Civil Rights, Human Rights, and the War on Drugs

"1. Human dignity
"Universal human dignity is a fundamental principle of human rights. It is from the inherent dignity of the human person that our rights derive. No drug law, policy, or practice should have the effect of undermining or violating the dignity of any person or group of persons.

"2. Universality and interdependence of rights
"Human rights are universal, inalienable, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated, including in the contexts of drug policy, development assistance, health care, and criminal justice. A person’s involvement in drug-related criminality affects the enjoyment of some rights and specifically engages others. In no case are human rights entirely forfeited."

"Conflicts and wars are known to contribute to a higher burden of mental health problems among specific individuals who experience trauma as well as among those living in or near to conflict zones, even across generations [3–5]. Post-traumatic stress disorder is mostly recognized as the mental health burden; however, during conflict there is also significant disability from common mental health problems such as depression, anxiety, and substance misuse. From the Somalian conflict, these have been linked with the poverty associated with economic fragmentation and with a reduction of basic security functions and safety [6]. The link between armed conflict and the production and trafficking of illicit drugs has been noted in the literature, and recent research indicates a link between lootable resources, including opioids, and conflict duration [7]."

"As noted in a systematic review by Horyniak and colleagues (2016), forced migrants have commonly witnessed and personally experienced pre- and post-migration stress and trauma, including loss of homes and livelihoods, violence, and family separation [8]. Among this population, the prevalence of mental health disorders, specifically depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, are particularly high due to this lived experience [9–11]. In past studies, comorbidity between mental health and substance use disorders has been well documented in the general population [12–14]. An emerging literature has begun on substance use as coping mechanism to document comorbidity among forced migrant populations [15–17].

"Also, forced migrants experience acculturation challenges, the process of cultural and psychological change that follows contact with a culture other than one’s own [18]. It has been hypothesized that migrants who are highly engaged in the host culture (‘assimilation’) may engage in substance use and addiction in order to adhere to mainstream norms and gain acceptance in their new communities [18–20]. Acculturation is an especially important factor for younger migrants, whose experiences are compounded by intergenerational conflict, and peer pressure as found in previous studies among Sudanese and Latino adolescents [19–23]. For example, in a study among ninth-grade adolescents, low levels of interest in maintaining their native culture alongside low levels of participation in their new culture, often due to discrimination and exclusion, has been associated with substance use [24] Additionally, forced migrants, commonly experience social and economic inequality, marginalization and discrimination [25–28]. These factors have been shown to be important determinants of health, and could contribute to feelings of stress and powerlessness, which may contribute to substance use [29–31]. In addition, forced migrants could be exposed to illicit drugs as well through their residence in disadvantaged neighborhoods where drugs may be readily available leading to increased morbidity and mortality [32,33]. As a contributing factor, the HIV outbreak in Ukraine has spread throughout the nation. According to Public Health Center of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine, Ukraine continues to have high rates of HIV infection in Eastern Europe and Central and Eastern Asia [34]."

"In our view, it is the duty of law enforcement to protect and serve our communities and defend the U.S. Constitution. Despite these highly admirable goals, far too often law enforcement, and policing policies and practices, have failed to adequately protect communities of color, and at times has even acted as agents of injustice. As a result, deep mistrust and tension has developed between law enforcement and communities of color. Such tension was not born from the misconduct of a 'couple of bad apples,' but rather from official policies -- many of which continue to disproportionally impact and harm communities of color -- as well as 'the actions of the past and the role that [the law enforcement] profession has played in society’s historical mistreatment of communities of color.'"

"Black and Hispanic Americans, and other minority groups as well, are victimized by disproportionate targeting and unfair treatment by police and other front-line law enforcement officials; by racially skewed charging and plea bargaining decisions of prosecutors; by discriminatory sentencing practices; and by the failure of judges, elected officials and other criminal justice policy makers to redress the inequities that become more glaring every day."

"In 2021, the world set ambitious law reform targets to remove criminal laws that are undermining the HIV response and leaving key populations behind. Recognising decriminalization as a critical element in the response, countries made a commitment that by 2025 less than 10% of countries would have punitive legal and policy environments that affect the HIV response. The Global AIDS Strategy set as a target that less than 10% of countries would criminalise sex work, possession of small amounts of drugs, same-sex sexual activity, and HIV exposure, non-disclosure and transmission."

