-
Remarks Allyn Taylor at 2018 CND side event Regulating Cannabis in Accord with International Law
Allyn Taylor, University of Washington School of Law (U.S.)CND side event Regulating Cannabis in Accord with International Law: Options to Explore
Friday, March 16, 2018The prior panelists have made a concrete political and legal case for the codification of a treaty inter se to address the tension between state regulation of cannabis and commitments under the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Dissatisfaction with the status of cannabis in the treaty system has long resulted has been described as “quiet revolution,” Today, however, the quiet revolution has turned into an all out revolt. With more and more direct treaty violations, the tensions between state cannabis policy and international law can no longer be ignored and viable options to maintain the integrity of the treaty system are highly limited. Recognizing the increasing polarization of policy debates in Vienna, there is simply no political will to resolve the challenges of cannabis reform within the treaty system.
In this scenario, the codification of a treaty inter se between two or more state parties is, as Dr Jelsma and his colleagues have written, the only safety valve for collective action that can adjust the treaty regime for like minded parties and, at the same time, preserve the rule of law.
With more and more states modifying the legal status of cannabis in contravention of the treaty, the time is ripe for such states to use their sovereign authority to codify a new inter se treaty consistent with international law. The codification of a treaty inter se can maintain the integrity of the drug treaties and the legitimacy of state action.
My task for the next few minutes is not to further make the case for an inter se treaty, but to discuss the processes that can be used by interested parties to advance negotiation of such an instrument. I will focus, in particular, on the contribution that civil society can make to strengthen this process and, perhaps, even jump starting it.
States by virtue of their international legal personality have the sovereign authority to negotiate virtually any treaty consistent with the UN Charter–including the proposed inter se treaty. Contemporary international lawmaking tends to be viewed as a process in which states, with participation of non-states actors formulate rules in accordance with agreed, pre-determined procedures.
Notably, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) has very little to say about the process by which lawmaking happens. The VCLT has only one rule of negotiation applicable to inter-se treaties. Pursuant to Article 41 negotiating parties have a duty to notify other parties to the multilateral treaty of their intention to adopt an inter-se modification near the end of the process (according to the VCLT commentary). Some further general guidance is provided by the UNGA 1999 Negotiating Principles, including the duty to negotiate in good faith. But outside these limited parameters, law-making can be conducted in any manner that the state parties see fit and there are a multitude of fora and designs of treaty negotiations.
In recognition of the variety of processes, I want to focus on the early stages of the treaty making endeavor and the contribution that non-state actors (NGOs) can make to this process. In general, the initiation of the legislative process is an unsystematic affair, at the national level and especially at the international level because of the highly decentralized nature of the entire process. During or after the stage in which interested parties begin to identify their desired goals through domestic policy processes, the parties will enter into the pre-negotiation phases of the “if” and “how” of formal negotiations. In the course pre-negotiation the parties will also begin to identify common or separate interests and goals The subsequent negotiation phase consists, of course, of official meetings and informal meetings.
The development of an inter se treaty on cannabis raises novel and potentially highly complex substantive issues on which little exists to guide the policy making process. For example, what should be the scope of the treaty? Should it simply dis-apply the scheduling system of the drug treaties or address other issues such as medical cannabis and the stringent requirement of state medical systems in the Single Convention? In addition, should the treaty be broadly drafted to allow states maximum autonomy to regulate cannabis according to domestic preferences? Or should it include some international controls and commitments? And if so what? Should the treaty include commitments on public education? Protection of youth? Should it be drafted as a full blown public health regulatory instrument? In addition, there are important issues regarding international trade. Should the treaty authorize international trade in cannabis amongst the parties to the treaty? And, if so, how? What legal mechanisms and controls can be included in the treaty to assure other states that States moving outside the current legal regime will continue to honor other states’ domestic prohibition of cannabis? Whether or not the treaty incorporates an international trade regime, what mechanisms can be included in the treaty to control potential diversion of cannabis into illegal international channels? These are just a few of the myriad of substantive issues that will confront negotiators?
In addition to complex substantive issues, there are a host of legal procedural mechanisms to be considered. For example, should there be duties of international cooperation and information sharing to guide future policy development, and if so what? Should the treaty allow for reservations? Should it be open-ended to allow other states to join the instrument as their domestic public policy environments evolve?
Clearly the elaboration of an inter se treaty on cannabis raises novel and potentially highly complex substantive and, procedural issues on which little exists to guide the policy making process. The lack of information on these issues could be a major barrier to policy development and treaty codification,
but NGOS can help fill this vacuumNGOS are an important and even central component of most treaty-making processes today, both inside and outside the UN system. As Raustalia has observed, their participation yields political, technical and informational benefits for states and participation can be structured to secure these benefits, while maintaining real limits on NGO activities and power.
As a former legal adviser at WHO, I have been involved in several legal processes as the which NGOS made a substantial contribution to honing the treaty-making process early in the process. For example, formal negotiations of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control were initiated by public hearings in which NGOs participated and provided substantive ideas some of which were debated during the negotiation process. During the negotiations, NGOS continued to provide policy input and advocacy for the treaty. Notably, as states moved closer to fixed positions and final text of treaty , NGO formal participation became increasingly narrowed – consistent with what we see in final stages of other negotiations. Another interesting example is the negotiation of the WHO Global Code of Practice on the International Recruitment of Health Personnel. Although the Health Assembly authorized the negotiations many years earlier, the process remained dormant until it was launched by an initiative spearheaded by Realizing Rights led by Mary Robinson. Realizing Rights convened several sessions of a global policy counsel consisting of key interested states, representatives of international organizations and other NGOs to begin the policy dialogue on the content of the proposed Code. This process served as a kick start to formal negotiations.
