Harm Reduction: Revolutions

Debate on harm reduction at the UN high level meeting on drugs - is it really a storm in the teacup?

Altough harm reduction was not mentioned in the Political Declaration adopted by the high level UN meeting on drugs (March 11-12, 2009), 26 countries supported a statement made by Germany that interpreted the term “related support services” (a euphemism substituting harm reduction in the text) as harm reduction services. Other governments, like the US, Japan and Russia opposed this interpretation.

“Little more than a storm in a teacup” – this is how the head of UNODC described the heated debates on the term “harm reduction” in his closing speech. Not everybody shares his opinion. For example, the Transnational Institute (TNI) concluded in its excellent blog that this year the “Vienna consensus on drug control has cracked”. I tend to agree with TNI: despite the noisy celebarations of the “century of drug control”, there are signs that the global prohibition era is coming to an end. Maybe change will not come suddenly but step by step: each new harm reduction program is a small revolution against the old UNiform ways of drug control.

Posted by Peter Sarosi

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE PLEASE GO TO THE MIRROR PAGE ON OUR SITE DEDICATED TO DRUG POLICY BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK!

Share

Related articles

Breaking Down the Vienna Consensus on Drugs

The consensus behind global drug prohibition is fading - watch the new video we filmed at the high level UN meeting in Vienna and find out why!

They harrass the homeless people! - an HCLU video

After briefly reviewing how homelessness got pronounced as an offence, we are kindly asking you to send a letter to the minister of interior Sándor Pintér and rapporteur on homelessness, Máté Kocsis about that homeless people are not criminals. If you have time and would like to help somehow else, we can recommend you other opportunities, too.

They want to imprison him illegally

Orosz Béla was fined 50 thousand forints for a minor offence. In a letter sent on August 8th, he informed the police that because of his poverty, he cannot pay the fine, but would like to work off his debts through community service. He did not receive a response from the police. Two months later, the courts informed him that they will hold a hearing regarding the conversion of his fine into a prison sentence. This procedure is illegal; the judicial authorities disregarded the laws relating to offences.