Khadeija Mahgoub, Article 33 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child: The Journey from Drafting History to the Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Human Rights and Drugs, Vol.2, No.I, 2012

ABSTRACT

Article 33 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is an important international legal instrument that obligates States Parties to protect children and youth from involvement with illicit drugs and the drug trade. This article provides an analysis of the drafting history of article 33 to the evolving interpretations of its terms in the Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child. It reveals a clear connection to the right to health as well as a dynamic interpretation of the article by the Committee. To improve the Committee’s Concluding Observations moving forward, a General Comment on the article is recommended.

Download full article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License

Alex Stevens, The ethics and effectiveness of coerced treatment of people who use drugs, Human Rights and Drugs, Vol.2, No.I, 2012

ABSTRACT

In the context of international debates about ways to reduce the harms related to the use of illicit drugs and their control, this article explores the specific issue of coerced treatment of people who use drugs. It uses established standards of human rights and medical ethics to judge whether it is ethical to apply either of two types of coerced treatment (compulsory treatment and quasi-compulsory treatment,or QCT) to any of three groups of drug users (non-problematic users, dependent drug users and drug dependent offenders). It argues that compulsory treatment is not ethical for any group, as it breaches the standard of informed consent. Quasi-compulsory treatment (i.e. treatment that is offered as an alternative to a punishment that is itself ethically justified) may be ethical (under specified conditions) for drug dependent offenders who are facing a more restrictive penal sanction, but is not ethical for other people who use drugs. The article also briefly reviews evidence which suggests that QCT may be as effective as voluntary treatment.

Download full article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License

Parallel Universes: Human Rights and International Drug Control

This video produced by the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union highlights the human rights violations done against people all over the world as a result of the current international drug control system. The activists and researchers interviewed here recount the litany of abuses done in the name of drug control: torture, corporal punishment, overcrowding in prisons, death penalty for drug offences, denial of palliative care and HIV/AIDS treatment, among others.

As explained by the producers, the words of Paul Hunt, former UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health (2002-2008), at the 2008 Harm Reduction Conference are more valid than ever. The international drug control seems to be operating in a parallel universe from human rights law and it is the most vulnerable people who pay the price for this.

Click here to read Human Rights, Health and Harm Reduction: States’ amnesia and parallel universes, by Prof. Paul Hunt, member of the International Advisory Committee of the International Centre on Human Rights and Drug Policy.

Follow us on twitter @ICHRDP

New book on Convention of the Rights of the Child and Narcotic Drugs

A Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 33: Protection from Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

By Damon Barrett and Philip E. Veerman

This volume constitutes a commentary on Article 33 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is part of the series, A Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which provides an article by article analysis of all substantive, organizational and procedural provisions of the CRC and its two Optional Protocols. For every article, a comparison with related human rights provisions is made, followed by an in-depth exploration of the nature and scope of State obligations deriving from that article. The series constitutes an essential tool for actors in the field of children’s rights, including academics, students, judges, grassroots workers, governmental, non- governmental and international officers. The series is sponsored by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office.

Biographical note

Damon Barrett is Senior Human Rights Analyst with London-based Harm Reduction International and cofounder of the International Centre on Human Rights and Drug Policy. He is an editor-in-chief of the International Journal on Human Rights and Drug Policy, and editor of Children of the Drug War: Perspectives on the Impact of Drug Policies on Young People (IDEA, iDebate Press, New York and Amsterdam, 2011).

Philip E. Veerman is a psychologist at Bouman mental health services in Rotterdam, where he is responsible for the professional training programme for health psychologists. He is an independent expert of the courts in the Netherlands.

To find out more, go to the website of Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Narcotics Watchdog Turns Blind Eye to Rights Abuses

Patrick Gallahue’s most recent op-ed presents a strong argument against the reluctance of the International Narcotics Control Board to condemn the human rights violations done in the name of drug control.

The INCB, a quasi-judicial monitoring mechanism known and ‘guardian’ of the international drug control treaties, has remained silent about the imposition of forced labor at compulsory drug detention centres, despite the condemnation of twelve UN agencies this month. It has also refused to comment on the death penalty for drug offenders, arguing that it was beyond the mandate of the INCB and ’such sanctions were the “exclusive prerogative” of States.’