The experience of these two , very different processes, points to critical roles that NGOs can play in process of negotiating an inter se treaty.
First, at the early lawmaking stages, major independent NGOs could utilize their convening power to bring together interested parties to discuss contours and policy process for codifying an inter se agreement. This convening rule could play a critical role in galvanizing action on the cannabis treaty. The reality is cannabis reform is highly politically controversial A number of states are moving y ahead domestically, including Canada, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Uruguay, Morocco and Jamaica. Further, a number of other countries are interested in domestic reform, but are deterred by the international legal status of cannabis. All of these states are likely interested in changing legal status of cannabis, but none find taking the political lead feasible or palatable.
In this scenario, the creation of an independent forum organized by NGOs can relieve the political pressure on states to take the lead will providing a platform for all interested states to meet and negotiateA second key role that NGOs can play is providing policy research at all stages of the lawmaking process, but especially at initiation. One of the prime contributions of NGOS in international lawmaking process is policy research and development. This contribution will be essential in the early stages of the development of an inter se cannabis treaty – when state policy positions are being developed. As is in the case of other areas of legal concern, the drug control field includes, expertly staffed NGOs and academic centers that devote considerable efforts and resources to policy research and have substantial expertise in drug policy. These organizations include, the Transnational Institute, the Washington Office on Latin America, and the Global Drug Policy Observatory at Swansea University in the UK. By involving organizations such a s these in the process of developing a cannabis treaty, governments may be able to gain accurate and creative policy advice from independent sources, advance the efficacy and lower the effective cost of treaty negotiations.
In this process, NGOS and academic centers can potentially also move process along by creating different type of draft documents . The most complicated and diverse stage in the treaty-making process is, of course, that of formulating the instruments. This may involve several sub-stages: preliminary studies, particularly in technically complex fields and initial drafts. NGOs can help at all stages. For example, one such document that NGOs can potentially draft early on is what I call the "Elements" document. In early days of FCTC, the secretariat created a document called Elements of FCTC – that included all of the possible topics that could be included in the treaty.
Such a document could be very helpful to states to kick start discussion of novel inter se agreement. Further on in the process NGOs can also potentially create draft text on direction of statesTo sum up. NGOs can play a central role in supporting states and facilitating the development of a new inter se treaty outside of the UN system The legal reforms happening at increasing pace in states today means that there is a window of opportunity to resolve the legal dilemma by adopting a new treaty.
Sovereign states will be the creators of a new inter se treaty, but can do so in a manner strengthened by the contributions of civil society. Ultimately, the benefits that states will accrue from NGO participation will allow them to regulate cannabis with greater efficiency, effectiveness, legality and legitimacy.Allyn Taylor, University of Washington School of Law (U.S.)
Friday, March 16, 2018 -
Summary of report Beckley Foundation
‘Licensing and Regulation of the Cannabis Market in England and Wales: Towards A Cost Benefit Analysis’
The Beckley report, Licensing and Regulation of the Cannabis Market in England and Wales: Towards a Cost-Benefit Analysis, grasps of the economic consequences of a regulated market, as opposed to the current prohibitionist model. This is essential for evaluating the impacts of possible drug policy reform. The report outlines the factors which must be included in further cost-benefit analyses. The report costed 60.000 pounds and 3 years to create. Reliable data was often lacking and more evidence is needed.
One of the key advantages to a cost-benefit analysis is its complete elimination of subjective and emotive processes, which have become an unfortunate mainstay in the drug policy debate - this gives the results an objective credibility.
It is very important to note that by excluding 'internal costs and benefits' the report specifically excludes the reasons why people use cannabis, such as medication, enjoyment and creativity - instead this report takes the perspective of a concerned tax payer, or a budget-focused politician.
An often-used argument surrounding cannabis reform is the concept of the 'gateway effect'; the idea that cannabis use leads to the use of 'harder drugs'. This report not only rejects the idea of a demand side gateway effect (through a thorough assessment of the available data), but also introduces the idea that a regulated market would virtually eliminate another sort of damaging gateway effect, namely the supply-side gateway. This is where social dealers of cannabis come into contact with professional dealers of a larger variety of drugs and thus are more likely to progress to dealing harder drugs.
Another element which has gained much attention in recent history is the mental health costs of cannabis brought about by the increased ratio of THC to CBD. One of the many advantages of a regulated market is that through health-education, labelling and variable tax rates, strains of cannabis with a high CBD ratio can be encouraged, particularly for vulnerable users.
The main conclusion is that there would be a net social benefit to reform of somewhere between 280 and 460 million pounds. This means that even when we ignore the experiential benefits claimed by cannabis users and just focus on the financial effects on society at large, the argument for reform remains robust, compelling and increasingly difficult for policy makers to ignore.
On top of the financial benefit there are of course many other advantages. These include increased respect of human rights, the avoidance of discrimination in the enforcement of prohibition, the minimisation of the blighting effect of a criminal record on a person’s life and the increased accessibility to health information and treatment. The current criminalization of cannabis users sacrifices the credibility of health campaigns. Moreover, based on US evidence it is expected that access to cannabis for teenagers would probably decrease.
