52. Sitzung der VN-Suchtstoffkommission, Wien, 11. bis 20. März 2009
Intervention
on behalf of the German Delegation
for the Round Table (a) at the High Level Segment of the 52nd CND
Current and emerging challenges, new trends and patterns of the world drug problem and possible improvements to the evaluation system
Madam Chair
Please allow me to make some general, but also critical remarks.
1. My first remark concerns the current and emerging challenges and new trends.
Which are the “current and emerging challenges and new trends” that the Draft Political Declaration is about to identify? In our view, the Political Declaration (PD) does not sufficiently reflect current and emerging challenges and new trends, nor does it propose new tools or approaches that are designed to face future challenges.
We feel that the draft Political Declaration is very much attached to the past and not enough future-oriented. We think that this is due to the fact that, during the preparation of the Political Declaration, many delegations were too reluctant to go forward and not open enough towards new methods, instruments and approaches.
One of the core objectives of the Political Declaration is to define the ultimate goal of international drug policy.
In its preamble, the PD states that “we are determined to promote a society free of drug abuse”. This is an extremely ambitious goal which is much more ambitious than the goal of the UNGASS 1998 Declaration. The 1998-Declaration aimed at “reducing significantly drug supply and drug demand”.
Through the UNGASS review process, we realised that even theses relatively modest goals have not been met. Now, it is very unlikely that we will reach a “society free of drug abuse” in any part of the world. Let me be frank: We need ambitious but realistic goals in order to remain credible.
Unrealistic goals are likely to result in a negative assessment in 2019, feeding those with arguments who doubt whether the current drug control system is worthwhile.
Besides, in my view, the real "challenge" is not only to reduce the availability and the abuse of drugs. We must also focus on the adverse consequences of drug abuse and on the unintended consequences of anti-drug measures.
That is why we need a substantial debate about the substance and content of harm reduction including its place within the drug control system: We must define ways to reduce the adverse health and social consequences of drug abuse and to assist those who need help - within the framework of the international drug control treaties.
We also need an open and constructive debate about the unintended consequences of drug policies – as described in the UNODC document "Fit for purpose". To find adequate responses is indeed a challenge that the international community must face.
2. My second remark concerns the issue of possible improvements to the evaluation system
Today, we know much more about the current situation and the new trends regarding the drug problem worldwide than we did ten years ago. We also have much more scientific and practical evidence on what works and what does not work, in order to design and to implement rational, evidence based and effective policies.
Scientific evidence should always be the basis for formulating drug policies. We need to improve the basis of our international drugs policy. Let me make three suggestions:
· I strongly suggest to integrate the annual and biannual questionnaires into one single one-year questionnaire. This questionnaire would comprise all necessary information and puts trends and measures into context with each other.
· We should use all available data from regional and complementary sources, such as the European Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction and other institutions.
- Standardization and harmonization of data collection methods is an important issue – therefore development and implementation of indicators both in the area of demand and supply reduction are crucial.
I thank you, Madam Chair.
*************************************************************
Intervention
on behalf of the German Delegation
at the High Level Segment of the 52nd CND
Round Table
Demand reduction, treatment and preventive policies and practices
Let me comment on a few issues as regards the achievements the international community has brought about in the field of demand reduction and where we feel that there is still a need for improvement.
1. Although already the decisions of UNGASS 1998 established the principle of a "balanced approach", we believe that this balance has not been achieved to date. Worldwide, more emphasis is still placed on supply reduction and law enforcement policies. We believe, that Member States should dedicate the same attention and the same priority to demand reduction strategies as they do to supply reduction strategies.
What is even more important than the formal balance is the commitment of Member States to implement drug demand policies. The review process has shown that the problems encountered in the field of demand reduction are to a great extent due to an inadequate implementation in practice.
2. System-wide coherence is another aim which we are yet to reach in the field of demand reduction: International and regional agencies should work jointly on the reduction of drug demand in order to ensure a system-wide coherence of activities. They should maintain a constant dialogue, coordinate their actions and, where appropriate, launch joint initiatives such as the Joint UNODC-WHO Programme on Drug Dependence, Treatment and Care. We believe that this Joint Action Programme is a very good basis for dovetailing the initiatives on demand reduction relating to (injecting) drug use that WHO and UNODC, as well as UNAIDS have been conducting in recent years.
3. Drug demand reduction programmes must be integrated in a comprehensive strategy aiming at
· preventing drug use;
· facilitating access to counselling, to treatment of dependency and to rehabilitation; and
· establishing effective measures to reduce the adverse health and social consequences of drug abuse.
