Written by our Finance Officer, Ross Paterson.
Today was an exciting day for Youth RISE and its partner organisations, as the Global Drug Policy Index (GDPI) was the subject of a side event at the 65 th UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND). The side event provided a fantastic opportunity to showcase this pioneeringproject and the dedicated work of all people involved in its design, creation, launch, and the many advocacy activities carried out in various countries all over the world – not least a great number of Youth RISE staff and International Working Group members including Beatrix Vas, Carolina Ahumada, Ishwor Maharjan, Joana Canedo, Mayank Singh, MJ Stowe, Ruby Lawlor, Marialba Quesada, and Sandeep Shahi.
The side event was moderated by IDPC’s Marie Nougier and featured contributions from 3 people involved in the project in various capacities, including Mat Wall of Swansea University’s Global Drug Policy Observatory; Anne Madden of Harm Reduction Australia; and Youth RISE’s very own Marialba Quesada, as well as contributions from the UNODC’s Zhannat Kosmukhamedova and the OHCHR’s Zaved Mahmood.
The event began with Mat, who provided some background on the complexity of the task of deciding on an appropriate methodology for the GDPI’s, given the inherent difficulty of reducing something as complex and multi-faceted as drug policy to a series of numbers which can be quantified and compared between countries. He cited the four main challenges they faced: defining the boundaries of drug policy, as it often intersects with other policy areas; difficulties evaluating drug policy comparatively between countries given its politicised nature; navigating the complex international drug policy environment; and
overcoming challenges regarding unreliable data provided by state authorities seeking to show themselves in a positive light. Following consultation with drug policy experts and people with on-the-ground experience of drug policy practice in various countries, it was decided that the best conceptual approach for the Index’s creation was to use the UN Common Position on drug policy – which has an explicit focus on human rights-oriented drug policy recommendations – as it allowed the team to work around some of the political problems they were encountering from the outset. A total of 75 indicators were thus decided on across 5 policy dimensions: 1) the absence of extreme responses; 2) the proportionality of the criminal justice system; 3) health and harm reduction; 4) access to controlled medicines; and 5) development. Mat noted the key role of civil society organisations and individuals in providing much of the data through the GDPI survey which was then analysed by the team at Swansea University.
Next, it was a delight to hear our very own International Working Group member Marialba Quesada deliver a fantastic contribution outlining some of the main conclusions of the GDPI as well as presenting some results from Costa Rica and the importance of the participation of Latin America more generally. Marialba pointed out that none of the 30 countries came out particularly well in the index. Even Norway, who came out in first place, returned low scores when it came to providing harm reduction services – partly as a result of the lack of any form of decriminalisation. She went on to discuss how the incarceration of people who use drugs remains a huge issue around the globe, and touched on the fact that extrajudicial killings remain a concern in countries like Mexico – something she noted that decriminalisation models would help bring an end to. Mexico and Brazil were singled out by Marialba for their poor performance in the Index, where many are incarcerated not because their use of drugs is necessarily problematic, but because so much stigma exists around their use in the first place, leading to various other forms of discrimination as well as a sense of a restriction of the right to freedom of movement for people who use drugs. She explained how only 8 out of 30 countries could be said to be following the UN’s Common Position on drugs, and that ensuring domestic drug policies are in line with this approach does not appear to be a priority in many Latin American countries such as Costa Rica. She
also remarked that 24 of the 30 countries continue to carry minimum sentences for drug-related offences – for example, up to 8 years in Costa Rica. She continued that this most often tends to disproportionately impact people of lower socioeconomic status and ethnic minority groups, compounding the issue of access to services for these populations. Marialba concluded by describing some of the work she and others have done in Costa Rica to promote the Index, including a social media campaign as well as a webinar involving a range of key stakeholders including youth agencies, NGOs and civil society.
Marialba was followed by Anne Madden of Harm Reduction Australia (HRA) who began by describing how, similarly to Marialba in Costa Rica, HRA held a webinar in Australia featuring both domestic and international drug policy experts, advocates, researchers, and Australian parliamentarians, which really started a dialogue among politicians on how their domestic drug policies could be improved. She also expanded on a point Marialba had made about how no countries did particularly well in the Index by highlighting how Australia managed to “sneak into the top 5”, despite the fact that most Australians with an interest in drug policy recognise that the country still has a lot to improve on, particularly when it comes to access to harm reduction services and proportionality of criminal justice responses. She noted that indigenous communities were much more likely than others to be targeted by law enforcement and are overrepresented in prisons. And, despite having a reputation of being a ”harm reduction paradise”, Anne pointed out that there is no real drug testing to speak of, a lack of drug consumption rooms, and poor naloxone provision in Australia. In this way, we can see how the Index allows us to challenge misconceptions and political narratives that parliamentarians like to push for the sake of optics by pointing to measurable, quantifiable data that undermines these false narratives, in turn applying pressure for concrete policy solutions. She even mentioned how the Index had already been used against Australia during this year’s CND negotiations to pursue more tangible policy outcomes as opposed to mere rhetoric.
The contribution from the UNODC’s Zaved Mahmood can be summed up as a statement of his gratitude for the work that went into the GDPI and its usefulness as a tool to ensure greater accountability for state governments in years to come, and unfortunately the UNODC’s Zhannat Kosmukhamedova’s contribution was mostly inaudible due to technical difficulties.
Overall, the side event provided a fantastic insight into both the design of the Index itself as well as its results. For those involved in the project, it will no doubt be incredibly satisfying to see the amount of traction the Index has gained after years of tireless work. There is certainly a great deal of recognition among many people that the GDPI will inevitably become a vital tool in the fight for evidence-based, public health-oriented, human rights-centred drug policies. The concept of an index like the GDPI – while certainly an enormous, complex challenge for those involved in its creation – is a fairly simple one. Rank countries on their adherence to the UN common position on drugs, name and shame those who are
patently failing in this regard, and incentivise them to improve their track record by comparing them directly against other countries. However, despite its relative conceptual simplicity, it looks to be a key milestone in the global fight against the ‘War on Drugs’. With each new version, the Index will allow drug policy experts and civil society actors to challenge governments directly for their lack of progress and, in this way, give more power to those whose voices so often go unheard in policy-making processes. Every single person involved in this project, including our colleagues who have played a pivotal role in the Index’s creation, should all be extremely proud of their fantastic achievement.