• Español
  • English
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • rss
  • Español
  • English
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • rss
TNI D&D
  • Home
  • About us
    • About us
    • People
    • Partners
    • Researchers
    • Contact us
    • In the media
    • Newsletter
  • Newsroom
    • Press contacts
    • Press releases
    • Resources
    • Drugs in the news
  • Issues
    • Drug policy debate in the Americas
    • Decriminalization
    • Proportionality of sentences
    • Harm reduction
    • Reclassification of substances
    • Safer crack use
    • Human rights
    • Regulation
    • Unscheduling the coca leaf
    • Ending the war on drugs
    • Alternative development
    • Cannabis
    • Producers of Crops
    • Law enforcement
    • ATS, Mild stimulants & NPS
    • European Drug Policy
    • Money Laundering
  • UN Drug
    Control
    • Conventions
    • UNODC
    • CND
    • INCB
    • UNGASS
  • Country
    information
    • Drug Law Reform on the Map
    • Central America
      • El Salvador
      • Guatemala
      • Honduras
      • Costa Rica
    • Latin America
      • Argentina
      • Bolivia
      • Paraguay
      • Brazil
      • Chile
      • Colombia
      • Ecuador
      • Peru
      • Uruguay
      • Venezuela
    • Mexico
    • Caribbean
      • Jamaica
      • Belize
    • Afghanistan
  • Events
    • Expert Seminars
    • Informal Policy Dialogues
    • Public Events
    • Judges for Law Reform
  • Publications
    • Drug Policy Briefings
    • Drug Law Reform
    • Legislative Reform Series
    • The Human Face
    • Drugs & conflict
    • Drugs and the Law (CEDD)
      • Systems overload
    • Drug Markets and Violence
  • Weblog

 

The Vienna Declaration

The Vienna Declaration is a statement seeking to improve community health and safety by calling for the incorporation of scientific evidence into illicit drug policies. We are inviting scientists, health practitioners and the public to endorse this document in order to bring these issues to the attention of governments and international agencies, and to illustrate that drug policy reform is a matter of urgent international significance. We also welcome organizational endorsements.

application-pdfDownload: The Vienna Declaration (PDF)

The Declaration

The criminalisation of illicit drug users is fuelling the HIV epidemic and has resulted in overwhelmingly negative health and social consequences. A full policy reorientation is needed.

In response to the health and social harms of illegal drugs, a large international drug prohibition regime has been developed under the umbrella of the United Nations.1 Decades of research provide a comprehensive assessment of the impacts of the global “War on Drugs” and, as thousands of individuals gather in Vienna at the XVIII International AIDS Conference, the international scientific community calls for an acknowledgement of the limits and harms of drug prohibition, and for drug policy reform to remove barriers to effective HIV prevention, treatment and care.

The evidence that law enforcement has failed to prevent the availability of illegal drugs, in communities where there is demand, is now unambiguous.2, 3Over the last several decades, national and international drug surveillance systems have demonstrated a general pattern of falling drug prices and increasing drug purity—despite massive investments in drug law enforcement.3,4

Furthermore, there is no evidence that increasing the ferocity of law enforcement meaningfully reduces the prevalence of drug use.5 The data also clearly demonstrate that the number of countries in which people inject illegal drugs is growing, with women and children becoming increasingly affected.6 Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, injection drug use accounts for approximately one in three new cases of HIV.7, 8 In some areas where HIV is spreading most rapidly, such as Eastern Europe and Central Asia, HIV prevalence can be as high as 70% among people who inject drugs, and in some areas more than 80% of all HIV cases are among this group.8

In the context of overwhelming evidence that drug law enforcement has failed to achieve its stated objectives, it is important that its harmful consequences be acknowledged and addressed. These consequences include but are not limited to:

  • HIV epidemics fuelled by the criminalisation of people who use illicit drugs and by prohibitions on the provision of sterile needles and opioid substitution treatment.9, 10
  • HIV outbreaks among incarcerated and institutionalised drug users as a result of punitive laws and policies and a lack of HIV prevention services in these settings.11-13
  • The undermining of public health systems when law enforcement drives drug users away from prevention and care services and into environments where the risk of infectious disease transmission (e.g., HIV, hepatitis C & B, and tuberculosis) and other harms is increased.14-16
  • A crisis in criminal justice systems as a result of record incarceration rates in a number of nations.17, 18 This has negatively affected the social functioning of entire communities. While racial disparities in incarceration rates for drug offences are evident in countries all over the world, the impact has been particularly severe in the US, where approximately one in nine African-American males in the age group 20 to 34 is incarcerated on any given day, primarily as a result of drug law enforcement.19
  • Stigma towards people who use illicit drugs, which reinforces the political popularity of criminalising drug users and undermines HIV prevention and other health promotion efforts.20, 21
  • Severe human rights violations, including torture, forced labour, inhuman and degrading treatment, and execution of drug offenders in a number of countries.22, 23
  • A massive illicit market worth an estimated annual value of US$320 billion.4 These profits remain entirely outside the control of government. They fuel crime, violence and corruption in countless urban communities and have destabilised entire countries, such as Colombia, Mexico and Afghanistan.4
  • Billions of tax dollars wasted on a “War on Drugs” approach to drug control that does not achieve its stated objectives and, instead, directly or indirectly contributes to the above harms.24
Unfortunately, evidence of the failure of drug prohibition to achieve its stated goals, as well as the severe negative consequences of these policies, is often denied by those with vested interests in maintaining the status quo.25This has created confusion among the public and has cost countless lives. Governments and international organisations have ethical and legal obligations to respond to this crisis and must seek to enact alternative evidence-based strategies that can effectively reduce the harms of drugs without creating harms of their own. We, the undersigned, call on governments and international organisations, including the United Nations, to:
  • Undertake a transparent review of the effectiveness of current drug policies.
  • Implement and evaluate a science-based public health approach to address the individual and community harms stemming from illicit drug use.
  • Decriminalise drug users, scale up evidence-based drug dependence treatment options and abolish ineffective compulsory drug treatment centres that violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.26
  • Unequivocally endorse and scale up funding for the implementation of the comprehensive package of HIV interventions spelled out in the WHO, UNODC and UNAIDS Target Setting Guide.27
  • Meaningfully involve members of the affected community in developing, monitoring and implementing services and policies that affect their lives.
We further call upon the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, to urgently implement measures to ensure that the United Nations system—including the International Narcotics Control Board—speaks with one voice to support the decriminalisation of drug users and the implementation of evidence-based approaches to drug control.28

Basing drug policies on scientific evidence will not eliminate drug use or the problems stemming from drug injecting. However, reorienting drug policies towards evidence-based approaches that respect, protect and fulfil human rights has the potential to reduce harms deriving from current policies and would allow for the redirection of the vast financial resources towards where they are needed most: implementing and evaluating evidence-based prevention, regulatory, treatment and harm reduction interventions.


The official website for the Vienna Declaration

 


