Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:58 am
Time: 11:58 am
Results for drug regulation
18 results foundAuthor: New Zealand. Law Commission. Title: Controlling and regulating drugs Summary: This issues paper traces the history of drug policy and regulation in New Zealand and reviews the current approach to drug control and regulation. Details: Wellington, New Zealand: Law Commission, 2010, 402p. Source: Internet Source Year: 2010 Country: New Zealand URL: Shelf Number: 117811 Keywords: Criminal Justice PolicyDrug OffensesDrug PolicyDrug Regulation |
Author: Reuter, Peter Title: The Unintended Consequences of Drug Policies. Report 5 Summary: This document is the fifth of five reports that assesses changes in global drug problem from 1998 to 2007. It looks specifically into the issues surrounding the unintended consequences of drug policies in consuming nations. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2009. 36p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: International URL: Shelf Number: 117657 Keywords: Drug ControlDrug PolicyDrug Regulation |
Author: Reuter, Peter H. Title: Assessing Changes in Global Drug Problems, 1998-2007: Main Report Summary: This report provides key findings of the RAND Europe study which assesses how the global market for illicit drugs has developed from 1998 to 2007 and describes worldwide drug policies implemented during that period to address the problem. The study assesses the impact of policy measures, both at the national and sub-national levels, on the illicit drugs problem. To the extent data allows, the project assessed how much policy measures, at the national and sub-national levels, have influenced drug problems. The analysis is focused on policy relevant matters but it does not attempt to make recommendations to governments. The evidence suggests that illicit drugs presented as much of a problem in 2007 as in 1998. Broadly speaking, while the situation may have improved slightly in some of the world's richer countries, it has substantially worsened in others, which include a few large developing or transitional countries. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2009. 68p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: International URL: Shelf Number: 117653 Keywords: Drug ControlDrug PolicyDrug RegulationDrug TraffickingIllegal Drugs |
Author: Rolles, Stephen, ed. Title: A Comparison of the Cost-effectiveness of Prohibition and Regulation of Drugs Summary: Despite the billions spent each year on proactive and reactive drug law enforcement, the punitive prohibitionist approach has consistently delivered the opposite of its stated goals. The UK Government’s own data clearly demonstrates drug supply and availability increasing; use of drugs that cause the most harm increasing; health harms increasing; massive levels of crime created at all scales leading to a crisis in the criminal justice system; and illicit drug profits enriching criminals, fuelling conflict and destabilising producer and transit countries from Mexico to Afghanistan. This is an expensive policy that, in the words of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, has also created a raft of negative ‘unintended consequences’. The UK Government specifically claims the benefits of any move away from prohibition towards legal regulation of drug markets would be outweighed by the costs. No such cost-benefit analysis, or even a proper impact assessment of existing enforcement policy and legislation has ever been carried out here or anywhere else in the world. Yet there are clear Government guidelines that an impact assessment should be triggered by amongst other things, a policy going out to public consultation or when ‘unintended consequences’ are identified, both of which have happened with drug policy in recent years. Alternative approaches—involving established regulatory models of controlling drug production, supply and use—have not been considered or costed. The limited cost effectiveness analysis of current policy that has been undertaken has frequently been suppressed. In terms of scrutinizing major public policy and spending initiatives, current drug policy is unique in this regard. The generalisations being used to defend continuation of an expensive and systematically failing policy of drugs prohibition, and close down a mature and rational exploration of alternative approaches, are demonstrably based on un-evidenced assumptions. This paper is an attempt to begin to redress these failings by comparing the costs and benefits of the current policy of drug prohibition, with those of a proposed model for the legal regulation of drugs in the UK. We also identify areas of further research, and steps to ensure future drugs policy is genuinely based on evidence of what works. This initial analysis demonstrates that a move to legally regulated drug supply would deliver substantial benefits to the Treasury and wider community, even in the highly unlikely event of a substantial increase in use. Details: Bristol, UK: Transform Drug Policy Foundation, 2009. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 26, 2010 at: http://www.tdpf.org.uk/CBA%20New%202010.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.tdpf.org.uk/CBA%20New%202010.pdf Shelf Number: 120098 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug PolicyDrug Regulation |
