Mapping the Response to Drug-Related HIV and Hepatitis C Epidemics

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Mapping the Response to Drug-Related HIV and Hepatitis C Epidemics Untitled-7 1 29/04/2008 12:11:46 Contents Acknowledgements p2 Foreword by Professor Paul Hunt p3 Introductory comments from Gerry Stimson p4 Introductory comments from International Network of People who Use Drugs (INPUD) p4 Introduction p7 Section 1: A global perspective p9 Section 2: Regional overviews Asia p21 Eurasia p33 Western Europe p47 Caribbean p57 Latin America p65 North America p75 Oceania p87 Middle East and North Africa p97 Sub-Saharan Africa p107 Section 3: Key issues The Human Right to Harm Reduction p119 Beyond injecting drug use – the overlap between HIV and non-injecting drug use p123 Civil Society Engagement: Connecting the local with the global p125 1 The Global State of Harm Reduction 2008 Mapping the response to drug-related HIV and hepatitis C epidemics Catherine Cook and Natalya Kanaef © 2008 International Harm Reduction Association ISBN 978-0-9557754-2-0 This report was produced by HR2, the Human Rights Monitoring and Policy Analysis Programme of the International Harm Reduction Association. Acknowledgements This report was made possible by the collaborative input of numerous harm reduction networks, drug user organisations and research institutes. IHRA would like to acknowledge the invaluable contribution of these individuals and organisations in gathering data for their specific countries or regions: Asia: Asian Harm Reduction Network, Thailand; Caribbean: Caribbean Harm Reduction Coalition, Saint Lucia; Eurasia: Eurasian Harm Reduction Network, Lithuania; Latin America: Intercambios Association Civil, Argentina; Middle East and North Africa: Iranian National Centre for Addiction Studies; North America: Harm Reduction Project and Harm Reduction Coalition (US), Canadian Harm Reduction Network (Canada); Oceania: Australian Injecting and Illicit Drug Users League (Australia), New Zealand Drug Foundation (New Zealand); Sub-Saharan Africa: South African Medical Research Council (Southern Africa), UYDEL, Uganda (East Africa), Student AID Liberia (Liberia), Professor A. Ouedraogo (West Africa); Western Europe: International Harm Reduction Association, ASUD/French National Association for the Safety of Drug Users (France), Brukarföreningen/Danish Drug Users Union (Denmark), Svenska Brukarföreningen/Swedish Drug Users Union (Sweden), National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse (UK). Thanks also to the following people for reviewing sections of the report and for providing input and guidance: Rick Lines, Gerry Stimson, Damon Barrett, Jamie Bridge, Annie Kuch, Annette Verster, Joumana Hermez, Gabriele Riedner, Ying-Ru Lo, Danica Klempova, Lucas Wiessing, Dagmar Hedrich, Harry Shapiro, Richard Elliott, Sandra Ka Hon Chu, Sam Friedman, Alex Wodak, Kate Dolan, Dave Burrows, Paul Williams, Louisa Degenhardt, Stijn Goossens, Heino Stover, Luiz Paulo Guanabara, Irma Kirtadze, David Otiashvili, Matt Curtis and Catalina Iliuta. Section 3: The Human Right to Harm Reduction was written by Damon Barrett. Beyond Injecting Drug Use: The overlap between HIV and non-injecting drug use was written by Jamie Bridge, Marcus Day, Moupali Das-Douglas, Grant Colfax and Chris Beyrer. Civil Society Engagement: Connecting the local with the global was written by Damon Barrett, with substantial input from Pascal Tanguay. Designed by Mark Joyce Copy-edited by Jennifer Armstrong Printed in Spain by 7-23h Open Print Published by International Harm Reduction Association 40 Bermondsey Street, 2nd Floor London SE1 3UD United Kingdom Telephone: +44 (0)207 940 7525 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.ihra.net 2 Foreword by Professor Paul Hunt Since the earliest days of the global HIV pandemic, people who inject drugs have been identified as one of the groups disproportionately affected by the virus. In the mid-1980s, harm reduction arose as a series of targeted, low-threshold interventions aimed at preventing the transmission of HIV through unsafe injecting practices. In the two decades since then, comprehensive harm reduction services have proven time and again to be remarkably effective responses to HIV. But the health benefits of harm reduction extend beyond HIV prevention to preventing the transmission of other blood-borne viruses and to protecting people who inject drugs, and their partners, from the wide range of other negative health consequences associated with injecting drug use. Today, despite endorsement by UNAIDS, WHO and UNODC, and the overwhelming evidence in favour of harm reduction as an effective HIV prevention strategy, the global state of harm reduction is poor. Less than 5% of