The Street Lawyers provide free legal aid services, as part of an integrated low-threshold outreach harm reduction initiative, to people who use drugs, homeless people and street-based sex workers in Denmark.

Street Lawyers (Abogados de la Calle) ofrecen apoyo legal gratuito, como parte de una iniciativa de reducción integral de daños proveedora de servicios de fácil acceso para las personas que usa drogas, personas vagabundas y trabajadoras del sexo de la calle en Dinamarca.

Street Lawyers (les Avocats des Rues) offrent des services d'assistance juridique gratuits au Danemark, dans le cadre d'une approche intégrée à bas seuil visant à sensibiliser les usagers de drogues, les SDF et les travailleurs du sexe sur la réduction des risques.

Gadejuristen (The Street Lawyers)

Preocupa a expertos de la sociedad civil que la nueva Agenda y Plan de Acción den la espalda al “enfoque equilibrado” de la UE sobre políticas referidas a drogas. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

The following letter was drafted by a coalition of 29 civil society organisations and community networks in the European Union. The letter urges the German Presidency to propose to the EU Horizontal Working Party on Drugs (HDG) that the current draft EU Agenda and Action Plan on Drugs 2021-2025 be rejected, and measures are taken to ensure an appropriate and inclusive strategic development process for the next EU drugs strategy.

We are writing regarding the proposed EU Agenda and Action Plan on Drugs 2021-2025, published by the European Commission on 24 July 2020 (the “2021-25 EU Drugs Agenda”, or the “Agenda”). We have serious concerns regarding both the process for its development as well as with the substance of the document and urge the German Presidency to propose to the EU Horizontal Working Party on Drugs (HDG) that this draft cannot be accepted, and to outline an appropriate and inclusive strategic development process for the next EU drugs strategy.

The formulation of the 2021-25 EU Drugs Agenda through a unilateral Communication of the European Commission without consultation with EU Member States and other relevant EU actors, including civil society is deeply problematic. If the HDG accepts this document as it stands, a worrying procedural precedent will be set. To date, the ‘EU’s drugs strategies and action plans are developed through a rigorous process that allows Member States to work together on the development of strategic approaches. This involves a series of negotiations, evaluations and compromises so that consensus can be reached in the form of a new strategy document.’ The 2021-25 EU Drugs Agenda appears to be the result of a hasty, opaque and non-participatory policy-making process, and represents a drastic departure from agreed EU policies. The lack of appropriate consultation and engagement inevitably means that the different experiences and views of EU Member States and other relevant EU actors have less weight in the new document. It fails to adopt a balanced, integrated, and multidisciplinary approach to drug matters; it is not rooted on human rights, public health, and the key international drug policy documents; and it envisages a diminished role for civil society and affected communities.

The European Union has been a global leader in advancing a balanced, integrated, and multidisciplinary approach to drug policies. The 2005 and 2013 EU Drugs Strategies established a consolidated framework that has become a ‘central guiding model’ for national-level drug strategies across the EU. However, the 2021-25 EU Drugs Agenda proposes -in its own words- a ‘paradigm-shift’. It disproportionately focuses EU policy on law enforcement and supply control, to the detriment of the priority previously given to public health, human rights, international cooperation, and scientific research and evaluation. If implemented, it will signal a diminished support for evidence-based drug treatment and harm reduction services, and it will weaken the voice of the EU in international drugs fora, where it has been a key global actor in defending the balanced, rights-based approach adopted by the 2016 UNGASS Outcome Document.

In spite of the EU’s commitment to seek the ‘active and meaningful participation and involvement of civil society’ in the ‘development and implementation of drug policies’, the participation of civil society in the preparation of the 2021-25 Drugs Agenda has been deeply flawed. European NGOs were only allowed to provide input to the Agenda with the publication of the Road Map, on 10 June 2020, with no other opportunity to feed in the process, besides a call between the Commission and certain CSFD members in April. It should be borne in mind that the Road Map is a document of just over two pages that does not allow for a genuine understanding of, or feedback on, the Agenda. No draft of the Agenda was ever shared.