Author: Global Commission on Drug Policy Title: War On Drugs: Report of the Global Commission on Drug Policy Summary: The global war on drugs has failed. When the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs came into being 50 years ago, and when President Nixon launched the US government’s war on drugs 40 years ago, policymakers believed that harsh law enforcement action against those involved in drug production, distribution and use would lead to an ever-diminishing market in controlled drugs such as heroin, cocaine and cannabis, and the eventual achievement of a ‘drug free world’. In practice, the global scale of illegal drug markets – largely controlled by organized crime – has grown dramatically over this period. While accurate estimates of global consumption across the entire 50-year period are not available, an analysis of the last 10 years alone shows a large and growing market. In spite of the increasing evidence that current policies are not achieving their objectives, most policymaking bodies at the national and international level have tended to avoid open scrutiny or debate on alternatives. This lack of leadership on drug policy has prompted the establishment of our Commission, and leads us to our view that the time is now right for a serious, comprehensive and wide-ranging review of strategies to respond to the drug phenomenon. The starting point for this review is the recognition of the global drug problem as a set of interlinked health and social challenges to be managed, rather than a war to be won. Commission members have agreed on four core principles that should guide national and international drug policies and strategies, and have made eleven recommendations for action. The Commission’s recommendations include: ● End the criminalization, marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but who do no harm to others. ● Encourage experimentation by governments with models of legal regulation of drugs (especially cannabis) to undermine the power of organized crime and safeguard the health and security of their citizens. ● Ensure that a variety of treatment modalities are available – including not just methadone and buprenorphine treatment but also the heroin-assisted treatment programs that have proven successful in many European countries and Canada. ● Apply human rights and harm reduction principles and policies both to people who use drugs as well as those involved in the lower ends of illegal drug markets such as farmers, couriers and petty sellers. Details: Rio de Janeiro: Global Commission on Drug Policy, 2011. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2011 at: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Report Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Report Shelf Number: 121881 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse PolicyDrug PolicyDrug RegulationIllegal Drug Markets |
Author: Tanguay, Pascal Title: Kratom in Thailand: Decriminalisation and Community Control? Summary: In early 2010, the Thai Office of the Narcotics Control Board (ONCB) developed a policy proposal to review different aspects of the criminal justice process in relation to drug cases. The possibility of decriminalising the indigenous psychoactive plant, kratom, was included in the ONCB’s proposal for consideration by the Ministry of Justice. This briefing paper provides an overview of issues related to kratom legislation and policy in Thailand as well as a set of conclusions and recommendations to contribute to a reassessment of the current ban on kratom in Thailand and the region. The briefing is based on desk research of existing documentation as well as field research carried out in October and November 2010 in Bangkok, Surat Thani, Trang, Satun, Songkhla, and Hat Yai in Thailand. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2011. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies, Nr. 13: Accessed July 1, 2011 at: http://www.idpc.net/sites/default/files/library/kratom-in-thailand.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Thailand URL: http://www.idpc.net/sites/default/files/library/kratom-in-thailand.pdf Shelf Number: 121940 Keywords: Drug Control Policy (Thailand)Drug Regulation |
Author: Zuffa, Grazia Title: How to Determine Personal Use in Drug Legislation. The “Threshold Controversy” in the Light of the Italian Experience Summary: Distinguishing between drug possession for personal use and supply and trafficking is widely acknowledged as one of the most difficult and controversial issues facing drug legislators and policy makers. To address the problem, two solutions are typically enacted: the threshold scheme and the “flexible” model. According to the former, pre-defined quantities of the substances are presumed for personal use, while in the flexible model (or “discretionary system”) the court rules whether possession of drugs is intended for personal use or for supply, taking into account all the available circumstances. The purpose of this paper is to examine the advantages and the shortcomings of the different options, based on the Italian experience, as well as their real effectiveness in dealing with the problem. As the threshold controversy in the Italian context is closely intertwined with the debate over “criminalisation versus decriminalisation”, it will be necessary to examine changes in drug legislation, in particular evaluating the current 2006 drug law. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2011. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 15: Accessed September 2, 2011 at: http://www.idpc.net/sites/default/files/library/The-threshold-controversy-in-the-light-of-the-italian-experience.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Italy URL: http://www.idpc.net/sites/default/files/library/The-threshold-controversy-in-the-light-of-the-italian-experience.pdf Shelf Number: 122620 Keywords: Drug Control (Italy)Drug PolicyDrug RegulationDrugs |