those in need have access to harm reduction services. Up to 10% of new HIV infections worldwide are attributable to unsafe injecting. When sub-Saharan Africa is excluded, this figure rises to 30%. The figure is significantly higher still in some regions and specific countries, often the same places where access to harm reduction services is most limited. All over the world, people who use drugs remain marginalised, stigmatised and criminalised, with increasing vulnerability to HIV and decreasing access to essential health care services. In such environments, the full guarantee of the right to the highest attainable standard of health for people who use drugs is impossible. In seeking to reduce drug-related harm, without judgement, and with respect for the inherent dignity of every individual, regardless of lifestyle, harm reduction stands as a clear example of human rights in practice. What began as a health-based intervention in response to HIV must today be recognised as an essential component of the right to the highest attainable standard of health for people who inject drugs. Every state therefore has an obligation to implement, as a matter of priority, national comprehensive harm reduction services for people who use drugs. The Global State of Harm Reduction is a welcome and long overdue publication. As it develops, in print and online, it will, I hope, serve as a tool to assist not only in assessing the global state of harm reduction, but also the global state of the right to the highest attainable standard of health for people who use drugs. Professor Paul Hunt UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health 3 Introductory comments from Gerry Stimson It is over two decades since the first harm reduction projects started in Europe, Australia and North America – grass-roots services delivered by civil society and endorsed and (soon after) funded by some governments. Since the late 1980s, harm reduction has grown exponentially in terms of acceptance, coverage, popularity, implementation and scientific knowledge. Harm reduction programmes currently operate in a wide variety of cultural, religious and political contexts, and the approach is supported by international organisations such as UNAIDS, UNICEF, WHO, UNODC and the World Bank. This report aims to consolidate this growth by assessing and documenting the global state of harm reduction in 2008. In many ways, the scientific debate has been won and only ideological or moralistic criticisms remain. However, there are still numerous obstacles to the universal implementation of harm reduction, including resource shortages, re-emerging ‘War on Drugs’ approaches, legal restraints on substitution treatments, vociferous anti-harm reduction bodies and limitations on NGO operations in many developing and transitional countries. In order to overcome these barriers and move forward, harm reduction must become a truly global approach. The International Harm Reduction Association (IHRA) was formed in 1996 (as a result of the annual harm reduction conferences) and has since become a leading organisation promoting evidence-based harm reduction policies and practices on a global basis for all psychoactive substances. This report is a demonstration of IHRA’s commitment to the development of a conducive global environment for the promotion of harm reduction and the defence of the human rights of people who use drugs. Professor Gerry Stimson Executive Director International Harm Reduction Association Introductory comments from International Network of People who Use Drugs (INPUD) The global prohibition – imposed by the United Nations drug conventions – causes multiple damages to people who use drugs and the social environments in which we live. Under these circumstances, harm reduction is the only approach that really helps people who use drugs to survive. Harm reduction saves lives. Harm reduction and our community of people who use drugs have a symbiotic connection. Most important in this relationship is the acknowledgement that voices of drug user activists are fundamental for shaping the response to all problems related to illegal drug use. In this sense, drug user activism IS harm reduction. Drug user organising begins by addressing health-related issues. The drug user activists strive for political change. A recent online survey into the global state of drug user activism showed that 79% of responding organisations were engaged in advocacy, and 95% of them were purely peer-driven. Drug user activists are becoming increasingly involved in the global drug policy debate. In July 2007, the International Network of People who Use Drugs (INPUD), the first international drug user organisation, was registered, and since then it has been represented at international conferences and high-level meetings including the EU Civil Society Forum on Drugs, UNGASS Regional Consultations, UN Civil Society Task Force and the Commission on Narcotic Drugs. LUXEMBOURG Nevertheless, the life