Because taxes are a transfer, rather than a net social gain, they are not included in the report’s cost benefit analysis. However, a conservative estimation is made of what the tax revenue might be following reform.
The authors aim to bring the price of cannabis to lower than the illicit price, whilst aiming to keep it high enough to deter the expansion of use due to low price, particularly by the young. This would be achieved by a tax rate of around 70%, which is lower than the 83% on cigarettes and closer to the 72% on high alcohol beer.
The report predicts a small increase in cannabis quantity [+15% - +40%] due to a decreased cannabis price. The price elasticity of cannabis is estimated between [-0.2, -0.7]. The cross-price elasticity is important to consider: will alcohol consumption decrease if the price of cannabis decreases and cannabis consumption increases? According to a study of Clements and Zhao (2005), a4% increase in cannabis consumption would lead to a decrease of alcohol consumption (-1% beer, -2% wine, -4% spirits).
The authors assumed a cap on THC levels of 10% for licensed cannabis. By creating this limitation it leaves higher THC strains of cannabis in the illicit market. It would probably be better to keep all strains of cannabis within the licit market, and use taxation intelligently to make more potentially risky or harmful strains of cannabis less financially attractive. Campaigns could move users away from combining tobacco and cannabis.
The authors estimate that the government would gain in budgetary terms by something around one billion pounds a year, roughly three quarters of which would come from tax revenues rather than expenditure savings. In these times of economic hardship cost-benefit analyses with positive results should surely begin to play a key role in government.
The report
Mark Bryan, Emilia Del Bono, Stephen Pudney, Licensing and Regulation of the Cannabis Market in England and Wales: Towards a Cost-Benefit Analysis, Institute for Social and Economic Research (Iser), University of Essex & Beckley Foundation, September 2013
-
De Nederlandse kabinetsplannen in internationaal perspectief
Martin JelsmaRonde tafel gesprek drugsbeleid
Tweede Kamer, Vaste commissies voor V&J en VWS
3 oktober 2011
READ MORE...
Na een lange periode van pragmatisme en gedurfde vernieuwingen van het drugsbeleid, waarmee Nederland ook internationaal een pioniersrol innam, is er – zoals de Commissie Van de Donk constateerde – al jarenlang sprake van beleidsverwaarlozing. Die feitelijke stilstand dreigt met de huidige kabinetsplannen om te slaan naar achteruitgang. Er zijn een aantal goede redenen om daarover ernstig bezorgd te zijn, niet alleen ten behoeve van de verworvenheden hier in Nederland, maar ook bezien vanuit recente internationale ontwikkelingen. -
Fact Sheet: Coca leaf and the UN Drugs Conventions
10 Facts about the Cocal Leaf and the UN Drugs Conventions
1. An ECOSOC mandated study published in 1950 as the Report of the Commission of Enquiry on the Coca Leaf, recommends to suppress “the harmful habit of chewing coca” within a few years;
2. In 1952 the WHO Expert Committee on Drugs Liable to Produce Addiction concluded that “coca chewing comes so close to the characteristics of addiction ... that it must be defined and treated as an addiction” and advised this to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs.
3. Coca, together with cannabis and opium, became one of the main control targets of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, including special restrictions on cultivation, proscribing the phasing out of traditional use within 25 years and listing the coca leaf as “a substance liable for abuse” in Schedule 1;
4. The 1988 Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances forced states to criminalize coca, under article 3, paragraph 2: “Subject to its constitutional principles and the basic concepts of its legal system, each Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish as a criminal offence under its domestic law,when committed intentionally, the possession, purchase or cultivation of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances for personal consumption contrary to the provisions of the 1961 Convention, the 1961Convention as amended or the 1971 Convention”, but it also makes an exemption for traditional use; Article 14 states: “Each Party shall take appropriate measures to prevent illicit cultivation of and to eradicate plants containing narcotic or psychotropic substances, such as opium poppy, coca bush and cannabis plants, cultivated illicitly in its territory”, but then continues saying that the “measures adopted shall respect fundamental human rights and shall take due account of traditional licit uses, where there is historic evidence of such use”. One official reservation was made, only by Bolivia, upon signing and confirmed upon ratification of this Convention to preserve the right to use coca leaf for traditional purposes.
5. The INCB annual report for 1994 stressed that: “The conflict between the provisions of the 1961 Convention and the views and legislation of countries where the use of the coca leaf is legal should be solved. There is a need to undertake a scientific review to assess the coca-chewing habit and the drinking of coca tea.” A supplement to the 1994 report dedicated one section to ‘Coca leaf: a need to clarify ambiguities’, calling for ”a need to examine the situation regarding State parties to the 1961 Convention that have made reservations under article 49 of that Convention. A true assessment of the habit of coca leaf chewing is urgently called for”.
6. In 1995 the WHO finished “the largest global study on cocaine use”, including one part on the use of coca leaf, concluding that "the use of coca leaves appears to have no negative health effects and has positive therapeutic, sacred and social functions for indigenous Andean populations", apparently one of the reasons the study was obstructed in a peer review process, and never published.
7. In September 2007 the UN adopts the Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, reflecting a global commitment to respect cultural traditions and medicinal practices of all indigenous populations. This recognition reflects a clear contradiction in international law regarding the legal status of traditional use of coca.
8. The government of Bolivia proposed to amend the 1961 Single Convention in March 2009, by removing two sub paragraphs of article 49 that bans coca leaf chewing. A US-led coalition presented objections within the 12 months period established by the procedure, and blocked the amendment.
