The International Consortium on Drug Policy (IDPC) is a global network of NGOs and professional networks specialize in issues related to the use and production of controlled drugs. The Consortium aims to promote objective and open debate on the effectiveness, direction and content of drug policies at national and international support policies based on scientific evidence that effectively reduce drug related harm . The public network also anecdotal reports, disseminates the reports of its member organizations on specific issues related to drugs and provides specialized consulting services to policymakers and officials around the world.
In 2009, the Bolivian government sought to amend the United Nations Convention of 1961 Estupefacientes.1 The proposed amendment would eliminate the ban on unjustified burden on the chewing of coca without affecting the tight global control system which are under cultivation of coca and cocaína.2 The 18-month period available to countries to challenge the amendment requested by Bolivia ends on January 31, 2011. Several countries - including those who would be the United States, Colombia, Russia, Japan, France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Sweden and Denmark are considering the possibility of formal objections to the UN secretary general. IDPC urges these governments to rethink this idea. The continued ban is clearly at odds with several multilateral official statements, such as United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of 2007.3 protect indigenous rights and culture of the Andean-Amazonian peoples to chew coca leaves undermines As any international efforts to address important issues related to the illicit market for cocaine.
The defeat of the amendment would show that the international community continues to prioritize the punitive approach of zero tolerance in the field of drug control over the rights of indigenous peoples. Oppose the requested modification would perpetuate an obvious violation of these freedoms. Moreover, the introduction of amendments reasonable and technically sound in the drug control conventions should be seen as a normal part of the modernization process to suit their own purposes in the XXI century.
Background
1961 Single Convention on Estupefacientes4 is the key UN treaty which establishes the international drug control. When it drafted and approved, a drug that Western governments wanted to submit to strict international control was cocaine. However, this posed a dilemma with regard to the traditional practice, not only widespread, but also culturally rooted, chewing coca leaves in several Latin American countries (Colombia's indigenous territories, Amazonian Brazil, Peru and Bolivia and northern Argentina and Chile .) Chewing coca leaves, unlike consumption Cocaine does not cause health problems or social acquaintances. However, this practice was banned and was given to the respective governments 25 years to eradicate it completely.
The period ended in 1989.5 Since then, the International Narcotics Control Board ( INCB) has continued to put pressure on countries to implement the ban. The prohibition of chewing coca leaves was adopted at a time when little attention was paid to cultural and indigenous rights, and papers on the debates surrounding the coca leaf from the time show that international community failed to take into account the rights and interests of communities consuming coca leaves to keep their religious, social, cultural and therapeutic.
The conclusions of the Report of the Study Coca leaves of the UN in 1950 provided the necessary justification to prohibit the chewing of coca leaf in the Convention Única.6 The report was strongly criticized by many analysts, considering arbitrary, inaccurate, racist and disrespectful of the cultural. After 50 years the UN has agreed, so commendable, greater protection of the rights of indigenous peoples. These decisions raise several questions about various aspects of drug control conventions.
To fix this error, have launched several initiatives:
1) The United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs of 1988 provided that all actions taken "take due account of traditional licit uses, although its possible application immediately neutralized by stipulating that they could not undermine their obligations under previous agreements.
2) The World Health Organization and the Institute for United Nations Interregional Crime Research and Justice launched the Project Cocaína7 in the early nineties. The project concluded that the traditional consumption of coca leaf has no negative health effects and serves therapeutic, sacred and social impact among Andean peoples. However, pressure from U.S. diplomats blocked the publication of the study, thereby revealing a strong determination to ensure that ideology is imposed on scientific evidence.
widespread support for reform
During the past 50 years, national legislation and international law have made the rights of indigenous peoples in various declarations and instruments legal. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of 2007 provides that "Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, [and] their traditional cultural expressions" .8 In April 2010, the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, an advisory body of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), welcomed the proposed amendment to Bolivia on the traditional use of coca leaf.
"The Forum recommends Member States to support this initiative" 9 In May 2009, the Forum noted that "recognizes the cultural and medical importance of coca in the Andean region and other indigenous regions of South America "and recommended" that amend or repeal the sections of the Convention relating to the habit of chewing coca leaf that are inconsistent with the rights of indigenous peoples to maintain their traditional practices in health and culture enshrined in Articles 11, 24 and 31 of the Declaration. "
Representatives of the Latino American peoples have struggled to achieve and ensure its place in society, politics and art, defending traditional practices such as consumption of coca leaf. Correct the historic mistake that resulted prohibit coca leaf in its natural form is an indispensable measure to respect the rights of indigenous peoples in Bolivia, Peru and Colombia. The proposed amendment by Bolivia to the UN, for example, grew out of the country's new Constitution, adopted in 2009, recognized that the coca leaf is an integral part of the cultural heritage of Peru Bolivia.11 has always maintained a legal coca market and in 2005, the Ministry of Culture said the chewing of coca leaf as intangible cultural heritage nación.12 Colombia allows the traditional use of coca in their native reserves and Argentina also legally recognizes the use of coca leaf protects the rights of their consumidores.13 With the Presidential Declaration of Quito, 14 issued in August 2009, all South American countries expressed support for Bolivia's proposal, calling that the international community to respect ancient cultural practice that represents the chewing of coca leaf.
Possible outcomes
If no UN member state objections by 31 January, the amendment shall enter into force automatically. If, however, there is one country that opposes it, the ECOSOC has the following options:
(a) approve the amendment would not apply in countries that oppose it;
(b) Reject the amendment in light of objections and provided substantive arguments, or
(c) To convene a Conference of the Parties to discuss the issue.
Conclusion and recommendations
IDPC strongly urges the international community not to object to the proposed amendment to Bolivia in order to ensure that finally end the ban on the consumption of coca leaf, which is totally discriminatory and lacks scientific basis. IDPC also urges Member States ECOSOC to support the adoption of the amendment, meaning that its provisions do not apply to countries that oppose it. A long time ago is to resolve this contradiction between the 1961 Convention, the 1988 Convention and UN declarations on indigenous peoples' rights.
0 comments:
Post a Comment