Author: Klein, Alex Title: Chewing over Khat prohibition: The globalisation of control and regulation of an ancient stimulant Summary: In the context of a fast changing and well documented market in legal highs, the case of khat (Catha edulis) provides an interesting anomaly. It is first of all a plant-based substance that undergoes minimal transformation or processing in the journey from farm to market. Secondly, khat has been consumed for hundreds if not thousands of years in the highlands of Eastern Africa and Southern Arabia. In European countries, khat use was first observed during the 1980s, but has only attracted wider attention in recent years. Discussions about appropriate regulatory systems and the implications of rising khat use for European drug policies should take cognizance of social, demographic and cultural trends, and compare the existing models of control that exist in Europe. Khat provides a unique example of a herbal stimulant that is defined as an ordinary vegetable in some countries and a controlled drug in others. It provides a rare opportunity to study the effectiveness, costs and benefits of diverse control regimes. As long as khat is legally produced and traded, it also allows for the views of stakeholders such as farmers and traders to be included in policy discussions. Details: Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Transnational Institute (TNI), 2012. 12p. Source: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 17: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 27, 2012 at http://undrugcontrol.info/images/stories/documents/dlr17.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://undrugcontrol.info/images/stories/documents/dlr17.pdf Shelf Number: 123835 Keywords: Drug RegulationIllegal Drug MarketsKhat |
Author: Collins, John, ed. Title: Governing The Global Drug Wars Summary: International drug control efforts began in 1909, with the aim of eradicating the abuse of certain drugs by controlling their supply. A complex international system of enforcement grew up based on this belief in supply control. A century on, the empirical data is available and overwhelming: the system has failed. Worse, it has become increasingly clear that the human cost of pursuing many of its policies renders them unjustifiable. From mass incarceration in the United States and Asia, to the HIV/AIDS epidemic flooding Russia and the waves of violence rippling through Latin America – current global drug policies are worsening current global drug problems. This is no longer a point of controversy, but as Joseph Spillane suggests, is something which ‘no serious scholar questions’. Nevertheless, driven by a mixture of bureaucratic and ideological inertia, the international drug control system, governed through the UN and enforced by a number of core states, continues to pursue many of the same failed policies. This report asks why the system evolved in the way that it did, and explores the potential for reform. Often, those seeking to understand the complex and opaque international drug control system look to the wording of its various conventions and governing treaties – both of which are open to wide interpretation. However, as William McAllister points out, the system evolved through complex diplomatic, bureaucratic, social and interpersonal forces. It is only through an understanding of these broader forces that we can properly explain how the system was constructed and why it continues to function in the way that it does. Building on this discussion of historical complexity, David Courtwright examines the reasons why some drugs have traditionally been the subjects of ‘war,’ while others have become deeply ingrained in the mainstream economy. This is a question expanded upon by James Mill’s survey of the questionable scientific evidence underpinning cannabis’ co-option into international controls. As Joseph Spillane’s analysis shows, in order to better understand current international drug policies we should focus more attention on the considerable harms that these policies create. In particular he suggests that researchers should concentrate on the wealth of evidence available from the daily experience of contemporary drug addicts, which reveals the, often-harrowing impacts of the various drug wars. Paul Gootenberg analyses the interaction between international policies and shifting cocaine ‘commodity chains’ in Latin America over the last century, culminating in the current Mexican crisis. In so doing, he highlights a seemingly inherent tendency of international drug policy makers to create larger and more violent problems than their interdictionist policies resolve. Former Swiss President Ruth Dreifuss and her colleague Diane Steber evaluate Switzerland’s interaction with the international system, highlighting the pressure exerted on states trying to pursue policies outside the traditional supply-centric paradigm. David Bewley-Taylor then