Furthermore, the European Commission disregarded the overwhelming majority of the 27 submissions sent by European NGOs, which urged the EU to retain the balanced and multidisciplinary approach that characterized the 2005 and 2013 EU Drugs Strategies. The fact that the deadline for submitting feedback was 15 July 2020, a mere nine days before the publication of the Communication, suggests that the consultation was not undertaken in the spirit of genuine inquiry, and that the Agenda was at least near completion when the Road Map was published.

Crucially, although the external evaluation of the 2013 EU Drugs Strategy was finalised in April 2020, the evaluation was not published or otherwise shared with civil society until three months later, on 24 July 2020, thus depriving stakeholders of crucial information when providing feedback to the Road Map. This is important, as there would appear to be a significant disconnect between the Agenda and the external evaluation. For instance, the evaluation consistently found that the 2013 Strategy had ‘sparked a considerable amount of progress’ in the cross-cutting areas of coordination, international cooperation, and monitoring, research and evaluation, which are precisely the areas now removed from the Agenda.

In addition to the grave concerns regarding the process and procedure, we felt it is important to bring your attention the key flaws in the draft Agenda:

. Although the Agenda explicitly claims to seek an ‘integrated, balanced, and multidisciplinary approach’ to drug policies, the draft is not balanced, as over half of its eight priority areas concern security and supply control interventions, with the rest distributed between prisons, prevention, treatment, and harm reduction. Public health measures aimed at reducing the harms that can be associated to drug use have been relegated from the first priority of the 2013 Drugs Strategy to the end of the new Agenda. The cross-cutting themes of coordination, international cooperation, and information and research, which have been successfully developed since 2013 to materialise the multidisciplinary and integrated approach, have been dropped. The many references to the balanced approach across the operative parts of the 2013 Strategy, for instance as the basis for increased coordination across all actors, interventions at the CND, and international cooperation, have also disappeared.

Deprioritising human rights and public health.

 Human rights have practically disappeared from the draft Agenda, which contains no reference to the relevant international or regional human rights instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Furthermore, there is no mention of the International Guidelines on Human Rights and Drug Policy, a critical document developed with the leading support of Germany that lays down, for the first time, a set of clear and comprehensive international standards for articulating rights-based responses to illegal drug economies. In contrast, the 2013 EU Drugs Strategy explicitly referred to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights, amongst others, and human rights were mentioned several times in the section on international cooperation. Public health has been relegated from the first policy field in the 2013 Strategy to the last priority areas of the Agenda, and has been replaced by ‘drug-related security’ as the first goal of the document.

Dropping support for key international documents.

 Equally surprising is the little attention paid to the 2016 UNGASS Outcome Document - only a footnote in the preambular part of the Agenda, and a mention in the Action Plan, outside its priority areas -, even though it has been consistently described by the EU as ‘the most comprehensive policy agreement of the international community and a milestone in the discussions on international drug policy’. It is also inexplicable that the Agenda would completely fail to reference the 2018 UN System Common Position on Drugs, a watershed document championed by the EU and EU Member States, as it establishes for the first time a coherent position across all UN entities on key topics like decriminalisation and harm reduction.

Reducing the space for civil society and people who use drugs.

 Whereas the 2013 EU Drugs Strategy contained a commitment to promote and encourage ‘the active and meaningful participation and involvement of civil society’, the EU Drugs Agenda only mentions ‘engagement’ with the CSFD. Involvement with civil society beyond the CSFD has been omitted, and there is no reference to engaging with people who use drugs and clients of drug services, which the 2013 Strategy did.

Weakening the external dimensions of drug policy.

 The 2021-25 Drugs Agenda risks weakening the external action of the EU in bilateral and multilateral drugs fora, as it does not set clear guidelines for EU coordinated intervention, and it does not provide strong support for the key international documents that the EU has been forcefully defending and promoting in the last years. For instance, the Agenda does not provide any concrete principle or guideline for intervening at the CND, even though it is arguably the centre of the international drug control system, and the role of the EU there is more important than ever. This contrasts greatly with the 2013 Drugs Strategy, which committed the EU to a ‘strong voice’ in the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, with the aim of promoting the balanced approach. Another case in point is the only reference to alternative development in the whole Agenda, which can be found under the heading ‘dismantling drug production’, and is not deemed to warrant even one of the 24 priority areas set in the document. This is especially surprising considering that the 2018 Council Conclusions adopted exclusively on this topic committed the EU to a ‘leading role (…) in the funding and implementation of alternative development’, and stated clearly that the success of alternative development goes ‘beyond an exclusive focus on illicit drug crop monitoring’.

