Funded, in part, by: THE 2019 COMMISSION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS AND ITS MINISTERIAL SEGMENT Taking stock of the implementation of the commitments made to jointly address and counter the world drug problem, in particular in light of the 2019 target date JUNE 2019 Executive summary The 62nd session of the Commission on Narcotic the role of the INCB in its role of policing compli- Drugs (Commission or CND) and its Ministerial ance with the international drug control conven- Segment took place in Vienna between 14 and 22 tions, and in particular in responding to cannabis March 2019. Protracted and sometimes conflicted legalisation, which preoccupied Russia throughout discussions led up to the event, held ten years on the Commission. In the event, the resolution was from the Political Declaration and Plan of Action of negotiated through intensive debates at the CoW 2009, which had passed with little sign of success. and in informal meetings, the ultimate version be- In the words of the 2018 World Drug Report, ‘Both ing less strident than the original. Other resolu- the range of drugs and drug markets are expanding tions, including some important ones on hepatitis and diversifying as never before’. C (the very first CND resolution on this topic) and HIV prevention among women who use drugs, are The global situation has produced a range of often detailed below. profoundly different policy responses by member states, which can loosely be characterised as head- In addition, there were a number of decisions made at ing in two directions: one dominated by law en- the 62nd CND regarding the scheduling of substances forcement measures, the second accepting the real- under the drug control conventions, with CND mem- ity of the market and seeking to manage its harmful bers voting on scheduling recommendations from effects. The decision of Canada to introduce a legally the Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD; regulated market for cannabis has prompted a stri- on drugs and medicines) and the International Nar- dent response by the Russian Federation, which re- cotics Control Board (INCB; on precursors). They in- peatedly attacked the Canadian move during the cluded four fentanyls now included under Schedule CND. These contrasting views were reflected con- 1 of the 1961 Single Convention, five synthetic can- tinually in the country statements of the Ministerial nabinoids now included under Schedule 2 of the Segment, and in later CND sessions. The Ministerial 1971 Psychotropic Convention, and three precursors Declaration itself reiterated some of the themes of now included under Table 1 of the 1988 Trafficking the 2016 UNGASS Outcome Document, while re- Convention. The Commission, however, postponed flecting these policy tensions between member voting on recommendations made by the ECDD in states. Amongst the most significant components relation to cannabis. of the Ministerial Declaration is the apparently un- precedented acknowledgement of the ‘persistent The CND was marked by vibrant civil society en- and emerging challenges’ faced by the international gagement, with almost 500 civil society delegates drug control regime. attending, several countries including civil society representatives on their country delegations, over 2019 CND ReportThe of Proceedings There were eight draft resolutions proposed at the 40 side events co-organised with civil society or- Committee of the Whole (CoW). The most contro- ganisations, and civil society delegates delivering versial of these, stemming as it did from the ten- statements at the plenary. This represents a con- sions surrounding cannabis regulation policy, was tinued growth of civil society engagement in the that of the Russian Federation, finally entitled ‘Sup- Commission’s activities – despite stronger-than- porting the International Narcotics Control Board in usual tensions with UN building security staff. The fulfilling its treaty-mandated functions in coopera- now-familiar ‘informal dialogues’ took place, with tion with Member States and in collaboration with discussion between civil society and the CND Chair, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs and the World the Executive Director of the United Nations Office Health Organization’ (Resolution L3). The Russian on Drugs and Crime (Office or UNODC) and the resolution was intended to support and enhance President of the INCB. 1 Introduction to pursue an approach underpinned by evidence and human rights that puts public health at its Expectations surrounding sessions of the CND core. Reflecting natural variation, the result might in Vienna are always determined by a combina- be regarded as a spectrum of market management tion of factors, including pressing – and often approaches embracing a range of harm reduction divisive – contemporary debates and the timing interventions, the decriminalisation of some drugs of the meeting relative to the Commission’s own for personal use and, in some instances, legally reg- ‘review’ cycle. And so it was that member