examines ‘the UNGASS decade’ between 1998 and 2008, when the international community committed itself to achieving ‘a drug free world’. He argues that the consensus that characterised this period is now fracturing as nation states are more openly pursuing alternative approaches. In the final section of this report we look towards the future of the system and highlight specific areas in need of immediate reform. Damon Barrett shows that the current system is lacking in basic human rights oversight, and as a result is permitting systematic human rights abuses. Joanne Csete focuses on the International Narcotics Control Board’s (INCB) support for unscientific policies internationally and its refusal to endorse best practice public health policies, particularly around HIV/AIDS prevention. She argues that the INCB remains ‘the most closed and least transparent of any entity supported by the United Nations.’ The machinery of international drug control has solidified around outdated modes of thinking and failed policies. Despite this, it has proved remarkably successful at restricting policy experimentation worldwide and encouraging the continuation of counterproductive approaches. Two steps need to be taken. First, there need to be immediate measures to incorporate basic human rights standards and improve the level of oversight within the system. This is particularly urgent in the areas of international funding decisions and the operation of the INCB. Second, an independent root and branch review of the approach to, and apparatus governing, international drug control needs to be conducted with a view to long-term structural reforms. Such a review must begin with a deep understanding of the historical forces that have shaped and continue to underpin the current policies and system. This report should serve as a starting point. Details: London: London School of Economics, 2012. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: LSE Ideas; Special Report SR014: : Accessed March 25, 2013 at: http://www2.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/reports/SR014.aspx Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www2.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/reports/SR014.aspx Shelf Number: 128121 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse PolicyDrug ControlDrug PolicyDrug RegulationDrug War (International) |
Author: Seddon, Toby Title: Regulating Global Drug Problems Summary: The problems associated with the global drug trade are amongst the most challenging and intractable of all those facing policy-makers. The global drug prohibition system is widely acknowledged as a costly and counterproductive failure, not only presiding over a massive expansion of the problem but also causing a range of damaging side-effects, notably fuelling organised crime. The need for new thinking has never been more evident. It is argued that current arguments for drug policy reform, whilst highly effective at critiquing prohibition, are nevertheless based on a false understanding of the nature of markets and regulation. This paper sets out an alternative constitutive conception of drug control which not only provides a better basis for challenging prohibition but also a more fruitful framework for developing an alternative approach. It is suggested that the regulation perspective outlined in this paper represents a new paradigm for addressing the challenges presented by global psychoactive commerce in the early twenty-first century. Details: Canberra: Australian National University, Regulatory Institutions Network (RegNet), 2013. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: RegNet Research Paper No. 2013/6 : Accessed June 1, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2261026 Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2261026 Shelf Number: 128889 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug ControlDrug MarketsDrug PolicyDrug Regulation |
Author: Gallahue, Patrick Title: Partners in Crime: International Funding for Drug Control and Gross Violations of Human Rights Summary: “Partners in Crime: International Funding for Drug Control and Gross Violations of Human Rights” documents how millions of dollars in drug enforcement funding and technical assistance are spent in countries with grave human rights concerns. Donor states include the United States, Australia Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Sweden and the European Union. Human rights abuses in the context of drug enforcement are well documented, but in the name of drug control, donor states are routinely supporting practices in other countries that they themselves regard as morally reprehensible and illegal, including executions, arbitrary detention, slave labour and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, sometimes amounting to torture. Using the examples of the death penalty and abusive drug detention centres, this report shows just how little regard is given to human rights in drug enforcement funding and co-operation, including when such funds are passed through the United Nations. Details: London: Harm Reduction International, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2013 at: http://www.ihra.net/files/2012/06/22/Partners_in_Crime_web1.pdf Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www.ihra.net/files/2012/06/22/Partners_in_Crime_web1.pdf Shelf Number: 129207 Keywords: Drug ControlDrug EnforcementDrug PolicyDrug RegulationHuman Rights |