9. In July 2011 Bolivia denounced the 1961 Single Convention, which came into effect in January 2012. Bolivia will reaccede the treaty on the 10 th of January 2013 with a new reservation that will only enter into force if two third of all parties to the Convention do not express objections. Whether Bolivia would decide to still reaccede in the unlikely case that the reservation is not accepted, remains to be seen.
10. In February 2012 Bolivia responded to the INCB annual report for 2011 preface, in which it was accused of threatening the integrity of the entire international drug control regime by using the rarely used but legitimate procedure of treaty denunciation and reaccession with a reservation to defend traditional uses of the coca leaf.
Updated until September 2012
-
Flexibility of treaty provisions
In a confidential and authoritative memorandum to the INCB, UNODC legal experts argue that most harm reduction measures are in fact acceptable under the conventions. According to the Legal Affairs Section "it could easily be argued that the Guiding Principles of Drug Demand Reduction provide a clear mandate for the institution of harm reduction policies that, respecting cultural and gender differences, provide for a more supportive environment for drug users."
READ MORE... -
Tatyana Dmitrieva
READ MORE...
Tatyana Dmitrieva is a current member of the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) and its Vice-President. She is Russia’s former minister of Health and she is, since 2005, the Chief Consultative Expert Psychiatrist of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation. She is the Director of the Serbsky State Research Centre for Social and Forensic Psychiatry in Moscow, which is responsible for forensic psychiatry for criminal courts. She is also the Head of the Department for Social and Forensic Psychiatry at the Sechenov Medical Academy of Moscow and Vice-Chairperson of the Russian Society of Psychiatrists and Narcologists. -
Proposal by Colombia, 27 November 1997
FOR PARTICIPANTS ONLY
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.7/Rev.1
27 November 1997
ENGLISH
ORIGINAL: SPANISHCOMMISSION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS ACTING AS PREPARATORY BODY FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DEVOTED TO THE FIGHT AGAINST THE ILLICIT PRODUCTION, SALE, DEMAND, TRAFFIC AND DISTRIBUTION OF NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES AND RELATED ACTIVITIES
Third informal open-ended inter-sessional meeting
Vienna, 5 December 1997
Item 2 of the provisional agenda*PROPOSAL BY COLOMBIA**
The attached draft revised text is being circulated at the request of the Government of Colombia. The draft revised text contains elements from discussions held by the Latin American and the Caribbean working group and suggestions made by the African working group.
*E/CN.7/1997/PC.8.
**This document has not been edited.
V.97-28579 (E) (a:1997 ar.3)
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.7/Rev. 1
Page 2
DRAFT UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION ON STRENGTHENING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN SUPPORT OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES AND PROJECTS
The General Assembly,
p.p. 1. Reaffirms that the fight against illicit drugs must be pursued on the basis of the principle of shared responsibility, following a comprehensive and balanced approach, and with full respect for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations,
p.p.2. Recalling that, in its resolution 51/64, it decided that this special session should be devoted, inter alia, to examining the fight against the illicit production of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and to proposing new strategies, methods, practical activities and specific measures aimed at strengthening international cooperation to address the problem of illicit drugs,
p.p.3. Recalling that one of the objectives of this special session of the General Assembly, as set out in its resolution 51/64, is to encourage international cooperation in developing programmes for the elimination of cultivation for illicit purposes and in promoting alternative development programmes,
p.p.4. Recognizing that alternative development constitutes one of the fundamental tools for promoting the elimination of cultivation for illicit purposes,
p.p.5. Recognizing that the problem of the illicit production of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and its relationship to sustainable development requires, within the context of shared responsibility, close cooperation among States, the competent organs of the United Nations system, regional bodies and international financial institutions,
p.p.6. Aware that, in order to achieve maximum effectiveness in the fight against drug abuse, it is necessary to maintain a balanced approach by allocating appropriate resources to initiatives that include the reduction of both illicit demand and illicit supply,
p.p.7. Underlining the need to promote international cooperation in support of alternative development programmes and projects aimed at strengthening self-sustaining production systems and economic, social and environmental processes for the benefit of communities and population groups affected by illicit cultivation, recognizing the particular socio-cultural characteristics of each of those communities and groups, within the framework of a comprehensive and permanent solution to the problem of illicit drugs,
Decides to adopt the following United Nations Declaration on Strengthening International Cooperation in Support of Alternative Development Programmes and Projects;
o.p. 1. Reaffirms that alternative development is the key component of the policy and programmes for reducing illicit drug production that have been adopted within the comprehensive framework of the global drug control strategy of the United Nations;
o.p.2. Recognizes that, for the purpose of continuing the efforts of Governments in the implementation of alternative development programmes, decisive action is called for to strengthen the existing processes and to implement new and innovative alternative development programmes having the firm support of the international community, with a view to ensuring their viability, as an effective confirmation of shared responsibility;
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.7/Rev.1
Page 3
o.p.3. Regards alternative development as a tool for generating and promoting lawful and sustainable socioeconomic options for those communities and population groups that have resorted to cultivation for illicit purposes as a means of obtaining a livelihood;
o.p.4. Emphasizes the need for commercial agreements to permit greater access of agricultural exports to international markets, with a view to overcoming problems relating to prices and marketing resulting from the substitution of crops cultivated for illicit purposes by crops cultivated for licit commercial purposes;
o.p.5. Reiterates that international cooperation is essential for strengthening alternative development programmes and projects within the United Nations objective of achieving a truly comprehensive and enduring solution to the problem of illicit drugs;