 In spite of the EU’s leading role in fostering scientific knowledge and research on drug markets and drug use through the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), the 2021-25 EU Drugs Agenda has dropped the cross-cutting theme on monitoring, research and evaluation, and science-based drug policies are scarcely mentioned in the operative parts of the document. Again, this makes a striking contrast with the 2013 Drugs Strategy, which featured a whole theme on research and evaluation for ‘a better understanding of all aspects of the drug phenomenon’, and provided a role for the EMCDDA in supply reduction, international cooperation, and the overall implementation of the document, among others.

 Although the 2021-25 Drugs Agenda explicitly seeks to reduce drug-related stigma, the European Commission press release accompanying the publication of the proposed Agenda was deeply stigmatising, as it puts drug policies at the same level as child abuse and firearms trafficking. Furthermore, the Agenda contains some instances of stigmatising language (‘substance abuse’ and ‘substance misuse’) that did not exist in the 2013 Drugs Strategy.

In light of the above and following established practices for the development of previous EU drugs strategies, we urge you, as the Council Presidency, to take political leadership and encourage the HDG to reject the draft proposed by the European Commission. A new process for strategy development should ensure that the new document reflects in a balanced manner the existing EU and the latest international commitments (in particular the 2016 UNGASS Outcome Document), the views of the EU Member States and all the relevant actors within the EU institutions, and engages meaningfully with civil society.

We would also be grateful if you could share this letter with your HDG colleagues before the 9 September meeting.
We remain at your disposal for any further discussion on this matter, and look forward to our continued cooperation on this and other topics during the German Presidency.

TThe following letter was drafted by a coalition of 29 civil society organisations and community networks in the European Union. The letter urges the German Presidency to propose to the EU Horizontal Working Party on Drugs (HDG) that the current draft EU Agenda and Action Plan on Drugs 2021-2025 be rejected, and measures are taken to ensure an appropriate and inclusive strategic development process for the next EU drugs strategy.

he following letter was drafted by a coalition of 29 civil society organisations and community networks in the European Union. The letter urges the German Presidency to propose to the EU Horizontal Working Party on Drugs (HDG) that the current draft EU Agenda and Action Plan on Drugs 2021-2025 be rejected, and measures are taken to ensure an appropriate and inclusive strategic development process for the next EU drugs strategy.

Expertos en políticas sobre drogas plantean inquietudes sobre borrador de la Agenda y Plan de Acción sobre Drogas de la UE para el período 2021-2025 – Carta Abierta 

La retirada de la moratoria sobre la pena de muerte, que lleva 43 años vigente en el país, constituiría un revés importante para los derechos humanos. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

LONDON [27 JUNE 2019] – Harm Reduction International and almost 120 human rights organisations from around the world – including Amnesty International and the International Commission of Jurists – published open letters today calling on the United Nations’ major drug control bodies to intervene and help stop Sri Lanka’s move to resume executions after 43 years.

President Maithripala Sirisena signed the execution warrants this week for four people convicted of drug-related offences.

The letters – sent to the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) and UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) – underscore that the death penalty for drug offences violates international human rights law. The signatories state that “Remaining silent as Sri Lanka puts an end to a 43-year de facto moratorium on executions would strike a blow to the INCB’s and UNODC’s commitments to human rights compliance as a core principle of international drug policy.”

Giada Girelli, human rights analyst at Harm Reduction International, said: “There is simply no evidence that the death penalty is an effective deterrent against the drug trade. President Sirisena’s move is a gross violation of human rights – UN bodies must urge authorities in Sri Lanka to reverse this and work to consign the death penalty to the history books.”

Harm Reduction International’s latest research shows that global executions for drug offences fell by almost 90% from 2015-18, in large part because of judicial reforms in Iran. Of the 35 countries that retain the death penalty for drug offences, only four carried out executions in 2018 (China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Singapore).

