Data from the Mortality After Release from Incarceration Consortium (MARIC) study recorded 75 427 deaths. The all-cause crude mortality rates (CMR) during the first week following release (1612 [95% CI 1048–2287]) was higher than during all other time periods (incidence rate ratio [IRR] compared with week 2: 1·5 [95% CI 1·2–1·8], 

2=26·0%, weeks 3–4: 2·0 [1·5–2·6], 

2=53·0%, and weeks 9–12: 2·2 [1·6–3·0], 

The highest cause-specific mortality rates during the first week were due to alcohol and other drug poisoning (CMR 657 [95% CI 332–1076]), suicide (135 [36–277]), and cardiovascular disease (71 [16–153]). We observed considerable variation in cause-specific CMRs over time since release and across regions. Pooled all-cause CMRs were similar between males (731 [95% CI 630–839]) and females (660 [560–767]) and were higher in older age groups.

The markedly elevated rate of death in the first week post-release underscores an urgent need for investment in evidence-based, coordinated transitional healthcare, including treatment for mental illness and substance use disorders to prevent post-release deaths due to suicide and overdose. Temporal variations in rates and causes of death highlight the need for routine monitoring of post-release mortality.

 to read the full article (restricted access)

Rates and causes of death after release from incarceration among 1 471 526 people in eight high-income and middle-income countries: an individual participant data meta-analysis

Abuja, Nigeria: The West Africa Drug Policy Network (WADPN) is calling on the Nigerian Senate to drop the death penalty for drug-related offences and review the fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence for drug use.

Nigeria's Senate in May 2024, proposed significantly toughening penalties for drug trafficking, making the death penalty the new maximum sentence through a law amendment. The amendment, which is not yet law, replaces life imprisonment that is previously the harshest punishment.

WADPN is concerned that the Nigerian Senate is introducing the death penalty for drug-related offences. Contrarily, this coincides with a significant global campaign against the death penalty and all forms of punishment for personal drug use and possession.

WADPN urges Nigerian senate to reconsider death penalty for drug offences

The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) has re-elected Professor Jallal Toufiq as its President at its 140th session.

INCB commenced its 140th session on 20 May with a meeting of its Standing Committee on Estimates, which reviewed estimated requirements for controlled substances for medical, scientific and industrial purposes as submitted by governments.

On 22 May, the Board re-elected Professor Jallal Toufiq as its President and elected a new Bureau for a one-year term

International Narcotics Control Board re-elects President and elects new officers

This year’s meeting of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna marked a significant shift in policy when it agreed to focus on drug use as a public health issue that required an approach of harm reduction. This stance moves from the criminalization of drug use and brings the commission in line with the approach of the UN General Assembly, the World Health Organization, UNAIDS and the UN Office of Human Rights, all of which revised their policies a decade or more ago.

The annual meeting of the CND, as it’s known, helps set the direction of drug policy for UN member states, and in previous years it reflected the position of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, its parent entity. The focus was on suppressing the use of drugs and policing, which has not been successful, and I’ve been advocating for more than two decades for an evidence-based approach to address drug production and use.

The CND reached this new policy partly by discarding its past agreement that all its decisions need to be reached by consensus (the so-called “Vienna spirit”) and held votes on the resolutions for the first time. This allowed the shift to a harm-reduction policy, a term that was excluded from resolutions because of opposition from the handful of countries committed to the criminal justice approach.

Charting a new global course for dealing with illicit drug use

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency announced in late April 2024 that it plans to ease federal restrictions on cannabis, reclassifying it from a Schedule I drug to the less restricted Schedule III, which includes drugs such as Tylenol with codeine, testosterone and other anabolic steroids. This historic shift signals an acknowledgment of the promising medicinal value of cannabis.

The move comes in tandem with growing interest in the use of psilocybin, the active component in magic mushrooms, for treatment of depression, chronic pain and other conditions. In 2018 and 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted a breakthrough therapy designation to psilocybin, meant to expedite drug development given that preliminary studies suggest it may have substantial therapeutic value over currently available therapies for treatment-resistant depression and major depressive disorder.

Both of these developments represent a dramatic change from long-standing federal policy around these substances that has historically criminalized their use and blocked or delayed research efforts into their therapeutic potential.

How cannabis and psilocybin might help some of the 50 million Americans who are experiencing chronic pain

Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin may mean well in attempting to re-list cannabis as a narcotic, but his aim only attests to his mediocre knowledge about the plant and the dilemma facing the country. 

Cannabis was decriminalised in 2022 by the Prayut Chan-o-cha administration. The liberalisation of the plant was the flagship election policy of Bhumjaithai, a coalition party, ahead of the 2019 polls.

Thailand has come far regarding its cannabis policy, and there is no point in reversing it. Mr Srettha should keep the right focus and, instead of over-reacting, recognise the main problem of cannabis in this country: its unregulated usage.


Mr Srettha should keep his promise of listening to all sides, and not rush to recriminalise the plant, but instead support laws that will control its usage.


Thailand: Control weed, don't kill it

Politicians and much of the media have been lying and whipping up a moral panic. And now, decriminalization in British Columbia is all but dead. In this episode, Garth talks with Crackdown senior producer Sam Fenn and VANDU organizer Hannah Dempsey to bring you the straight goods on why drugs have been re-criminalized and what the grim implications of this move are.