o.p.6. Underlines the need to foster coordinated links between the public sector and civil society, nongovernmental organizations and the private sector, with a view to their participating in the implementation of alternative development programmes and projects;
o.p.7. Advocates the following objectives of programmes and projects for alternative development, and of international cooperation for that purpose, which will ensure the effectiveness of the common endeavour to reduce the illicit production of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances;
o.p.7. (a) Alternative development programmes and projects must be consistent with national development policies and strategies in the rural and regional communities affected by the illicit cultivation and production of drugs;
o.p.7. (b) Programmes for alternative development and international cooperation for that purpose should, within the general context of sustainable development, take into account the particular economic and social characteristics and the traditional licit customs of the communities and population groups affected by the illicit production of drugs;
o.p.7. (c) Alternative development must contribute to creating sustainable social and economic opportunities that will help to improve the living conditions of the communities where illicit cultivation and production exist;
o.p.7. (d) The national institutions responsible for alternative development should promote the coordinated participation of the affected communities and population groups in the formulation and execution of the projects;
o.p.7. (e) Improvements in the road, services and production infrastructure as well as technology transfer should be part of the collective benefits that will encourage the communities and population groups to abandon cultivation for illicit purposes;
o.p.7. (f) Alternative development programmes should contribute to promoting social values and a climate conducive to community participation, discontinuation of cultivation for illicit purposes and observance of the law;
o.p.7. (g) Institution-building at the regional and local levels should be regarded as a factor that will contribute to improving the level of participation in activities fostered by alternative development;
o.p.7. (h) Alternative development programmes and projects must observe environmental sustainability criteria and avoid any expansion or displacement of illicit cultivation, even to ecologically fragile areas;
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.7/Rev.1
Page 4
o.p.7. (i) International cooperation should contribute to achieving the sustainability of alternative development programmes and projects in the medium and long term;
o.p.8 Encourages UNDCP to continue to pursue its catalytic role in regard to international financial institutions and to assist interested Governments in approaching such institutions for the purpose of financing their alternative development programmes and projects;
o.p.9 Requests UNDCP to continue to provide technical and financial assistance to Governments executing alternative development programmes and to intensify its efforts to obtain additional financial resources through voluntary contributions from Governments;
o.p.10 Entrusts the Executive Director of UNDCP with the design of a mechanism whereby its Fund receives, in the contributions voluntarily made by Governments, a percentage of the confiscated proceeds from illicit drug trafficking and related activities, with a view to supporting alternative development programmes and projects, requesting him to present a report to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, at its forty-second session, for its consideration;
o.p.11. Requests the agencies of the United Nations system, in particular UNDP, FAO and UNIDO, to cooperate, within their spheres of competence, through agro-industrial development and technology transfer to regions and communities that are the targets of alternative development programmes and projects;
o.p.12. Recommends to Governments pursuing alternative development strategies that they implement follow-up and evaluation systems which will enable them to monitor the qualitative and quantitative progress of those programmes and share their experiences with other Governments, UNDCP and INCB;
o.p.13. Requests the Executive Director of UNDCP to report on the follow-up to this declaration at the forty second session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs.
-
CND note, 23 October 1997
Note by the Secretariat of the CND, 23 October 1997
COMMISSION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS ACTING AS PREPARATORY BODY FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DEVOTED TO THE FIGHT AGAINST THE ILLICIT PRODUCTION, SALE, DEMAND, TRAFFIC AND DISTRIBUTION OF NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES AND RELATED ACTIVITIES
Third informal open-ended inter-sessional meeting
Vienna, 5 December 1997
Item 2 of the provisional agenda*ERADICATION OF ILLICIT NARCOTIC CROPS
AND PROMOTION OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMESContents
- Development of a Global Strategy for the Elimination of Illicit Crops
- Increased Cooperation in Alternative Development
- Providing Accurate Information on Illicit Crop Cultivation
- Strengthening the Drug Control System Through Institution-building
- Improved Information about Alternative Development Results
- Finding Safe Means of Eradication
*E/CN.711997/PC/8.
V.97-27490T
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.8
Page 2
I. Development of a Global Strategy for the Elimination of Illicit Crops
Problem
1. The United Nations International Drug Control Programme (UNDCP) and its predecessor bodies have accumulated a large corpus of knowledge and operational experience in the area of reduction of illicit crops. Illicit crop eradication, crop substitution and alternative development have been adopted as strategies to reduce illicit drug supply in countries in which drug crops are illicitly produced. The reduction or elimination of illicit drug crops in areas in which UNDCP and Governments and bilateral development institutions have intervened has not led to an overall reduction of areas under illicit crop cultivation, as new or non-traditional production areas have replaced old or traditional ones.
2. No comprehensive attempt has been made yet to conceptualize principles and modalities required to address this problem at the global level. And no time-frame has been defined and no estimation has been made of the resources needed to make attainment of this objective possible.
Action
3. UNDCP therefore intends to formulate a global strategy to eliminate the illicit cultivation of drug crops, focusing on the coca bush and the opium poppy. The strategy will build on the experience in alternative development projects accumulated by Governments, bilateral and multilateral institutions and UNDCP and will include a comprehensive proposal for action. The progress on the strategy will be reported to the General Assembly at its special session on drug control that is to be held in 1998.