Más de 100 grupos de derechos humanos exhortan a la ONU a que exija a Sri Lanka que ponga fin a las ejecuciones de personas por delitos relacionados con las drogas

Más de 200 organizaciones sociales de todo el mundo han emitido una declaración denunciando la falta de reconocimiento por parte de los gobiernos de las devastadoras consecuencias de las políticas punitivas de drogas en la preparación de la cumbre sobre el tema que Naciones Unidas realizará el mes próximo.

En abril de 2016, los líderes mundiales se reunirán en Nueva York para decidir sobre el futuro de la política de drogas a nivel global, en la primera Sesión Especial de la Asamblea General (UNGASS) de la ONU sobre el tema en dos décadas. El Secretario General de la ONU, Ban Ki-moon hizo un llamado para que la reunión fuese “un debate amplio y abierto que considere todas las opciones”. Sin embargo, conforme los preparativos avanzan esta semana en Viena en la reunión anual de la Comisión de Estupefacientes (CND), está cada vez más claro que esta oportunidad única para repensar la fracasada “guerra contra las drogas” probablemente no dará los resultados esperados.

Suscríbase a las Alertas mensuales del IDPC para recibir información sobre cuestiones relacionadas con políticas sobre drogas.

Declaración de la sociedad civil - El documento final de la UNGASS: ¿diplomacia o negacionismo?

El primer centro público de inyección más segura de Dinamarca abrió las puertas el pasado 2 de octubre en Copenhague, con 7 cabinas de inyección. Puede que se creen otros dos centros en Odense y Aarhus. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

The first public sanctioned safer injecting facility in Denmark opened in Copenhagen on the 2ndof October with 7 injection booths. At least one more such facility, which will have booths both for injecting and for crack and heroin smoking, is on its way, although this other facility will not be ready to open until August 2013. Two more facilities might also open in Odense and Aarhus.

A few days later this month, the opposition party in Denmark proposed establishing a crisis centre for people who use drugs and need medication and other services urgently (inspired by “Onsite” in Vancouver). The government has declared its willingness to discuss this proposal.

Finally, a week ago the Minister of Health declared that the Danish government now supports and will fund a Naloxone programme, which will be starting at the beginning of 2013.

These are highly positive developments in terms of development, political endorsement and financial support for evidence-based harm reduction services in Denmark.

Keep up-to-date with drug policy developments by subscribing to the IDPC Monthly Alert.

Novedades de políticas de drogas en Dinamarca: la reducción de daños gana terreno

El Parlamento danés votó a favor de legalizar el funcionamiento de salas de consumo de drogas bajo supervisión especializada. Más información, en inglés, está disponible abajo.

___________________________________________________________________________

The Danish parliament has voted in favour of legalising the operation of supervised consumption rooms.

A majority of Danish MPs have voted in favour of a bill that makes it legal to consume controlled drugs within supervised facilities that the law classifies as “safe drug consumption rooms”. Denmark is the first country to have passed legislation to regulate the operation of such facilities. The decision was supported by 63 MPs, with 43 voting against and one MP abstaining. These safe drug consumption rooms are not only open for drug injectors but allow other forms of use as well, such as smoking, which is less risky than injection.

According to harm reduction activists, consumption rooms have never been illegal in Denmark. “In a constitutional state, what is not specifically illegal, is simply legal,” said Nanna Gotfredsen, the head of Street Lawyers (join them on Facebook!), an NGO which has been advocating for safe consumption rooms for several years. However, the new law puts an ends to any debate as to the legality of such facilities, which will be able to operate with governmental support from 1st July, when the law comes into effect.

Watch the HCLU's 2009 movie about the Street Lawyers of Coppenhagen:

Gadejuristen (The Street Lawyers)

Región

Traducciones

Contenido relacionado

Expertos en políticas sobre drogas plantean inquietudes sobre borrador de la Agenda y Plan de Acción sobre Drogas de la UE para el período 2021-2025 – Carta Abierta

Más de 100 grupos de derechos humanos exhortan a la ONU a que exija a Sri Lanka que ponga fin a las ejecuciones de personas por delitos relacionados con las drogas

Declaración de la sociedad civil - El documento final de la UNGASS: ¿diplomacia o negacionismo?

Novedades de políticas de drogas en Dinamarca: la reducción de daños gana terreno

Dinamarca legaliza las salas de consumo de drogas bajo supervisión