REFERENCES
1. William B McAllister. Drug diplomacy in the twentieth century: an international history. Routledge, New York, 2000.
2. Reuter P. Ten years after the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS): assessing drug problems, policies and reform proposals. Addiction 2009;104:510-7.
3. United States Office of National Drug Control Policy. The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the Second Quarter of 2003. Executive Office of the President;
Washington, DC, 2004.
4. World Drug Report 2005. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime; 2005.
5. Degenhardt L, Chiu W-T, Sampson N, et al. Toward a global view of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, and cocaine use: Findings from the WHO World Mental Health Surveys.
PLOS Medicine 2008;5:1053-67.
6. Mathers BM, Degenhardt L, Phillips B, et al. Global epidemiology of injecting drug use and HIV among people who inject drugs: A systematic review. Lancet
2008;372:1733-45.
7. Wolfe D, Malinowska-Sempruch K. Illicit drug policies and the global HIV epidemic: Effects of UN and national government approaches. New York: Open Society
Institute; 2004.
8. 2008 Report on the global AIDS epidemic. The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS; Geneva, 2008.
9. Lurie P, Drucker E. An opportunity lost: HIV infections associated with lack of a national needle-exchange programme in the USA. Lancet 1997;349:604.
10. Rhodes T, Lowndes C, Judd A, et al. Explosive spread and high prevalence of HIV infection among injecting drug users in Togliatti City, Russia. AIDS 2002;16:F25.
11. Taylor A, Goldberg D, Emslie J, et al. Outbreak of HIV infection in a Scottish prison. British Medical Journal 1995;310:289.
12. Sarang A, Rhodes T, Platt L, et al. Drug injecting and syringe use in the HIV risk environment of Russian penitentiary institutions: qualitative study. Addiction
2006;101:1787.
13. Jurgens R, Ball A, Verster A. Interventions to reduce HIV transmission related to injecting drug use in prison. Lancet Infectious Disease 2009;9:57-66.
14. Davis C, Burris S, Metzger D, Becher J, Lynch K. Effects of an intensive street-level police intervention on syringe exchange program utilization: Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. American Journal of Public Health 2005;95:233.
15. Bluthenthal RN, Kral AH, Lorvick J, Watters JK. Impact of law enforcement on syringe exchange programs: A look at Oakland and San Francisco. Medical Anthropology
1997;18:61.
16. Rhodes T, Mikhailova L, Sarang A, et al. Situational factors influencing drug injecting, risk reduction and syringe exchange in Togliatti City, Russian Federation: a
qualitative study of micro risk environment. Social Science & Medicine 2003;57:39.
17. Fellner J, Vinck P. Targeting blacks: Drug law enforcement and race in the United States. New York: Human Rights Watch; 2008.
18. Drucker E. Population impact under New York's Rockefeller drug laws: An analysis of life years lost. Journal of Urban Health 2002;79:434-44.
19. Warren J, Gelb A, Horowitz J, Riordan J. One in 100: Behind bars in America 2008. The Pew Center on the States Washington, DC: The Pew Charitable Trusts 2008.
20. Rhodes T, Singer M, Bourgois P, Friedman SR, Strathdee SA. The social structural production of HIV risk among injecting drug users. Social Science & Medicine 2005;61:1026.
21. Ahern J, Stuber J, Galea S. Stigma, discrimination and the health of illicit drug users. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2007;88:188.
22. Elliott R, Csete J, Palepu A, Kerr T. Reason and rights in global drug control policy. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005;172:655-6.
23. Edwards G, Babor T, Darke S, et al. Drug trafficking: time to abolish the death penalty. Addiction 2009;104:3.
24. The National Centre on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (2001).  Shoveling up: The impact of substance abuse on State budgets.

25. Wood E, Montaner JS, Kerr T. Illicit drug addiction, infectious disease spread, and the need for an evidence-based response. Lancet Infectious Diseases
2008;8:142-3.
26. Klag S, O'Callaghan F, Creed P. The use of legal coercion in the treatment of substance abusers: An overview and critical analysis of thirty years of research. Substance
Use & Misuse 2005;40:1777.
27. WHO, UNODC, UNAIDS 2009. Technical Guide for countries to set targets for universal access to HIV prevention, treatment and care for injection drug users.

28. Wood E, Kerr T. Could a United Nations organisation lead to a worsening of drug-related harms? Drug and Alcohol Review 2010;29:99-100.

  • Labels
    HIV/AIDS | human rights | INCB | UN drug control | harm reduction

Drugs in the News

  • How some THC is legal — for now
    18.01.2021
  • Is the world running out of Ayahausca?
    18.01.2021
  • France launches public consultation on legalising cannabis
    17.01.2021
  • Drug deaths: ‘Scotland should decriminalise and dare Westminster to block it’
    15.01.2021
  • 2020 was S.F.’s deadliest year for overdoses, by far
    15.01.2021
  • Appeals Court overturns ruling that legalized SCS; Safehouse fights on
    13.01.2021
More news

Weblog

    A new EU Drug Strategy is being repared by the German presidencyA new EU Drug Strategy is being repared by the German presidency
    08.10.2020
More weblog

Hilites

Balancing Treaty Stability and Change

balancing hilite

Inter se modification of the UN drug control conventions to facilitate cannabis regulation


Connecting the dots...

connecting dots hilite

Human rights, illicit cultivation and alternative development


Morocco and Cannabis

morocco cannabis hilite

Reduction, containment or acceptance


The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition

rise decline hilite

The History of Cannabis in the UN Drug Control System and Options For Reform


Tags

10-year Review  20 1998 UNGASS  26 2005 CND debate  8 2016 UNGASS  126 2019 HLM  5 activism  19 afghanistan  24 show all