It goes without saying that our first priority must always be to prevent people to from taking drugs; secondly to treat addicted people in order to get them off the drugs. But in a third step, when prevention and treatment have failed, we must try to reduce the adverse consequences of drug abuse.
I would like to stress the following point: We welcome the fact that the Draft Political Declaration (to be adopted later today) will pronounce "related support services aimed at… reducing the adverse consequences of drug abuse" on an equal footing with prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. We believe that we have made an important step forward by including this new element into our common concept of demand reduction. These "services" should be an essential part of any comprehensive demand reduction strategy. They are effective and they save lives. And maybe one day even all of us can call them by their common name of "Harm reduction measures".
I hope that the acknowledgement of the concept of harm reduction by this High Level Segment will also help to eliminate the stigmatization of people addicted to drugs. Drug addiction is above all a wicked disease. It causes a tremendous amount of harm for the addicted person, his or her family, friends, communities and society as a whole. These people should be at the heart of our attention. I am glad that we have taken this step, even if it was not a leap, and that we are heading in the right direction. To help people suffering from drug addiction. To make them survive. To show them a way out of their misery.
Let me draw your attention to one last point: The continuous and even rising spread of HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases, (e.g. hepatitis B and C) among injecting drug users is alarming. Although in many countries, like my own country, the prevalence of HIV infections is decreasing due to the implementation of effective measures, such as syringe exchange and substitution treatment. In other countries infections are on the rise. We must counter this devastating disease together and achieve universal access to comprehensive prevention programmes, treatment, care and support.
*************************************************************
Intervention
on behalf of the German Delegation
for the Round Table (d) at the High Level Segment of the 52nd CND
Countering illicit drug traffic and supply,
and alternative development
Mr. Chairman,
I would like to address the issue of Alternative Development .
First of all I would like to point out that Germany has worked for more than 25 years in the field of Alternative Development in South East Asia, Latin America and during the last years as well in Afghanistan. İn some countries we have seen that former drug producing areas and peasants have been successfully and sustainably integrated into national mainstream development. But in other countries, we are still facing huge challenges mainly linked with insecure and violent conflict and postconflict environments.
We tried to introduce these experiences into the Political Declaration and the Action Plan which are to be adopted today. But we regret, that this Political Declaration does neither reflect sufficiently our evidence based conclusions from the past ten years nor does it propose new approaches that are able to face new challenges.
We would have welcomed if the draft political declaration had mentioned the guiding principles of “proper sequencing” and “non conditionality” which are an integral part and key for successful German and European drugs policy.. Let me shortly explain the reason for both principles.
· Principle of Proper Sequencing:
Evidence has shown that inadequate sequencing of Alternative Development assistance and eradication measures can undermine development efforts and seriously damage the building of trust. Often, eradication has happened too early, when viable alternative crops were not yet procuded and thus could not generate an adequate income. Serious food shortages and hunger have been a consequence as for example in some parts of South East Asia after the opium ban. Of course, the sequencing between Alternative Development measures and eradication has to be adapted to the specific circumstances of each region, based on previous analysis of ground conditions.
· Principle of Non Conditionality:
The provision of development assistance should not be made conditional on prior elimination of illicit drug crop production. This kind of explicit conditionality can appear as a disguised form of forced eradication. As long as alternative livelihoods are not available, forced eradication is not sustainable, because it tends to generate social and political violence and very often it displaces cultivation to more inaccessible spots with negative environmental impact (loss of diversity, negative climate impact).
Mr. Chairman,
Alternative development requires long term strategies, based on a comprehensive approach to rural and sustainable economic development. The objective of those programmes is to reduce gradually the dependence from illicit drug cultivation and to strengthen licit income sources in the long term. Therefore, successful Alternative Development programmes require long term investments for productive and social infrastructure. The provision of secured land use rights are the basis for the peasants’ engagement for medium and long term investment in their land. Alternative Development programmes need to be coordinated with other national policies in the area of agriculture, environment and economy.
Mr. Chairman,
We are facing increasingly the challenge of insecurity. High levels of post conflict and criminal violence existe in many regions where drug crops are illicitly cultivated in remote areas and where the State and its authorities are weak or absent. We need an open and constructive debate in order to find adequate responses to these challenges on the basis of the overarching principles of human rights and human security.
Mr. Chairman,
Last but not least, we regret that success within drug reduction policies is still measured only with the reduction of drug crop cultivation. We are confident that in the future qualitative and quantiative indicators of human development will be included as success indicators, which are not only reflecting the reduction of illicit crop cultivation and production, but are first of all of all reflecting human development.
Thank you, Mr. Chaiman