized by Amnesty International And which showed the human face of the war on drugs and human rights defenders who are trying to make sure that They are protected for the work that they do and they are they are a constant target of Governments so people on the ground suffer from human rights violations But people who try to protect them are also victims of these human rights violations Yeah, so so I think there's something we need to keep in mind that we may need to make sure that the people Who are affected by drug policies come to C&D and share the story with the delegates and with other civil society there So that's another opportunity to kind of make sure that that voice is heard Just to conclude our discussions. I would like to Say that Actually, that's a real pity that the governments would not like or many governments would not like to involve civil society in this decision making process Because what we see is actually that civil society can come to an agreement much easier I mean we are working together in in like many forums as civil society organizations and even we have very You know divers the ideological background and different perspectives But what we can have a real dialogue about these things and that that's really missing from from the sometimes from the discussions in the Or among the governments. So thank you very much for accepting our invitation and thank you for your very variable thoughts and Thank you