Tags

10-year Review  20 1998 UNGASS  26 2005 CND debate  8 2016 UNGASS  126 2019 HLM  5 activism  19 afghanistan  24 hide
africa  7 albania  11 alternative development  112 alternatives to policing  2 amnesty  62 appellation of origin  3 argentina  32 asean  9 ATS  15 australia  93 ayahuasca  6 bahamas  4 ballot 2012  155 banking  43 barbados  11 belgium  32 belize  10 bermuda  4 bolivia  115 brazil  93 brownfield doctrine  24 burma  42 california  201 cambodia  12 canada  492 cannabinoids  89 cannabis  2755 cannabis clubs  185 cannabis industry  362 caribbean  133 caricom  33 cbd oil  1 central america  5 chile  21 china  46 civil society  37 CND  126 coca  212 cocaine  59 coffee shop  210 cognitive decline  30 colombia  147 colorado  159 compulsary detention  19 conflict  3 conventions  249 corporate capture  6 costa rica  10 crack  50 craft cannabis  27 crime  67 czech republic  30 dark net  4 death penalty  2 decertification  1 decriminalization  815 deforestation  8 denmark  119 drug checking  35 drug consumption rooms  178 drug courts  22 drug markets  133 drug testing  7 drug trade  48 e-cigarettes  1 e-joint  2 ecstasy  59 ecuador  22 egypt  16 el salvador  2 environment  14 eradication  125 essential medicines  25 estonia  1 eswatini  4 european drug policy  67 expert advisory group  9 extrajudicial killings  92 fair trade  13 fentanyl  75 france  97 fumigation  25 gateway theory  29 georgia  2 germany  151 ghana  16 global commission  46 greece  18 guatemala  31 guatemala initiative  47 harm reduction  329 hemp  39 heroin  126 heroin assisted treatment  77 HIV/AIDS  61 home cultivation  73 honduras  3 human rights  246 incarceration  51 INCB  135 india  87 indonesia  32 informal drug policy dialogues  22 inter se modification  13 iran  14 ireland  15 israel  55 italy  34 jamaica  161 japan  2 kava  3 kazakhstan  5 ketamine  27 khat  36 kratom  26 kyrgyzstan  1 laos  2 latin american debate  115 law enforcement  377 lebanon  41 legal highs  63 legalization  1348 lesotho  6 luxembourg  32 malaysia  7 malta  13 medical cannabis  595 mental health  43 methamphetamine  40 mexico  201 Mid-Term Review  1 mild stimulants  37 money laundering  53 morocco  88 naloxone  13 nepal  6 netherlands  285 new york  20 new zealand  64 NIDA  5 nitrous oxide  6 norway  15 NPS  10 opinion polls  115 opioids  131 opium  90 oregon  29 overdose kits  4 pakistan  9 panama  5 paraguay  4 pardon  2 patents  18 peace  22 peru  42 peyote  3 philippines  85 pleasure  5 police pacification  18 portugal  66 potency  2 precursors  6 prevention  3 prison situation  92 producers  117 prohibition  140 proportionality  110 psychedelics  11 psychosis  53 puerto rico  3 racism  24 reclassification  116 recriminalisation  36 regulation  1187 russia  36 sacramental use  11 safe supply  18 safer crack  28 scheduling  24 scientific research  135 sdg  2 security  14 senegal  1 sentencing  65 singapore  6 social justice  47 south africa  63 spain  76 st lucia  7 st vincent and grenadines  29 substance-use disorder  18 substitution treatment  30 sweden  26 switzerland  133 synthetic cannabinoids  30 taxation  38 teen use  43 thailand  52 thresholds  37 tramadol  17 treatment  22 trinidad & tobago  14 tunisia  5 UK  248 UN drug control  422 UNGASS  58 UNODC  107 uruguay  143 US drug policy  1108 vaping  2 venezuela  5 vietnam  5 violence  131 WHO  60 world drug report  11

This website

UN Drug Control

In 2011 the 1961 UN Single Convention on drugs will be in place for 50 years. In 2012 the international drug control system will exist 100 years since the International Opium Convention was signed in 1912 in The Hague. Does it still serve its purpose or is a reform of the UN Drug Conventions needed? This site provides critical background.

Drug Law Reform on the map

dlronthemap_und

Copyright © 2016 Drug Law Reform in Latin America

Website by WebWolf