Author: Haugaard, Lisa Title: Blunt Instrument: The United States' Punitive Fumigation Program in Colombia Summary: The conditions attached to the FY2002 foreign operations law governing the US-funded aerial spraying program to eradicate coca production in Colombia require that procedures be available to evaluate claims by local citizens that their health was harmed or their legal crops were damaged by aerial fumigation, and that fair compensation be paid to valid claims. According to the State Department's report released in September 2002, entitled "Report on Issues Related to the Aerial Eradication of Illicit Coca in Colombia," while a procedure for verification exists, not a single farmer has received compensation, and only one case has so far been approved for compensation. The compensation system for legal crops exists on paper, but not in practice. The report details no such procedure for evaluating health claims. Citizens' only recourse is their right to take legal action against Colombian government agencies. The conditions also require that alternative development be developed in departments scheduled for fumigation and implemented in departments where fumigation has taken place. The State Department report interprets this provision to mean a single alternative development project in a given geographic department (i.e., province or state) of Colombia satisfies the requirement, permitting fumigation to take place anywhere in that department. Thus the report did not provide a serious treatment of this provision. The fact that in 2002, USAID claims to have supported only 4500 hectares of licit crops while in the same year, the US Embassy goal is to spray 150,000 hectares, is one of several rough comparisons that reveal that the aerial fumigation program far outpaces alternative development. Indeed, alternative development programs are only designed to cover a small subset of the farmers affected by fumigation Details: Washington, DC: Latin American Working Group, 2002. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 12, 2014 at: http://www.lawg.org/storage/documents/blunt%20instrument%20(pdf) Year: 2002 Country: Colombia URL: http://www.lawg.org/storage/documents/blunt%20instrument%20(pdf).pdf Shelf Number: 132335 Keywords: Drug Control (Colombia)Drug PolicyDrug Regulation |
Author: Bagalman, Erin Title: Prescription Drug Abuse Summary: An estimated 6.8 million individuals currently abuse prescription drugs in the United States. Unlike policy on street drugs, federal policy on prescription drug abuse is complicated by the need to maintain access to prescription controlled substances (PCS) for legitimate medical use. The federal government has several roles in reducing prescription drug abuse. Coordination. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) coordinates and tracks prescription drug abuse reduction efforts and funding of multiple federal agencies. Regulation. The primary federal statutes governing prescription drug regulation are the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, commonly called the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Law Enforcement. Federal law enforcement, primarily the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), aims to prevent, detect, and investigate the diversion of prescription drugs while regulating the supply for legitimate medical, commercial, and scientific purposes. Health. Federal agencies and programs involved in health may address prescription drug abuse through service delivery (e.g., the Veterans Health Administration), financing (e.g., Medicare), and research (e.g., the National Institute on Drug Abuse). The federal government, state and local governments, and various private entities (e.g., pharmacies) are currently undertaking a range of approaches to reducing prescription drug abuse. Scheduling of PCS. The scheduling status of a PCS (1) affects patient access to PCS (e.g., by limiting refills); (2) affects the degree of regulatory requirements (e.g., supply chain recordkeeping); and (3) determines the degree of criminal punishment for illegal traffickers. Safe Storage and Disposal. DEA regulates storage of PCS by registered entities (e.g., pharmacies); provides registered entities with options for proper disposal of PCS; and sponsors National Prescription Drug Take-Back Days to assist citizens in safe disposal of PCS. Enhancing Law Enforcement. Federal law enforcement efforts may focus on geographic areas with higher rates of prescription drug abuse or on High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) that experience a higher volume of illicit trafficking of PCS. Using Data to Identify Risk. Most states operate prescription drug monitoring programs - databases of prescriptions filled for PCS. Other public and private entities also have data that may be analyzed to identify high-risk behavior among prescribers, dispensers, or patients. Awareness and Education. Efforts to increase awareness and education about prescription drug abuse may focus on health care providers, patients, or the general public. Treatment. Some prescription drug abuse may be avoided in treating underlying conditions (e.g., pain) or may be treated with pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic interventions. New products may improve treatment for both underlying conditions and prescription drug abuse. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2014. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: R43559: Accessed June 17, 2014 at: http://www.nacds.org/ceo/2014/0529/CRS_Drug_Abuse_Report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.nacds.org/ceo/2014/0529/CRS_Drug_Abuse_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 132480 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse PolicyDrug Abuse PreventionDrug EnforcementDrug RegulationPrescription Drug Abuse |