"In 2021, 35 countries retain the death penalty for a range of drug offences. Civil society had grounds for optimism at the beginning of the year, thanks to some promising developments in 2020: in Singapore, no executions took place for the first time since 2013; and in Saudi Arabia, Prince Salman declared a moratorium on drug-related executions at the beginning of 2020. Meanwhile, in the United States, the Biden-Harris victory in the 2020 elections raised hopes for new legislation abolishing the federal death penalty in the US.⁵

"At the end of 2021, the situation appears more uncertain. While no executions were reported in Saudi Arabia and Singapore in 2021, a sudden increase in executions was noted in Iran. This sharp reversal of the 2018-2020 trend, together with unexpected news of death sentences in low application countries, resulted in a rise of both drug-related sentences and executions in 2021.

"As of December 2021, Harm Reduction International (HRI) recorded at least 131 executions for drug offences globally, a 336% increase from 2020. It is imperative to note that this number is likely to represent only a fraction of all drug-related executions carried out globally."

"U.S. residents age 16 or older who had one or more contacts with police in the past 12 months were asked whether they experienced the threat of force or use of nonfatal force during any contact. Both the number and percentage of residents experiencing the threat of force or use of nonfatal force were lower in 2022 (748,800, 1.5%) than in 2020 (1,045,600, 1.9%) (table 3).

"In 2022, a higher percentage of males (2%) than of females (1%) experienced the threat or use of nonfatal police force. Black persons (4%) were more likely than white persons (1%) to experience the threat or use of nonfatal force. Residents ages 18 to 24 (2%) were more likely to experience the threat or use of nonfatal force than those age 65 or older (1%). In general, similar shares of residents in most demographic categories experienced the threat or use of nonfatal force in 2022 and 2020; however, females, Hispanic persons, and persons ages 18 to 24 were less likely to experience the threat or use of nonfatal force in 2022 than in 2020."

"In 2022, the majority (78%) of U.S. residents whose most recent police contact was a street stop (being stopped by police while in a public place or parked vehicle) experienced no resulting enforcement action (table 6). Twenty-two percent of residents experienced some form of enforcement action, most often a warning (14%). Being searched or arrested (5%) or given a ticket (2%) were less common outcomes of these street stops.

"Females (83% in 2020 and 84% in 2022) were more likely than males (68% in 2020 and 74% in 2022) to experience no enforcement action during their street stop. In 2022, white persons (15%) were more likely than Hispanic persons (7%) to receive a warning during their street stop. Persons ages 16 to 24 (23%) were more likely than any other age group to receive a warning during a street stop in 2022."

"In 2022, about 9% of drivers in traffic stops experienced no enforcement action by police, while about 44% were given a warning and 43% were given a ticket (table 5). There were no statistically significant changes in outcomes for drivers in traffic stops from 2020 to 2022.

"Female drivers (46% in 2020 and 48% in 2022) were more likely than male drivers (41% in 2020 and 42% in 2022) to be given a warning during a traffic stop, while male drivers (6% in 2020 and 5% in 2022) were more likely than female drivers (2% in each year) to be searched or arrested. There were no statistically significant differences by sex in the percentage of drivers who were given a ticket or experienced no enforcement action in 2020 or 2022.

"In 2022, there was no statistically significant difference in the percentage of white drivers and black drivers who experienced no enforcement action during their most recent traffic stop. Among those who did experience an enforcement action, white drivers (49%) were more likely to be given a warning than drivers of any other race or Hispanic origin. In 2022, Hispanic drivers (53%), black drivers (46%), and drivers of another race (49%) were more likely to receive a ticket than white drivers (39%)."

"U.S. residents whose most recent contact was police-initiated or related to a traffic accident were asked whether the contact involved police shouting, cursing, or threatening the use of force or using nonfatal force. The use of force includes handcuffing, pushing or grabbing, hitting or kicking, using a chemical or pepper spray, using an electroshock weapon, pointing or shooting a gun, or using some other type of physical force.^2,3 Threat of force, handcuffing, pushing or grabbing, hitting or kicking, and using a weapon were combined in this report to create overall estimates of the threat or use of force.

"In 2022, approximately 3% of residents experienced some type of police action during their most recent policeinitiated or traffic accident-related contact, with 2% experiencing the threat or use of nonfatal force (table 8). The most common specific actions residents experienced were cursing or shouting (2%) or handcuffing (2%) by police. There was no significant change between 2020 and 2022 in the percentage of persons who experienced any police action.