Read here Patrick Gallahue’s full analysis on the arguments by the INCB and how they contradict international human rights law.

‘Harm Reduction and Human Rights’, D. Barrett and P. Gallahue, Interights Bulletin, Winter 2011.

Human Rights and Abuses to Health Care, Interights Bulletin, Winter 2011, Volume 16, Number 4.

Harm Reduction and Human Rights

Abstract

‘Harm reduction’ is a phrase that may be unfamiliar to many in the human rights field despite the fact that its ethos and way of working is very close to it. Based on pragmatism, evidence, and compassion, harm reduction has been often misunderstood, side-lined, and isolated from human rights discourse. This paper shows how harm reduction has made important strides in human rights bodies of the United Nations. However, its application is critically absent anti-narcotics policy despite evidence of grave human rights violations done in the name of the “war on drugs” . The paper concludes that jurisprudence and scholarship around the human rights dimensions of harm reduction will be critical in understanding what works in protecting people from drug-related harms, but what is appropriate and necessary in a democratic society to achieve this legitimate aim

Download the full version of the publication.

2012 Summer Course on ‘Human Rights and Drug Policy’-Central European University

The Central European University, based in Budapest, taking applications to the course “Human Rights and Drug Policy”. The course will be held from 16 July-27 July, 2012.

The course aims to situate drug policies globally within a framework of fundamental human rights, and to assess the extent to which country and international drug policies fail to meet human rights standards. Discussion will focus partly on the identification and understanding of human rights including those that have their basis in international agreements and laws, and in part on evaluation and assessment of the gap between rights and practice in the implementation of drug policies in many countries and regions. The focus of the course will be global and participants will be drawn from all regions internationally.

A mix of teaching modes will be used and faculty are encouraged to minimise the use of formal lectures. Emphasis will be on discussion and interactive learning with maximal use of written and non-written materials. There exist considerable amounts of audio-visual media and these will be extensively used as a basis for group discussion. Time will be allocated for personal reading and participants will be encouraged to interact personally with faculty so as to deepen understanding of the issues. Site visits and discussions with civil society organisations and groups will be a feature of the programme of activities.

All those attending the course will be provided by CEU with a Certificate of Attendance. Opportunities will also be provided during the course for personal discussions with Faculty. It is intended that further work after the conclusion of the course be encouraged both in respect of research and programme analysis and development. Course faculty will be prepared to provide follow up assistance through personal agreement with students.

Faculty includes Damon Barrett, co-founder of the International Centre on Human Rights Policy, as well as other experts in the field. The course is organized in cooperation with the Open Society Insititute and the Central European University.

For more information on how to apply, click on the CEU’s website.

Mexico, war crimes and a slippery slope

The war on drugs in Mexico has left thousands of people dead and a country in peril. But how can international law address this situation?

In an article published by Open Democracy, Patrick Gallahue comments on the recent petition made by Mexican human rights activists to the International Criminal Court to prosecute the Mexican government for crimes against humanity. What are the possible consequences of considering the drug war an armed conflict? Gallahue makes a convincing argument that in order to arrive to peace, we need not necessarily call the situation in Mexico a war.

To read the full article, click here

Count the Costs: Increasing harms to the environment

The ‘War on Drugs’ has not only affected people but also the environment. Current drug policies have not reduced the environmental harm caused by illicit drug production but actually increased them according to the latest briefing by ‘Count the Costs’, a project launched earlier this year by a range of organisations, including the International Centre on Human Rights and Drug Policy.

Deforestation and pollution are just some of the devastating effects of the current drug control policies. Chemicals used to wipe out illicit crops in Colombia have affected its rich flora and fauna. The so called ‘balloon effect’, the phenomenon by which law enforcement displaces production in one region causing it to expand in another one as drug producers mobilise to meet demand) has also led to significant deforestation in Colombia, Mexico, Guatemala, Myanmar, Thailand and the United States.

As a result of the balloon effect, there has been “widespread deforestation, jeopardising the 200 species of oak tree and the habitats of numerous endemic bird species” in Mexico’s Sierra Madre mountain range. In Peru, 10% of the total rainforest destruction over the past century is due to the illicit drug trade.