II. Increased Cooperation in Alternative Development
Problem
4. Although an increase in cooperation has taken place in the last decade as exemplified by alternative development projects, the coordination of planning and resource allocation at the national and international levels can be improved. The long-term economic and political necessity for Governments to integrate such areas of illicit crop cultivation needs to be linked to overall national development planning and to increased commitment both to national drug control plans and to national economic and agricultural development plans.
Action
5. UNDCP should continue its cooperation with other United Nations entities working in rural development, following examples of successful interaction with relevant United Nations organizations in Asia and Latin America.
6. International financial institutions should seek the coordination of internationally assisted national development plans in order to incorporate alternative development measures at the national and international levels.
7. A sustainable economic environment should be provided at the national and international levels to facilitate the presence of market forces that make illicit crop cultivation less attractive. From an international perspective, trade arrangements and concessions offering increased access of agricultural exports to international markets should contribute to resolving price and marketing problems associated with substituting legal cash crops for illicit crops.
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.8
Page 3
8. Alternative development has been shown to be most successful where there is political will on the part of the Governments concerned to make it a priority. Governments should renew their commitment to effective alternative development programmes by systematically incorporating areas under illicit crop cultivation into national development plans, including those involving international assistance, and by increasing government capacity to design, implement and monitor alternative development measures.
III. Providing Accurate Information on Illicit Crop Cultivation
Problem
9. Both the Comprehensive Multidisciplinary Outline of Future Activities in Drug Abuse Control and the Global Programme of Action adopted by the General Assembly at its seventeenth special session refer to the need to identify illicit crop cultivation and this need has been subsequently recognized by the Commission on Narcotic Drugs in its resolutions. While UNDCP has undertaken a number of initiatives to increase its information on illicit crop cultivation, they have been ad hoc initiatives of a limited scale, designed to meet specific requirements.
Action
10. UNDCP should establish a database to provide annual data on the global cultivation of illicit crops, starting with key areas of production and relying on its own, government and other bilateral sources.
11. Member States should provide information through the annual reports questionnaire and by other means on the extent of illicit crop cultivation and eradication.
12. UNDCP should provide Member States with technical support on methods of data collection and monitoring, ensuring that the technology used and the methodology followed are appropriate to the circumstances in each Member State.
IV. Strengthening the Drug Control System Through Institution-Builidng
Problem
13. As the international repository for alternative development measures, UNDCP has been relied on by Member States for guidance and funding regarding alternative development. Governments need to develop, and increasingly rely on, their own capacities as UNDCP will be focusing increasingly on measures to support capacity-building and institution-building.
Action
14. The direct involvement of Member States in the design, planning and implementation of alternative development measures should be increased, enabling Member States to profit from the experience of UNDCP in alternative development.
15. Member States in which illicit crop cultivation occurs should increase their efforts to build institutions capable of managing alternative development projects and programmes as part of integrated national development programmes, with support from UNDCP.
16. Through community-based approaches and supportive, broadly focused development measures, UNDCP should provide technical assistance for institution-building at the local, national and regional levels.
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.8
Page 4
17. Emphasis should be placed on community-based approaches to natural resource management in sustainable production systems, approaches consistent with participatory, people-centred methods of development that rely on the knowledge, skills, interests and needs of the local population as a basis for appropriate intervention. This approach is especially important for alternative development given the sociocultural dimensions of illicit crop cultivation.
V. Improved Information about Alternative Development Results
Problem
18. Due to the complex economic, social and political contexts, preventing, reducing and eliminating illicit crop cultivation through alternative development measures still pose a challenge despite the positive results achieved in most project areas. The process by which Governments and United Nations agencies learn needs to be strengthened. By improving the dissemination of results, the experience that they have accumulated could be of more benefit.
Action
19. UNDCP should improve the dissemination of the results of alternative development programmes and projects to Member States, other United Nations entities and the general public.
20. Member States should improve their international cooperation in the exchange of relevant information on alternative development policies and results.
VI. Finding Safe Means of Eradication
21. Pursuant to Economic and Social Council resolution E/1 988/9, annex, paragraph 11, an Expert Group Meeting on Environmentally Safe Methods for the Eradication of Illicit Narcotic Plants was held at Vienna from 4 to 8 December 1989. The Expert Group recommended the initiation of a comprehensive research and development programma to enable current technological developments to be put to practical use in the field and to assess the environmental impact of the proposed methods using modern approaches. A research programma for environmentally safe methods of eradicating illicit drug plants was drawn up and subsequently amended where necessary by a panel of experts convened by UNDCP at Vienna in November 1992 and, most recently, by a similar panel in September 1997.
Problem
22. The draft research programma dealing with the three principal narcotic plants (the coca bush, the opium poppy and cannabis) requires further input in order for the environmental impact of the proposed eradication methods to be assessed using modern approaches approved by the major international pesticide regulatory authorities.
Action
23. The main needs include:
(a) Extensive environmental impact studies focusing initially on those herbicides which are currently used for control of illicit narcotic plants and which may be required for use in other geographical regions;
(b) Identification of new herbicidal chemicals that are environmentally safe and effective in controlling narcotic plants in order to keep pace with the rapid advances in herbicide chemistry and to allow the timely
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.8
Page 5
adoption of any chemical offering the advantages of increased environmental safety, efficacy and economic efficiency;
(c) Identification of biological control methods appropriate to both the classical strategy (using agents that establish, multiply, spread and persist in the areas producing the illicit crops) and the microbial herbicide strategy (inundating each target plant with a pathogenic organism for that specific plant);
(d) Surveys and collections of alternative biological control agents to ensure continued availability of suitable agents, should any of the lead candidates be rejected as a result of new research findings or countermeasures implemented by traffickers of narcotic drugs;
(e) Taxonomic studies of the narcotic plants, especially the opium poppy and cannabis, using modern techniques of genetic fingerprinting, in order to establish the range of genetic variation present in populations in the producer countries.