Recommended publications
  • Longing to Return and Spaces of Belonging
    TURUN YLIOPISTON JULKAISUJA ANNALES UNIVERSITATIS TURKUENSIS SERIAL B, HUMANIORA, 374 LONGING TO RETURN AND SPACES OF BELONGING. IRAQIS’ NARRATIVES IN HELSINKI AND ROME By Vanja La Vecchia-Mikkola TURUN YLIOPISTO UNIVERSITY OF TURKU Turku 2013 Department of Social Research/Sociology Faculty of Social Sciences University of Turku Turku, Finland Supervised by: Suvi Keskinen Östen Wahlbeck University of Helsinki University of Helsinki Helsinki, Finland Helsinki, Finland Reviewed by: Marja Tiilikainen Marko Juntunen University of Helsinki University of Tampere Helsinki, Finland Helsinki, Finland Opponent: Professor Minoo Alinia Uppsala University Uppsala, Sweden ISBN 978-951-29-5594-7 (PDF) ISSN 0082-6987 Acknowledgments First of all, I wish to express my initial appreciation to all the people from Iraq who contributed to this study. I will always remember the time spent with them as enriching and enjoyable experience, not only as a researcher but also as a human being. I am extremely grateful to my two PhD supervisors: Östen Wahlbeck and Suvi Keskinen, who have invested time and efforts in reading and providing feedback to the thesis. Östen, you have been an important mentor for me during these years. Thanks for your support and your patience. Your critical suggestions and valuable insights have been fundamental for this study. Suvi, thanks for your inspiring comments and continuous encouragement. Your help allows me to grow as a research scientist during this amazing journey. I am also deeply indebted to many people who contributed to the different steps of this thesis. I am grateful to both reviewers Marja Tiilikainen and Marko Juntunen, for their time, dedication and valuable comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Report to the Government of the Slovak Republic
    CPT/Inf (97) 2 Report to the Government of the Slovak Republic on the visit to Slovakia carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 25 June to 7 July 1995 The Government of the Slovak Republic has agreed to the publication of this report and of its interim and follow-up reports in response. The latter are set out in document CPT/Inf (97) 3. Strasbourg, 3 April 1997 - 2 - CONTENTS Copy of the letter transmitting the CPT's report ............................................................................5 PREFACE ...........................................................................................................................................6 I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................8 A. Dates of the visit and composition of the delegation ..............................................................8 B. Establishments visited...............................................................................................................9 C. Consultations held by the delegation.......................................................................................9 D. Co-operation encountered during the visit...........................................................................10 II. FACTS FOUND DURING THE VISIT AND ACTION PROPOSED ..............................12 A. Establishments under the authority of the Ministry of the Interior ..................................12
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly Distr.: General 16 February 2021
    United Nations A/HRC/WG.6/38/EST/1 General Assembly Distr.: General 16 February 2021 Original: English Human Rights Council Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review Thirty-eighth session 3–14 May 2021 National report submitted in accordance with paragraph 5 of the annex to Human Rights Council resolution 16/21* Estonia * The present document is being issued without formal editing. GE.21-02086(E) A/HRC/WG.6/38/EST/1 I. Introduction1 1. The Estonian Government values the importance of ensuring and promoting human rights as enshrined in international instruments and cooperating in the field of human rights with international organisations and other States. Estonia is committed to fulfilling its reporting obligations to UN treaty bodies and other international organisations. Estonia has issued a standing invitation to the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) provides a good basis for States to review their human rights activities and plan for the future. This third UPR and the mid-term report of 2018 continue the dialogue of the second UPR of 2016. Reporting process2 2. The report gives an overview of legislation, national action plans, policies and practices pertaining to human rights. References are made to recommendations by States in the course of the previous UPR. It has not been possible to address all human rights and fundamental freedoms in detail, and thus the report covers the issues that have deserved particular attention at national or international level in recent years. 3. This report has been compiled under the coordination of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in cooperation with other Ministries that provided an overview of developments in their areas of governance.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights in Estonia Human Rights
