Amending the Global Discourse on Narcotic Drugs An inquiry of the transnational drug policy reform movement Eva Magdalena Stambøl Master in Criminology Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law Faculty of Law UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Spring 2012 © Eva Magdalena Stambøl Spring 2012 Author: Eva Magdalena Stambøl Title: Amending the Global Discourse on Narcotic Drugs: An inquiry of the transnational drug policy reform movement http://www.duo.uio.no/ II Thanks to… …Knut-Erich Papendorf, for very inspiring and constructive supervision throughout the whole master thesis process, …Mike Trace, Heino Stöver, Dirk Schäffer, Aram Barra, Luís Astorga, Jorge Hernández Tinajero, Martin Jelsma and Frederik Polak, for amazingly interesting and knowledgeable interviews which I wish I could have included in their totality, …My flatmates, for lightening up my days in writing-isolation, …My mother, for always being there for me and for feeding me in hectic times, …My father, for proofreading my text – as always Special thanks to Javier Rivas, for helping me with practical tasks in the master thesis process, for joining me on my many travels, and, especially for being the inspiration in my everyday life In memory of Rami Nasr III Summary Author: Eva Magdalena Stambøl Title: Amending the Global Discourse on Narcotic Drugs: An inquiry of the transnational drug policy reform movement Supervisor: Knut-Erich Papendorf Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo. Spring 2012 This thesis examines how the transnational drug policy reform movement attempts to change the global discourse on narcotic drugs, as well as how domestic drug policy reform movements try to change national discourses on narcotic drugs – exemplified through the cases of Germany and Mexico. It elaborates on the development of the drug policy movement and of the global discourse on narcotic drugs over time, as well as presenting a snapshot of the current situation and the emerging trends in contemporary drug policies. More precisely, this thesis is an account of how the global discourse on narcotic drugs is changing as states and non-state actors are increasingly contesting the zero-tolerance approach to drugs. It examines shifts in drug policies towards harm reduction and drug law reform, implying decriminalization of drug-related actions, as well as the emerging debate on alternative forms of drug control. It elaborates on how the movement argues and works both at a national and at an international level to bring forth such changes as well as examining one particular and recently evolving strategy undertaken by the movement, namely human rights advocacy in relation to drug policy. Furthermore, this thesis investigates, in a governmentality perspective, what principles, objectives, values, problem constructions, knowledge, ‘truth discourses’, logics, rationalities IV and forms of power that are implicated in the policy proposals advocated by the drug policy reform movement, how they differ from and are in opposition to those involved in prevailing global drug policies, and also how they differ from – and are similar to – those implicated in policies at large. It also examines global drug policies in relation to a broader shift in governmental rationalities in global politics implying a tendency of governing through non- state actors such as civil society organizations, to which governmental tasks and responsibilities are being outsourced. V Table of Contents 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research questions ...................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Thesis outline ............................................................................................................... 4 2 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 My positioning in the field of inquiry ......................................................................... 6 2.2 Choice of countries for exemplification of national drug policy reform movements . 8 2.3 Data collection ............................................................................................................. 9 2.3.1 Conferences .......................................................................................................... 9 2.3.2 Expert interviews ................................................................................................ 11 3 Theoretical Perspectives ................................................................................................ 16 3.1 Social movement theories .......................................................................................... 16 3.1.1 Dimensions of transnational collective action ................................................... 18 3.1.2 Crucial features of social movements: Values, ideas and norms ....................... 19 3.1.3 Advocacy tactics ................................................................................................ 20 3.2 A governmentality perspective .................................................................................. 21 3.2.1 Governmentality ................................................................................................. 23 3.2.2 Bio-politics ......................................................................................................... 25 3.2.3 Concluding remarks ........................................................................................... 26 4 Harm Reduction ............................................................................................................. 28 4.1 Harm reduction as a philosophy ................................................................................ 29 4.2 Harm reduction as public health policies .................................................................. 33 4.2.1 The objectives and scope of harm reduction policies and interventions ............ 33 4.2.2 Harm reduction interventions ............................................................................. 36 4.2.3 The evidence-base for harm reduction interventions ......................................... 37 4.2.4 Harm reduction and HIV/AIDS ......................................................................... 38 4.2.5 Harm Reduction outside the context of opiate injection drug use ..................... 42 4.3 Harm reduction advocacy .......................................................................................... 44 VI 4.3.1 How do the NGOs use the evidence-base for harm reduction in their argumentation? ................................................................................................................. 45 4.3.2 How has the professionalization of the movement affected advocacy at different levels? ............................................................................................................................ 47 4.4 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 52 4.4.1 Harm reduction as forms of bio-power .............................................................. 53 4.4.2 The rationality and logics of harm reduction ..................................................... 55 4.4.3 Governing through harm reduction NGOs ......................................................... 59 4.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 63 5 Drug Law Reform .......................................................................................................... 64 5.1 How can drug law reform occur? .............................................................................. 65 5.1.1 The international legal framework of drug prohibition ...................................... 65 5.1.2 Decriminalization ............................................................................................... 67 5.1.3 De jure legalization of drugs with models of government regulation ................ 70 5.1.4 Concluding remarks ........................................................................................... 72 5.2 Why is the movement advocating drug law reform? ................................................. 72 5.2.1 The harms and costs of drug prohibition ............................................................ 72 5.2.2 Insufficient drug law change .............................................................................. 75 5.3 How does the movement go forth to influence a change in the global drug control discourse? ............................................................................................................................. 81 5.3.1 Influencing the international drug control organs .............................................. 82 5.3.2 The role of powerful alliances in opening up the debate ................................... 85 5.3.3 Political benefit and public opinion ................................................................... 88 5.4 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 91 5.4.1 ‘Advanced liberal’ drug control ......................................................................... 92 5.4.2 The current drug control regime ........................................................................