24. Output of the research programma should be collated and distributed, in a suitable form, to interested Member States on a regular basis. When sufficient data are available, they should be published in recognized scientific publications and as United Nations handbooks of methods for the eradication of narcotic plants. These should include methods of assessing the environmental impact of the eradication methods. Eradication programmes will succeed only if support strategies, such as crop substitution or alternative development, are put in place at the same time.
-
Draft Proposal United States
Draft Proposal by the
FOR PARTICIPANTS ONLY
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.9
27 November 1997
ORIGINAL: ENGLISHCOMMISSION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS ACTING AS PREPARATORY BODY FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DEVOTED TO THE FIGHT AGAINST THE ILLICIT PRODUCTION, SALE, DEMAND, TRAFFIC AND DISTRIBUTION OF NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES AND RELATED ACTIVITIES
Third informal open-ended inter-sessional meeting
Vienna, 5 December 1997
Item 2 of the provisional agenda*ERADICATION OF ILLICIT NARCOTIC CROPS AND PROMOTION OF
ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMESDraft non-paper to be included in the declaration on implementing the 1988 United Nations Convention against-Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotic Substances
PROPOSAL BY THE UNITED STATES**
*E/CN.711997/PC/8.
**This document has not been edited.
V.97-28603
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.9
Page 2
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON ERADICATION OF ILLICIT DRUG CROPS AND PROMOTION OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES
Problem
Despite the adoption of international conventions promoting the prohibition of illicit drug crops the problem of cultivation of coca bush, opium poppy, and cannabis plant continues at alarming levels.
Action
1. States and their community leaders must strongly condemn the cultivation of coca bush, opium poppy, and cannabis plants as well as other illicit drug crops.
2. States and their community leaders should ensure that the specific commitments of
the United Nations conventions regarding illicit drug crop cultivation are implemented and enforced,
including:
the provisions of the 1961 Convention (and its 1972 Protocol) which calls upon member States to prohibit the cultivation of opium poppy, the coca bush, or the cannabis plant to protect the public health and welfare and prevent diversion into illicit traffic and to take measures to seize any plants illicitly cultivated;
the provision of the 1988 Convention which calls upon parties to adopt measures to establish as a criminal offense the cultivation of opium poppy, coca bush, or cannabis plant for the production of narcotic drugs contrary to the provisions of the 1961 Convention and that Convention as amended and to take appropriate measures to prevent illicit cultivation of and to eradicate plants containing narcotic or psychotropic substances.
3. States should commit to ending all illicit cultivation of opium poppy and coca bush by the year 2008, using all available means, including alternative development, eradication and law enforcement.
4. States with illicit drug cultivation should develop national strategies to implement the provisions of the 1961 Convention and article 14 of the 1988 Convention regarding the elimination of drug crops.
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP. 9
Page 3
Problem
History has shown that there is no single response to eliminating the cultivation and production of illicit drugs.
Action
5. National crop elimination strategies and programmes should include comprehensive measures such as programmes in alternative development, law enforcement and eradication.
6. National crop elimination strategies should include concrete measurable objectives.
Problem
Member States have often undertaken valiant efforts to eliminate the cultivation of opium poppy, coca bush, and cannabis plant. Nevertheless, in many cases, successes in eliminating illicit drug cultivation in one area have resulted in increased illicit cultivation of such crops in other regions or countries.
Action
7. States should cooperate through bilateral, regional and multilateral means to prevent drug organizations from moving cultivation from one area, region, or country to another.
8. States should share information on illicit drug crop assessments with UNDCP and other Governments in order to increase cooperation to eliminate such cultivation
Problem
Alternative development is an important component for generating and promoting lawful, viable, and sustainable economic options to illicit drug crop cultivation. Against this backdrop, countries with illicit drug crops will need to seek continued assistance to support national efforts to eliminate drug crops.
Action
9. Member States with illicit drug., crop cultivation should present national plans to potential donors, including from bilateral and multilateral donors such as the World Bank and relevant regional banks, and request assistance to support their efforts to eliminate drug crops.
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CP,P.9
Page 4
10. Donor nations and the relevant United Nations organizations should assist countries in countering illicit drug production by providing alternative development assistance with the objective of eliminating drug crops.
11. The international financial institutions and the regional development banks should provide loans and other assistance for alternative development programmes that have as their objective the elimination of drug crops.
Problem
Alternative development programmes are not necessarily interchangeable from country to country.
Action
12. National authorities and local communities should be involved when development and implementing alternative development projects.
13. Local economic, social and cultural characteristics of the communities receiving alternative development assistance should be taken into account when alternative development programmes are developed.
14. Alternative development programmes should, when possible and necessary, include:
- sustainable development criteria;
- market projects which rehabilitate existing agricultural economy, integrate pest management, and technology transfer;
- institutional development support;
- market opportunities for new licit crops by linking new legitimate producers with potential markets;
- development of infrastructure such as roads and irrigation systems to encourage the abandonment of illicit crops;
- employment opportunities in the non-agricultural sector, where economically viable;
- close collaboration among, private investment, the inclusion of civil society, and non-governmental organizations.