Recriminalization - Episode 45 - Crackdown Podcast

A newly formed Harm Reduction Coalition Aotearoa (HRCA) from New Zealand launched with an initial action of sending an open letter to the Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, signed by national and international organisations as well as drug policy specialists calling for the legal regulation of all drugs. Launching on International Harm Reduction Day (7 May), HRCA was established to end harmful prohibitionist drug policies that are maintained through the nation’s Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, and replace it with “fit-for-purpose” drug laws that are grounded in evidence, harm reduction and human rights.

New coalition calls for drug legalisation in Aotearoa/New Zealand

Decriminalisation is based on the argument that the war on drugs has failed - that arresting people with severe addiction and seizing their drugs could increase their likelihood of overdose by forcing them to find other drugs that may be lethal. A criminal record may also bar them from finding a stable job, reducing the chance of recovery.

"I got thrown in jail for nine months for a half a gram of cocaine," said Guy Felicella, a Vancouver-based advocate for drug harm reduction and recovery, who recovered from drug addiction after overdosing six times in 2013.

Decriminalisation, he said, would have helped reduce his fear of being legally punished - a fear that forced him and others to use in private, out of view from someone who could call for help if they overdosed.

Portugal, where drugs were decriminalised in 2001, has drug death rates 

that are significantly lower than other countries.,

Its success inspired efforts in both BC and in the US state of Oregon, which decriminalised drugs in 2020.

But in all three places, the policy has faced pushback, and in Oregon, lawmakers voted in March to reverse it altogether after it was blamed for a rise in public disorder and drug use.

In BC, which has a history of harm reduction advocacy, the government's push to revise its decriminalisation policy was challenged in court over concerns it would lead to an "increased risk of overdose fatality".

For Mayor West, the courts are "out of touch with where the public is".

"This focus on 'irreparable harm' to a certain group ignores the harm that occurs to others by allowing rampant public drug use," he said.

But these sentiments have been countered by supporters of decriminalisation, like the province's outgoing chief coroner, who has said there is no evidence that suggests the general public is at risk from public drug use.

In Vancouver's Downtown Eastside, a historic neighbourhood that has long grappled with social issues like poverty and drug use, advocates have accused politicians of sowing "moral panic".

"Scapegoating and vilifying people who use drugs has [historically] been a real good vote-getter," said Garth Mullins, a member of the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users.

Success or failure? Canada's drug decriminalisation test faces scrutiny

Decriminalization is the removal of criminal sanctions for the use or possession of drugs. Specifically, B.C. allows the possession of up to 2.5 grams in total of any of the following drugs: opioids (heroin, morphine, fentanyl); crack and powder cocaine; methamphetamine; and MDMA (ecstasy). Oregon allowed drug users to possess up to one gram of certain drugs such as heroin, cocaine or meth, or up to 40 oxycodone pills. And they could still be fined $100.

That’s it. That’s all. It’s not a free-for-all.

Decriminalization of drugs does not mean drug users are exempt from all other bylaws and laws. They have rights, but they have responsibilities too, like other citizens.

Decriminalization doesn’t mean people can sell, buy and use drugs openly wherever and whenever they please. Firing up a crack pipe in a park, playground or a bus is not okay.

The law doesn’t mean drug users can camp on city streets, in parks, in merchants’ doorways or any place they choose. Drug users can’t defecate or urinate openly, or shoplift with impunity.

Decriminalization doesn’t mean we turn a blind eye to people being assaulted or threatened.

The crime and public disorder that has become all too common on city streets is unacceptable, and the public is right to be angry and demand action.

But recriminalising drug use and possession is not going to make any of those challenges disappear.

Drug decriminalisation is not to blame for all of our social woes

ISLAMABAD: Speakers at a conference organised by the Justice Project of Pakistan urged the government to introduce a drug policy that focuses on harm reduction, education, and medication to prevent deaths due to overdose and incentivise rehabilitation for substance use disorders.

Speaking at a plenary session ‘Effective Health and Harm Reduction Responses to Drug Use’, Syed Zulfiqar Hussain, a narcotics policy campaigner, said there were almost 6.7 million drug users in Pakistan and the country did not have an effective “harm reduction treatment” policy. In Lahore alone, there were over 7,000 homeless drug users with as many as 120 “hotspots”.

“There is no specialised treatment centre for women with drug dependence in Pakistan. People who use drugs deserve dignity, respect, and stigma-free care,” said Mr Hussain.

Amir Munir, additional district and sessions judge, said there was a need to develop a consensus regarding drug policy, particularly its legal aspect which treated substance users as pariahs.

Pakistan: Drug policy needs to focus on ‘harm reduction’ for effective response

MANILA - Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr said on April 15 he would not hand his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte to the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is investigating his deadly drug war.

Thousands of people have been killed in an anti-narcotics campaign started by former president Duterte in 2016 and continued under Mr Marcos.

Asked on April 15 if he would hand Mr Duterte – who has accused him of being a drug addict and criticised his policies – to the ICC if it issued a warrant for his arrest, Mr Marcos said no.

“We don’t recognise the warrant that they will send to us. That’s a no,” he said at a forum with the Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines.

“We are well within international law when we take the position of not recognising the jurisdiction of the ICC in the Philippines,” Mr Marcos said.

Mr Duterte withdrew the Philippines from the ICC in 2019 after the Hague-based tribunal started probing allegations of human rights abuses committed during his drug war.

The ICC launched a formal inquiry into Mr Duterte’s crackdown in September 2021, only to suspend it two months later after Manila said it was re-examining several hundred cases of drug operations that led to deaths at the hands of police, hitmen and vigilantes.

News

Rates and causes of death after release from incarceration among 1 471 526 people in eight high-income and middle-income countries: an individual participant data meta-analysis