Author: Room, Robin Title: Roadmaps to Reforming the UN Drug Conventions Summary: The three UN Drug Conventions of 1961, 1971 and 1988 currently impose a 'one-size-fits-all' prohibitionist approach to drug policy throughout the world. This report, released December 2012, explains in detail how the Conventions could be amended in order to give countries greater freedom to adopt drug policies better suited to their special needs. In particular, the report details the treaty amendments that would be necessary if a country (or, better, a group of countries working together) wished to experiment with either of the following options: i) clear and explicit decriminalisation of the possession of one or more currently controlled substances for personal use ii) the creation of a regulated, non-medical market in one or more controlled substances. Details: London: Beckley Foundation, 2012. 179p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 19, 2014 at: http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/Roadmaps-to-Reform.pdf Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/Roadmaps-to-Reform.pdf Shelf Number: 132526 Keywords: DecriminalizationDrug ControlDrug PolicyDrug Regulation |
Author: Kavanagh, Camino Title: Harmonizing Drug Legislation in West Africa - A Call for Minimum Standards Summary: In 2008 ECOWAS produced a Political Declaration and Regional Action Plan to address the Growing Problem of Illicit Drug Trafficking, Organized Crime and Drug Abuse. In 2013, the Action Plan was formally extended, and priority was placed on the conduct of an extensive review "of existing Member states - legislation with a view to achieving a common minimum standard to ensure sufficient deterrent against illicit trafficking and enhance the use demand reduction strategies to address problem associated with drug use in line with relevant regional and international conventions." As part of that process, the Heads of ECOWAS Drug Control Committees called on the ECOWAS Commission "to harmonize ECOWAS legal texts into a single and up to date regional protocol on drug control and prevention of organized crime." In addition to the ECOWAS initiative, other efforts are underway in the region to harmonize drug legislation. The latter include: i. The Dakar Initiative, a sub-regional initiative signed by seven countries in February 2010. The Initiative intends to support the implementation of the ECOWAS Regional Action Plan and the Political Declaration. One of the main outcomes of the Dakar Initiative to date is an effort by the Senegalese Ministry of Interior to draft "a document [aimed at] harmoniz[ing] existing national legal instruments at a sub-regional level to fight drug trafficking in a coordinated and more efficient manner." A first draft of the 'harmonization law' was tabled in November 2012. ii. The West African Network of Central Authorities and Prosecutors (WACAP), a UNODC-backed initiative aimed at improving cooperation in criminal matters in the West African region and serving as a basis for capacity building. The first meeting of the Network was held in May 2013 in Abidjan, Cote dIvoire. In January 2013 the West Africa Commission on Drugs (WACD) was launched with the purpose of inter alia mobilizing public awareness, and developing evidence-based policy recommendations around drug trafficking and drug consumption and related impacts. Throughout its country visits and in the background papers commissioned to inform its work, WACD Commissioners were repeatedly informed of the significant challenges that persist with regard to drug related legislation in the sub-region, as well as challenges regarding the effective implementation of the legislation. Beyond a range of technical challenges cited, and the lack of the necessary expertise on the part of law enforcement and the judiciary for implementing drug-related legislation, the Commissioners were also informed on repeated occasions that people who use drugs and low-level drug dealers tend to be the ones who feel the brunt of the law, while high-level actors in the drug market tend to benefit most from legal inconsistencies or loopholes, corruption or political interference in due process. In addition, despite the human right protections directly or indirectly provided for in national legislation, these are rarely respected when it comes to providing treatment for people who have come into conflict with the law for drug-related offences. In this regard, and cognizant of the fact that different initiatives are already underway in West Africa, the WACD commissioned an empirically informed paper on a sampling of national drug laws and related legislation in four (4) countries in West Africa. As a means to better understand how legislation is being applied in practice, the paper was also informed by interviews with law enforcement and prison officials as well as a sampling of people in pre-trial detention or serving sentences