    HUMAN RIGHTS IN ESTONIA Foundation Estonian Human Rights Centre 2010 [email protected] HUMAN RIGHTS IN ESTONIA www.humanrights.ee Annual Report of the Estonian Human Rights Centre 2010 Annual Report of the Estonian Human Rights Centre HUMAN RIGHTS IN ESTONIA 2010 Annual Report of the Estonian Human Rights Centre HUMAN RIGHTS IN ESTONIA 2010 HUMAN RIGHTS IN ESTONIA 2010 Annual Report of the Estonian Human Rights Centre Edited by: Kari Käsper, Marianne Meiorg Translated by: Grete Anton Thanks to: Kristin Rammus, Egert Rünne Published by: Foundation Estonian Human Rights Centre. Copyright: Authors, Foundation Estonian Human Rights Centre, 2011 Designed by: Mihkel Ronk, koosolek.ee Authors of photos (creative commons license, flickr.com): erix!, mknobil, sandman, daily sunny, M.Markus, Magic Madzik, dandeluca, Elsie esq., russelljsmith, takomabibelot, Yortw, dicktay2000, PinkMoose Printed by: Ecoprint ISSN 2228-1045 ISSN 2228-1053 Compiling and publishing of the report supported by Open Estonia Foundation and Estonian Ministry of Culture. Views expressed in the report may not represent those of the Open Estonia Foundation and the Estonian Ministry of Culture. 2 HUMAN RIGHTS IN ESTONIA 2010 Table of contents Prohibition of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment ....7 Epp Lumiste Prohibition of slavery and forced labour ............................................................19 Epp Lumiste Right to Personal Liberty ......................................................................................27 Eve Pilt Right to
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 Feedback Collection July 2020
    COVID-19 Feedback Collection July 2020 Infected Isolated / quarantine Dead Prisoner Staff Prisoner Staff Prisoner Staff Slovenia 2 1 28 14 Poland 6 7 59 52 Slovakia 0* 0 6 2 *1 positive tested prisoner has recovered Belgium 14 61* 50** *25 of the 61 are recovered and back at work; **on average 50 per day in quarantine Czech Republic 1* 2** 3 8 * in pre-trial detention prison hospital; ** 11 recovered Israel 0 7* 7 56 *6 all recovered Spain 72* 17** 101 112 2 4 *84 total, 16 already recovered; ** 278 total, 257 already recovered Catalonia 4* 33** *89 recovered; **128 already recovered Sweden 129* ** 20-30 0 *128 recovered fully Italy 132* 192** 1 2 * 2 of them are hospitalized; **184 of them penitentiary police / 8 administrative staff; 11 hospitalised Austria 2* 7** 0 0 *2 already recovered, **7 already recovered, 481 inmates and 91 staff tested negative Norway 0* 1** 69 *9 prisoners have recovered; ** 10 staff members have recovered Netherlands 20* 1 *14 in prisons, of which 11 are recovered, 1 deceased and 1 released from prison; 6 in forensic care of which 5 are recovered Hungary 0 1* 0 1* *1 infected staff member that is in quarantine Finland 0 0* 6 1 *5 already recovered Lithuania 0 0 0 0 Georgia 0 0 0 0 Latvia 0 0 0 0 Luxembourg 1 0 2* 0 *prisoners quarantined upon their arrival are not calculated. Every new detainee stays in isolation for 7 days before being transferred to regular sections. Malta* 0 0 0 0 Bulgaria 0 0 0 0 Romania 0 9 Estonia 0 5 some some Denmark 0* 0 *1 prisoner is recovered Moldova 1 7 9 28 0 0 Croatia *one staff
    [Show full text]
  • Report to the Estonian Government on the Visit to Estonia Carried out By
    CPT/Inf (2011) 15 Report to the Estonian Government on the visit to Estonia carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 9 to 18 May 2007 The Estonian Government has requested the publication of this report and of its response. The Government’s response is set out in document CPT/Inf (2011) 16. Strasbourg, 19 April 2011 - 2 - CONTENTS Copy of the letter transmitting the CPT’s report............................................................................4 I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................5 A. Dates of the visit and composition of the delegation ..............................................................5 B. Establishments visited...............................................................................................................6 C. Consultations and co-operation ...............................................................................................7 D. Immediate observation under Article 8, paragraph 5, of the Convention...........................8 II. FACTS FOUND DURING THE VISIT AND ACTION PROPOSED ................................9 A. Police establishments ................................................................................................................9 1. Preliminary remarks ..........................................................................................................9 2. Ill-treatment .....................