states, ulated markets for the non-medical use of cannabis UN agency and UN Economic and Social Council and, although a somewhat unique case, coca. On (ECOSOC) accredited NGO delegations arrived in the other hand, some states prefer to remain true the Austrian capital for the CND’s 62nd session and, to a law enforcement-dominated approach built crucially, its Ministerial Segment; an extended around the goals of market elimination and a ‘drug event stretching from 14 to 22 March. With prepa- free world’; an approach often described, including rations for the 2019 meeting having done much by members states themselves, as a ‘war on drugs’, to shape the Commission’s proceedings the previ- and one that reflects the traditional approach of the ous year,1 it seemed likely that the Segment, and UN international drug control system. the related Ministerial Declaration to which it was devoted, would determine not only the mood but It was within this increasingly familiar context that also to some extent the resultant outcomes of the observers and participants alike wondered how the session. Bearing in mind the nature of the pro- divide might play out at this year’s extended ses- tracted and often laboured negotiations around sion. Or in the words of one high level delegate the draft Declaration over the course of various from a state preferring a health- and rights-oriented reconvened and intersessional CND sessions and approach put it, how the ‘club of the progressives’ informal meetings in late 2018 and early 2019, the would interact with the champions of the ‘status odds were high that it would be a fractious affair. quo’; an increasingly tricky balancing act still con- The 2016 United Nations General Assembly Spe- ducted within what might be referred to as the cial Session (UNGASS) on the ‘world drug problem’ ‘logic of consensus’ within Vienna. To be sure, mind- and the related Outcome Document had arguably ful of the Russian Federation’s bellicose response in done something to take the heat out of the long preparatory meetings to Canada’s October 2018 im- planned 2019 ‘High Level Segment’. Yet, it could plementation of a legally regulated market for non- not divert attention from the unavoidable fact medical cannabis use, there was some deliberation that at the 10-year review of progress made since concerning not only Moscow’s likely approach to agreeing on the Political Declaration and Plan of the issue but also its attention to diplomatic proto- Action2 there has been – by all reasonable mea- col during the session proper. It might be argued sures – little significant or sustained improvement that the erosion of civility in public discourse has in the global situation. Rather, as the UNODC dem- accompanied the rise of authoritarian populism in onstrated in its 2018 World Drug Report, ‘both the government, as demonstrated in the Twitterocracy range of drugs and drug markets are expanding of US President Donald Trump and elsewhere. Re- and diversifying as never before’.3 Further, IDPC’s cent experience has shown how this erosion has ‘Taking stock’ shadow report also showed the un- penetrated even the institutions of the United Na- precedented levels of harms caused by repressive tions, which customarily represent a bastion of di- policies aiming to eradicate the illicit drug market plomacy and formal courtesy. Although they have over the past decade.4 been increasingly evident at the CND for the past decade or more, the tensions underlying the sup- As is now well known and documented, the emer- posed ‘Vienna consensus’ appear to be erupting gence of such a situation has produced a diver- into an ever more strident and intolerant discourse gence in approach across member states, with each of polarisation. country dealing with the increasingly complex poli- cy dilemma in different ways depending on a range Indeed, it was with this environment that the Rus- of cultural and political specificities. Nonetheless, at sian Federation introduced for negotiation at the the risk of attracting charges of reductivism, it re- regular segment a resolution intended to bolster The 2019 CND ReportThe of Proceedings mains possible to identify two general directions of the power of the International Narcotics Control 2 travel. On the one hand, some states have chosen Board (INCB or Board) in its response to states pursuing regulated markets. Although from IDPC’s The Ministerial Segment perspective a pragmatic approach to dealing with nd cannabis markets, regulation certainly exceeds the The Ministerial Segment of the 62 CND opened on inherent flexibilities of the current treaty framework Thursday 14 March 2019, approximately a decade and thus stands as a key point of systemic tension after the meetings that gave birth to the 2009 Political Declaration and Plan of Action; a document requiring attention from the CND. And this helps regarded by many analysts and commentators, explain why Resolution L3 became a point of keen including sections within the United Nations drug anticipation in the days leading up to the session.