"White persons (3%) were less likely than black persons (7%) but more likely than persons of another race (2%) to experience at least one type of police action in 2022. A lower percentage of Hispanic persons experienced at least one type of police action in 2022 (3%) than in 2020 (5%), including the threat or use of nonfatal force (2% in 2022 and 3% in 2020) and handcuffing (1% in 2022 and 3% in 2020)."

"In 2022, males (8%) were more likely than females (7%) to have police-initiated contact, while females (12%) were more likely than males (11%) to initiate contact with police (table 1). There was no significant difference between the percentages of males and females who had any police contact or contact related to a traffic accident in 2022.

"Across race and Hispanic origin, white persons (20%) were more likely than black (16%), Hispanic (16%), or Asian (12%) persons, but less likely than persons of another race (25%), to have any contact with police in 2022. White persons were more likely than black, Hispanic, or Asian persons, but less likely than persons of another race, to have resident-initiated or police-initiated contact with police. White persons (2.5%) were more likely than Asian persons (2%), but less likely than black persons (3%), to have contact with police as the result of a traffic accident.

"Persons ages 18 to 24 were more likely than persons in other age groups to experience any contact with police (25%), police-initiated contact (15%), and police contact related to a traffic accident (4%). Persons ages 18 to 24 (11%) were less likely than persons ages 25 to 44 (13%) or 45 to 64 (12%), but more likely than persons ages 16 to 17 (4%) or age 65 or older (9%), to initiate contact with police."

"In 2018, an estimated 2.1% of youth reported that they were sexually victimized by staff through force or coercion. Forced or coerced sexual acts or other sexual activity with facility staff included sexual activity involving physical force, threat of force, or other forms of pressure or coercion, such as being given money, favors, protection, or special treatment or being repeatedly asked to engage in sexual activity. The 2.1% rate includes—

"„ 1.8% of youth who reported that they were forced or coerced into engaging in sexual acts—sexual activity involving touching or penetrating of sexual body parts

"„ 0.2% of youth who reported that the forced or coerced sexual contact with staff involved other sexual activity, such as kissing on the mouth, looking at private body parts, or being shown something sexual, such as pictures or a movie

"„ 0.1% of youth who reported forced or coerced sexual activity with facility staff but did not provide additional information about the type of activity. An estimated 3.9% of youth reported that they had sexual contact with facility staff that did not involve force, threat of force, or coercion."

"In 2020, correctional administrators reported 36,264 allegations of sexual victimization in prisons, jails, and other adult correctional facilities (figure 1). This included allegations of inmate-on-inmate nonconsensual sexual acts, inmate-on-inmate abusive sexual contact, inmateon-inmate sexual harassment, staff-on-inmate sexual misconduct, and staff-on-inmate sexual harassment.1 Of all the allegations reported in 2020, 2,351 were substantiated after investigation, the lowest number since 2014, when there were 2,350 substantiated incidents. The number of allegations rose 121% from 2013 to 2016, which was partly attributable to correctional authorities’ continuing response to the 2012 release of the National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape. From 2016 to 2020, the number of allegations of sexual victimization remained relatively stable, ranging from 35,206 allegations in 2017 to 38,132 in 2019."

"In 2018, 4.0% of youth in juvenile facilities reported sexual victimization that involved force or coercion, either by another youth or by facility staff (not shown in tables). An estimated 1.9% of youth reported sexual victimization involving force or coercion by another youth (table 1). The 1.9% rate comprises—

"„ 1.2% of youth who reported incidents of forced or coerced sexual acts—sexual activity that involved touching or penetrating of sexual body parts 

"„ 0.5% of youth who reported being forced or coerced into other sexual activity with another youth that did not meet the description of forced or coerced sexual acts, such as kissing on the mouth, looking at private body parts, or being shown something sexual 

"„ 0.2% of youth who reported forced or coerced sexual activity with another youth but did not provide further information about the type of activity."

"All persons have the right to equality and freedom from discrimination. This means that all are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection and benefit of the law, including the enjoyment of all human rights without discrimination on a range of grounds (such as health status, which includes drug dependence).