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Feedback Collection(1)
    COVID-19 Feedback Collection 16 June 2020 Infected Isolated / quarantine Dead Prisoner Staff Prisoner Staff Prisoner Staff Slovenia 2 1 28 14 Poland 6 7 59 52 Slovakia 0* 0 6 2 *1 positive tested prisoner has recovered Belgium 14 61* 50** *25 of the 61 are recovered and Back at work; **on average 50 per day in quarantine Czech RepuBlic 1* 2** 3 8 * in pre-trial detention prison hospital; ** 11 recovered Israel 0 7* 7 56 *6 all recovered Spain 70* 23** 95 142 2 4 *83 total, 15 already recovered; ** 278 total, 2 already recovered Catalonia 1* 60** *60 already recovered; **32 already recovered, total of 92 Sweden 125* ** 20-30 0 *107 recovered fully Italy 132* 192** 1 2 * 2 of them are hospitalized; **184 of them penitentiary police / 8 administrative staff; 11 hospitalised Austria* 0* 0 0 0 *481 inmates tested negative until now Norway 0* 1** 69 *9 prisoners have recovered; ** 10 staff memBers have recovered Netherlands 20* 1 *14 in prisons, of which 11 are recovered, 1 deceased and 1 released from prison; 6 in forensic care of which 5 are recovered Hungary 0 1* 0 1* *1 infected staff memBer that is in quarantine Finland 0 0* 6 1 *5 already recovered Lithuania 0 0 0 0 Georgia 0 0 0 0 Latvia 0 0 0 0 LuxemBourg 1 0 2* 0 *prisoners quarantined upon their arrival are not calculated. Every new detainee stays in isolation for 7 days Before Being transferred to regular sections. Malta* 0 0 0 0 Bulgaria 0 0 0 0 Romania 0 9 Estonia 0 4 some some Denmark 0* 0 *1 prisoner is recovered Moldova 1 7 9 28 0 0 Croatia *one staff memBer was quarantined immediately after returning from travelling aBroad and has Been on sick-leave since then (never entered a prison), **all newly 0 2* 138** 27 0 0 admitted prisoners are isolated for reasons of precaution France 35 51 127 312 1 1 Portugal 0 7 Ireland 0* 47** 15*** *10 awaiting testing (results) **337 cleared from isolation Have you introduced technology as a replacement for rub down searches.
    [Show full text]
  • Acceptance-Oriented Drug Work
    Akzeptanzorientierte Drogenarbeit/ Acceptance-Oriented Drug Work ISSN 1861-0110 INDRO e.V. ___________________________________________________________________________ Forschungsbericht / Research report Health needs of drug dependent prisoners in four countries (Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland) [Die gesundheitlichen Bedürfnisse drogenabhängiger Inhaftierter in vier Län- dern (Estland, Ungarn, Litauen, Polen)] KATJA THANE a* (Dipl.-Soz.Päd., Dipl.-Krim.) & Heino Stöverb (Prof. Dr. Phil.) a University of Vechta, Germany b University of Applied Sciences, Frankfurt am Main, Germany *Corresponding author © INDRO e.V., Bremer Platz 18-20, D-48155 Münster, Germany. Jegliche Vervielfältigung, Verbreitung und Zitation von Textpassagen ausdrücklich gestattet unter Angabe der Originalquelle / verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article‟s original URL: Akzeptanzorientierte Drogenarbeit/Acceptance-Oriented Drug Work 2011;8:23-43, URL: www.indro-online.de/ThaneStoever2011.pdf Abstract The majority of people held in European prisons have severe problems associated with drug use, together with related health and social disadvantages. Those categorised as problematic drug users (PDUs) constitute a substantial proportion of prison populations in Europe. Recent figures indicate that a third to a half of prisoners having illicit drug use experience before imprisonment. Acknowledging the existence of a drug problem within prison walls often remains a taboo for prisoners, staff, management and politicians. Moreover, lack of continuity of care and support throughout the criminal justice system (CJS), from the moment of arrest to release from prison into the community, contributes to failures in reintegration, drives the “revolving door effect”, with drug users routinely caught in the criminal justice system and does not allow for the full implementation of the principle of equivalence of health services in prison comparable to those available in the community.