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.9
Page 5
15. UNDCP should promote efforts by the World Bank and regional banks to convene a series of regional donor conferences to seek resources for alterative development programmes in support of comprehensive crop control strategies.
16. Those countries that have experienced success in eliminating drug crops should share their experiences through UNDCP.
Problem
Even when development projects are successful, drug traffickers still have the resources to achieve many of their objectives. Large numbers of growers and processors are not likely to abandon the trade voluntarily simply because other opportunities exists; they must see that there is a risk associated with staying in illicit drug cultivation.
Action
17. Member States with illicit drug crop cultivation problems should ensure that sustainable development initiatives are backed, when necessary, by credible enforcement measures,
18. Comprehensive drug interdiction programmes can have disruptive efforts on the market that help drive down the price of illicitly cultivated drug crops and in so doing make alternative sources of legal income more competitive and attractive.
19. Under other circumstances, or when other strategies have not worked, States should consider deterrence measures such as eradication, destruction of illicit drug crops, arrests, as called for in the 1961 and 1988 Conventions.
20. Eradication efforts should utilize available research and ensure that environmentally safe methods are employed.
-
Draft Proposal by the European Union
FOR PARTICIPANTS ONLY
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.10
1 December 1997
ORIGINAL: ENGLISHCOMMISSION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS ACTING AS PREPARATORY BODY FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DEVOTED TO THE FIGHT AGAINST THE ILLICIT PRODUCTION, SALE, DEMAND, TRAFFIC AND DISTRIBUTION OF NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES AND RELATED ACTIVITIES
Third informal open-ended inter-sessional meeting
Vienna, 5 December 1997
Item 2 of the provisional agenda*ERADICATION OF ILLICIT NARCOTIC CROPS
AND PROMOTION OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMESDraft non-paper on Alternative Development
PROPOSAL BY THE EUROPEAN UNION**
*E/CN.7/1997/P8.
**This document has not been edited
V.97-28719
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.10
Page 2
Resolution on Alternative Development
Recalling that in accordance with Article 14.2 of the Vienna Convention of 1988, each party shall take appropriate measures to prevent illicit cultivation of plants containing narcotic and psychotropic substances, such as ..., cultivated illicitly in its territory;
Other preambular paragraphs ...
1. Defines alternative development as a gradual process to prevent and eliminate the illicit cultivation and processing of plants containing narcotic and psychotropic substances through specifically designed rural development measures in the context of sustainable national economic growth in countries taking action against drugs.
2. Urges all States to implement Article 14 of the UN Convention Against Illicit Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988 with special emphasis on the following aspects:
- Alternative development is an important component, among others, of balanced and comprehensive drug control strategy. It is intended to create a supportive environment for the Implementation of that strategy.
- Alternative development is primarily the responsibility of the country where illicit drug cultivation takes place.
- The sustainability of supply reduction is a most important assessment criterion of alternative development. In cases of peasant low income production structures, alternative development is more sustainable and socially and economically more acceptable than forced eradication.
- Alternative development programmes should include appropriate demand reduction measures.
- In order to ensure that alternative development is sustainable, participatory approaches based on dialogue and persuasion and which, include the community as a whole should be applied in the identification, preparation implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the alternative development. Local communities and public authorities should commit themselves by a community-based agreement to gradually reduce and finally eliminate all illicit crops.
- Alternative development programmes should be adapted to the specific legal, social, economic, ecological and cultural conditions;. present in a given project region.
- Alternative development programmes, as well as measures taken to address the drug problem, have to respect human rights standards.
- Alternative development programmes should incorporate the gender dimension by enabling women and men to participate equally in the development process.
E/CN.7/1997/PC/CRP.10
Page 3
1. Alternative development programmes must be undertaken within the broader framework of sustainable development efforts, and thus take account of environmental impacts and social sustainability.
2. Alternative development programmes should contribute to the promotion of democratic values to encourage community participation, and should further social responsibility to develop a civic culture of the rejection of the illicit cultivation of crops.
3. Invites national governments to take appropriate measures tn accordance with Article 14 of the 1988 Convention, to develop and implement national plans for alternative development creating appropriate institutions, as well as a suitable legal, economic and social framework. Governments in the producing areas should also design efficient and credible monitoring and verification mechanisms, based on commonly agreed goals and objectives, as a key element in guaranteeing the sustainability of eradication.
4. Appeals to international donors to assist producer countries in the task of alternative development by providing adequate financial and technical assistance. This assistance should be linked to national commitment and strong political will of producer countries to implement the obligations from Article 14 of the 1988 Convention.
5. Underlines that law enforcement measures are required as a necessary complement to alternative development programmes to tackle either illicit activities such as laboratories, precursors, trafficking, money laundering and related organized crime, both in areas where alternative development programmes are implemented and in surrounding areas. Law enforcement measures are also required against persistent illicit cultivation of narcotic crop in areas where viable alternative sources of income already exist.
6. Stresses that as long as alternative income is not available in areas where alternative development programmes are implemented, the success of such programmes may be seriously endangered if forced crop eradication measures are applied in the same areas at the same time.
7. Believes that the success of alternative development programmes depends on long term financial and political commitment of both the donor community and governments of affected countries, consistent integrated rural development, effective enforcement of drug control measures and awareness among the local population of the negative consequences of drug abuse
8. Considers that alternative development programmes should only he designed for areas that have the necessary potential for adequate drug control.
Page 1 of 4