for drug offences in the same four countries. The four countries selected for the case studies are Ghana, Nigeria, Mali and Guinea (the questionnaires for the prison sampling dimension of the case studies can be found in Annex B and C). The findings of the four case studies were presented to the WACD at its third meeting held in Accra, Ghana in October 2013. Subsequently, a small expert group drew from the case study findings, analysis of legislation in other countries (particularly Senegal, Sierra Leone and Liberia), and the findings from other background papers commissioned by the WACD to develop this synthesis report which puts forward a series of recommendations for minimum standards for drug related legislation in the region. It is hoped that the findings and recommendations of this synthesis report will fuel further discussion and serve as constructive input to ECOWAS and national policy makers as they move toward reviewing and harmonizing national drug legislation in West Africa. Details: West Africa Commission on Drugs, 2014. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: WACD Background paper No. 9(1): Accessed November 26, 2014 at: http://www.wacommissionondrugs.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Harmonizing-Drug-Legislation-in-West-Africa-2014-06-05.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Africa URL: http://www.wacommissionondrugs.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Harmonizing-Drug-Legislation-in-West-Africa-2014-06-05.pdf Shelf Number: 134256 Keywords: Drug ControlDrug Policy (West Africa)Drug RegulationDrug TraffickingOrganized Crime |
Author: Buxton, Julia Title: Drugs and Development: The Great Disconnect Summary: Key Points - The 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session on the World Drug Problem (UNGASS) will see a strong lobby in support of development oriented responses to the problem of drug supply, including from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). - The promotion of Alternative Development (AD) programmes that provide legal, non-drug related economic opportunities for drug crop cultivators reflects the limited success of enforcement responses, greater awareness of the development dimensions of cultivation activities and the importance of drugs and development agencies working co-operatively in drug environments. - Evidence from thirty years of AD programming demonstrates limited success in supply reduction and that poorly monitored and weakly evaluated programmes cause more harm than good; there has been little uptake of best practice approaches, cultivators rarely benefit from AD programmes, the concept of AD is contested and there is no shared understanding of 'development'. - AD was popularised in the 1990s when development discourse emphasised participatory approaches and human wellbeing. This is distinct from the development approaches of the 2000s, which have been 'securitised' in the aftermath of the Global War on Terror and which re-legitimise military participation in AD. - UNGASS 2016 provides an opportunity for critical scrutiny of AD and the constraints imposed by the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs on innovative, rights based and nationally owned supply responses. Cultivation is a development not a crime and security issue. Consideration must be given to a reconfiguration of institutional mandates, with supply and cultivation control removed from the UNODC and brought into the remit of development agencies. - Deliberation around the post 2015 Sustainable Development Goals provides an entry point for new approaches to drug issues in the Global South and an opportunity to reverse the human, development and public health harms caused by current counter-narcotics policies. Details: Swansea, UK: Global Drug Policy Observatory, Swansea University, 2015. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Report 2: Accessed February 3, 2015 at: http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/The%20Great%20Disconnect.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/The%20Great%20Disconnect.pdf Shelf Number: 134516 Keywords: Drug EnforcementDrug Policy (International)Drug ReformDrug Regulation |
Author: Sacco, Lisa N. Title: Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs Summary: In the midst of national concern over the opioid epidemic, federal and state officials are paying greater attention to the manner in which opioids are prescribed. Nearly all prescription drugs involved in overdoses are originally prescribed by a physician (rather than, for example, being stolen from pharmacies). Thus, attention has been directed toward better understanding how opioids are being prescribed and preventing the diversion of prescription drugs after the prescriptions are dispensed. Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) maintain statewide electronic databases of prescriptions dispensed for controlled substances (i.e., prescription drugs with a potential for abuse that are subject to stricter government regulation). Information collected by PDMPs may be used to educate and inform prescribers, pharmacists, and the public; identify or prevent drug abuse and diversion; facilitate the identification of prescription drug-addicted individuals and enable intervention and treatment; outline drug use and abuse trends to inform public health initiatives; or educate individuals about prescription drug use, abuse, diversion, and PDMPs themselves. As of February 2018, 50 states, the District of Columbia, and two territories (Guam and Puerto Rico) had operational PDMPs within their borders. How PDMPs are organized and operated varies among states. Each state determines which agency houses the PDMP; which controlled substances must be reported; which types of dispensers (e.g., pharmacies) are required to submit data; how often data are collected; who may access information in the PDMP database (e.g., prescribers, dispensers, or law enforcement); the circumstances under which the information may (or must) be accessed; and what enforcement mechanisms are in place for noncompliance. PDMP costs may vary widely, with startup costs that can range as high as $450,000 to over $1.5 million and annual operating costs ranging from $125,000 to nearly $1.0 million. States finance PDMPs using monies from a variety of sources including the state general fund, prescriber and pharmacy licensing fees, state controlled substance registration fees, health insurers' fees, directsupport organizations, state grants, and/or federal grants. The federal government supports state PDMPs through programs at the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Health and Human Services (HHS). Since FY2002, DOJ has administered the Harold Rogers Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, and in FY2017, DOJ incorporated this grant program into the new Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Program. HHS programs include National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting (NASPER), State Demonstration Grants for Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Response, Opioid Prevention in States grants, State Targeted Response to the Opioid Crisis Grants, and various pilots and initiatives under the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC). Of note, NASPER last received appropriations (of $2.0 million) in FY2010. State PDMPs vary with respect to whether or how information contained in the database is shared with other states. Federal policymakers have repeatedly emphasized the importance of enhancing interstate information sharing and the interoperability of state PDMPs. In 2011, the Obama Administration included efforts to increase interstate data sharing in its action plan to counter prescription drug abuse. In 2017, a presidential commission recommended, among other things, that the Trump Administration support legislation to require DOJ to fund a "data-sharing hub" and require states receiving federal grant funds to share PDMP data. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2018. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: R42593: Accessed May 25, 2018 at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42593.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42593.pdf Shelf Number: 150372 Keywords: Drug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse PolicyDrug Abuse PreventionDrug RegulationOpioid EpidemicOpioidsPrescription Drug Abuse |
Author: Global Commission on Drug Policy Title: Regulation: The Responsible Control of Drugs Summary: Executive Summary The legal regulation of drugs is rapidly moving from the theoretical to the practical domain. Regulation is a critical part of drug policy reform if the harms of prohibition and the illegal drug market are to be reduced but remains a particularly challenging element of the public and political debate. Progress requires engaging with legitimate public concerns about how regulation might be implemented and what its impacts will be, as well as political opposition and institutional inertia. Regulation and management of risky products and behaviors is a key function of government authorities across the world. It is the norm in almost all areas of policy and law - except drug policy. Regulation addresses the reality of risk in our lives and our communities and is all around us: product safety regulations that require flame-retardant mattresses; food regulations that require "sell-by" dates on labels; regulation of which vehicles can be driven, how fast, and where, and so on. This report addresses the reality that over 250 million people around the world are taking risks by consuming currently prohibited drugs. Accepting this reality and putting in place an effective regulatory strategy to manage it is neither admitting defeat nor condoning drug use. It is part of a responsible, evidence-based approach that deals with the world as it is in contrast with ideologically driven and ultimately counterproductive attempts to create a "drug free world". The report identifies key questions that, in the Commission's experience, have become particular stumbling blocks in the progress of the public dialogue on regulation. By engaging with these questions directly, the report aims to facilitate and encourage the debate, thus bringing this much needed reform nearer. Details: Geneva, Switzerland: Author, 2018. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 16, 2019 at: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/reports/regulation-the-responsible-control-of-drugs/ Year: 2018 Country: International URL: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ENG-2018_Regulation_Report_WEB-FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 154187 Keywords: Drug PolicyDrug RegulationIllegal Drug MarketIllicit Drug MarketLegalization |