    [Show full text]
  • FIRST SECTION CASE of JULIN V. ESTONIA (Applications Nos. 16563
    FIRST SECTION CASE OF JULIN v. ESTONIA (Applications nos. 16563/08, 40841/08, 8192/10 and 18656/10) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 29 May 2012 This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Julin v. Estonia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of: Nina Vaji ć, President, Peer Lorenzen, Khanlar Hajiyev, Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, Erik Møse, judges, Oliver Kask, ad hoc judge, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 17 April 2012, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in four applications (nos. 16563/08, 40841/08, 8192/10 and 18656/10) against the Republic of Estonia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by an Estonian national, Mr Vyacheslav Julin (“the applicant”), on 12 March 2008, 30 July 2008, 3 February 2010 and 18 March 2010 respectively. 2. The applicant was represented by Mr A. Sirendi, a lawyer practising in Tartu. The Estonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Kuurberg, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that he had been ill-treated by prison officers and there had been no effective investigation into this ill-treatment, that he had had no access to court in respect of his complaints concerning prison conditions and the actions of prison officers, and that he had been strip-searched in a humiliating manner, and without respect for his private life.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Detention and Alternatives: Fundamental Rights Aspects in EU
    JUSTICE FRA Criminal detention and alternatives: fundamental rights aspects in EU cross-border transfers aspects in EU cross-border rights fundamental and alternatives: Criminal detention Criminal detention and alternatives: fundamental rights aspects in EU cross- border transfers The report addresses matters related to human dignity (Article 1), the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 4), the right to liberty (Article 6), the right to respect for private and family life (Article 7), and the right to a fair trial (Article 47), falling under Titles I ‘Dignity’, II ‘Freedoms’, and VI ‘Justice’ of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). Photo (cover & inside): © Shutterstock (Zolnierek) More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). FRA – European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights Schwarzenbergplatz 11 – 1040 Vienna – Austria Tel. +43 158030-0 – Fax +43 158030-699 Email: [email protected] – fra.europa.eu Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016 Paper: 978-92-9491-352-4 10.2811/182993 TK-02-16-903-EN-C PDF: 978-92-9491-351-7 10.2811/244106 TK-02-16-903-EN-N © European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2016 Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Luxembourg Printed on process chlorine-free recycled paper (PCF) Criminal detention and alternatives: fundamental rights aspects in EU cross- border transfers Foreword Mutual recognition – the process of default recognition of decisions and judgments made by, for example, a court in another Member State – hinges greatly on Member States’ mutual trust in each other’s justice systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Child Talk a Reflective Toolkit for Prison Administrators and Staff on Supporting the Child-Parent Relationship
    2018 Child Talk A Reflective Toolkit for Prison Administrators and Staff on Supporting the Child-Parent Relationship Children of Prisoners Europe ________________________________________________________________ 1 Children of Prisoners Europe (COPE) is a pan-European network of non-profit organisations work- ing on behalf of children separated from an imprisoned parent. The network encourages inno- vative perspectives and practices to ensure that children with an imprisoned parent fully enjoy their rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and that action is taken to enable their wellbeing and development. Children of Prisoners Europe is a non-profit organisation registered in France under French Asso- ciation law 1901. SIRET: 437 527 013 00019 December 2018 Copyright © COPE 2018 This toolkit has been produced with the financial support of the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme of the European Union. The contents are the sole responsibility of Children of Prisoners Europe and can in no way be taken to re- flect the views of the European Commission. ________________________________________________________________ 2 Contents Contents..........................................................................................................................3 Introduction.....................................................................................................................4 Background.....................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • European Treatment, Transition Management, and Re-Integration of High-Risk Offenders
    56 Schriften zum Strafvollzug, Jugendstrafrecht und zur Kriminologie Herausgegeben von Prof. Dr. Frieder Dünkel Lehrstuhl für Kriminologie an der Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald Band 56 Frieder Dünkel, Jörg Jesse, Ineke Pruin, Moritz von der Wense (Eds.) European Treatment, Transition Management, Transition European Treatment, and Re-Integration of High-Risk Offenders European Treatment, • Transition Management, and Re-Integration of High-Risk Offenders Results of the Final Conference at Rostock-Warnemünde, 3-5 September 2014, and Final Evaluation Report of the Justice-Cooperation-Network (JCN)-Project “European treatment and transition management of high-risk offenders” ■ ISBN 978-3-942865-58-6 ■ ISSN 0949-8354 Dünkel · Jesse · Pruin · von der Wense (Eds.) Dünkel · Jesse Pruin von der Wense Forum Verlag Godesberg Schriften zum Strafvollzug, Jugendstrafrecht und zur Kriminologie Herausgegeben von Prof. Dr. Frieder Dünkel Lehrstuhl für Kriminologie an der Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald Band 56 Frieder Dünkel, Jörg Jesse, Ineke Pruin, Moritz von der Wense (Eds.) European Treatment, Transition Management, and Re-Integration of High-Risk Offenders Results of the F inal C onference at Rostock - W arnemünde, 3 - 5 Sep tember 20 1 4 , and F inal E valuation Rep ort of the Justice- C oop eration- N etw ork ( JC N ) - P roj ect “ E urop ean treatment and transition management of high- risk offenders” The project was funded by the Criminal Justice Programme of the European Commission (JUST/2011/JPEN/AG2943) MG 2016 Forum Verlag Godesberg This publication has been produced with the fnancial support of the Criminal Justice Programme of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the editors and authors and can in no way be taken to refect the views of the European Commission.
    [Show full text]