Although authorities argue the need to continue such policies precisely to avoid the environmental harm done by illicit production of drugs, the briefing highlights that “they have simply transferred these harms to more remote, ecologically sensitive areas such as the Amazon forests – an unavoidable consequence of the balloon effect.” The benefits are elusive as production is only displaced but not eliminated.

The consequences on development should also be considered as it is the most vulnerable and poor who are caught in the middle of supply reduction strategies. As criminals target areas with ‘little economic infrastructure or governance and suffer from high levels of poverty’, many farmers have few alternative means of earning a living outside of the drug trade. At the same time, law enforcement’s methods to eradicate crops, such as aerial spraying with chemical herbicides, destroys not only illicit but also licit crops, such as food crops. Water deposits in natural parks have also been contaminated due to the proximity of illicit crops to natural protected areas.

Other environmental harms include the massive consumption of electricity for the production of hydroponic cannabis and its corresponding CO2 footprint, or toxic waste dumping in the production of methamphetamines.

As a result, ‘Count the Costs’ recommends national authorities and international funders to take due consideration of environmental concerns at all levels. Thorough scrutiny of the impact of drug control policies on the environment is long overdue. This includes not only a more careful scrutiny as mentioned above, but also to explore “a range of alternative systems, including decriminalisation of personal possession of drugs, and models of legal regulation”.

Read the full version of the briefing here.

Join Count the Costs campaign on twitter and facebook.

Mexico neglects people displaced by drug violence says IDMC report

Despite the mass displacement in Mexico due to the drug related violence, the government does not have the necessary legal and institutional framework to address the needs of IDPs nor has it requested assistance from international organizations, according to a report published last week by the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) of the Norwegian Council of Refugees.

The report by the independent Oslo-based research body highlighted that more systematic research is needed to assess the full scale of displacement in Mexico. However, large-scale and gradual displacements have been identified through media reports, human rights organizations as well as a study by the Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez (UACJ). The states most affected have been Chihuahua and Tamaulipas, and to lesser extent Michoacán, Durango and Sinaloa.

Large-scale displacements have been recorded in Tamaulipas, Michoacán and Guerrero, according to the IDMC. The largest one registered so far was in Michoacán, where 2,000 people were forced to flee in 2010. Gradual displacement has been mostly registered in Ciudad Juárez. In the last three years, about 220,000 people have left this Northern city due to the sustained violence. Half of them have been identified as internal IDPs. One private consultancy report estimated 1.6 million people have been displaced by the drug violence, but the methodology used to arrive to this figure is uncertain.

Since President Felipe Calderon took office in 2006, about 50,000 soldiers have been deployed throughout the country. The mass displacement of citizens has occurred within the context of the battles between drug cartels and the military. Some of the effects of the drug-related violence and the militarisation of public security listed on the report have been widespread threats and attacks to journalists; violence against ‘transmigrants’ en-route to the United States; and increasing complaints against the armed forces for human rights violations.

People forced to flee their homes have lost their property, livelihoods and their identification documents. In one mass displacement case in Guerrero, 79 people lost their personal document and were not able to access social benefits. Their security is precarious, as the report notes:

“For example, those fleeing from Valle de Juárez around Ciudad Juárez have fled to the south-eastern part of Juárez, where armed violence is also intense. Small business owners fleeing to Veracruz have also been attacked by cartels there (Fundación Mepi, 2011)”.

Despite this, the government has no mechanisms in place to ensure the physical or legal protection of their property, nor does it address the basic needs of IDPs in order to prevent them from falling into poverty. The report stresses that “while the government’s military strategy to combat the cartels has led the violence to increase, it has had no plan to address the results of its intervention, including the resulting displacement”.

Last October, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs expressed its concern about the displacement situation in Mexico and offered to assist the government. However, there has been no formal effort or pledge to remedy the situation of the victims of the drug war violence.

Finally, the report is grounded on the view that Mexico is facing an internal conflict. For more discussion on this subject, read Patrick Gallahue’s article “Mexico’s ‘War on Drugs’: Real or Rhetorical Armed Conflict?”, published in the Journal of International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict. Just click here.

To read the full report, click here.

Next Page »