"In accordance with this right, States shall:
"i. Take all appropriate measures to prevent, identify, and remedy unjust discrimination in drug laws, policies, and practices on any prohibited grounds, including drug dependence.
"ii. Provide equal and effective protection against such discrimination, ensuring that particularly marginalised or vulnerable groups can effectively exercise and realise their human rights.

"To facilitate the above, States should:
"iii. Monitor the impact of drug laws, policies, and practices on various communities – including on the basis of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, economic status, and involvement in sex work – and collect disaggregated data for this purpose."

"Throughout 2021, executions for drug offences were confirmed to have taken place in Iran (at least 131) and China (at least one, a Chinese woman). In China, state secrecy prevents reporting of accurate figures, however, the country is believed to carry out numerous executions (potentially in the thousands, according to Amnesty International).¹⁷ Figures from Iran, collected by the Abdorrahman Boroumand Centre for Human Rights in Iran, show a weighty increase in confirmed drug-related executions, from 25 in 2020 to 131 in 2021 - a 424% rise, against a 28% increase in total executions in the country. Concurrently, executions for drug crimes in Iran represented a higher percentage of total executions than in the previous year: from 10% to 42%, back to pre-amendment levels.¹⁸ While the root causes of such a sharp surge are yet to be conclusively identified, this trend confirms experts’ fears that the impact of the 2017 Amendments to the Law for Combating Illicit Drugs may be temporary, and linked, at least to some degree, to political circumstances.

"In addition to China and Iran, it is highly likely that executions were carried out in two more countries characterised by extreme opacity of information: North Korea and Vietnam. Indeed, both countries regularly sentence people to death for drug offences, and both countries are believed to regularly execute individuals. In Vietnam, where dozens of drug-related death sentences are imposed every year, eleven execution centres are currently operational.¹⁹ In North Korea, civil society consistently identifies drug offences amongst the main crimes for which individuals are executed, although there are no published records or figures.

"Equally notable are findings on the absence of executions: in 2021, no executions for drug offences were carried out in Saudi Arabia for the first time in at least a decade (although one individual was executed for multiple political crimes, as well as “promotion and use” of illicit substances). This development, due to an ongoing moratorium on drug-related executions in the Kingdom, is significant, especially considering that in 2019, 84 drug-related executions were reported, with more likely to have taken place. At the same time, the moratorium has not yet been formalised, or finalised via law reform, meaning executions may restart at any time. According to civil society organisations such as the European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights,²⁰ death sentences continue to be imposed and people on death row for drug crimes have not undergone retrials or seen their sentences commuted. Absent more substantial reforms, these individuals are still at imminent risk of execution.

"There were no executions for drugs or any other crimes in Indonesia for the fifth consecutive year. There were also no executions in Singapore for the second year in a row; one execution was announced in late 2021, but was later suspended pending judicial review and national as well as international outcry (for more details, see case study, pag. 29). Though the COVID-19 pandemic certainly played a role, the fact that one of the most committed retentionist countries refrained from carrying out executions is significant.

"On 29 December 2021, the Malaysian government announced that the special committee created in 2019 to reflect upon death penalty abolition will soon present its findings to the executive. The same statement also indicated that “the Bill to amend laws on the death penalty, as well as other relevant laws, is expected to be tabled in Parliament by the third quarter of 2022.”²¹

"With Saudi Arabia and Singapore currently refraining from carrying out drug-related executions, the group of states that actively executes individuals for these non-violent crimes is shrinking, and is more isolated than ever. At the same time, this group is increasingly characterised by secrecy, if not outright censorship, on the use of capital punishment, in clear violation of its human rights obligations. This poses huge challenges to both institutional and civil society actors monitoring and advocating against capital punishment. For the same reason, and absent more details, the total number of drug-related executions in 2021 should be treated as the minimum confirmed figure. The total number is higher, possibly significantly so."

"In 2018, correctional administrators reported 27,826 allegations of sexual victimization in prisons, jails, and other adult correctional facilities (figure 1). Of those allegations, 1,673 were substantiated after investigation. The number of allegations rose 180% from 2011 to 2015, which was partly attributable to correctional authorities’ response to the 2012 release of the National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape. From 2015 to 2018, the number of allegations increased more slowly (14%). During 2016-18, the majority of allegations involved staff sexual victimizations of inmates (56%), but most substantiated incidents involved inmate sexual victimizations of other inmates (55%)."

"In 2011, less than 1% of the 241.4 million U.S. residents age 16 or older were involved in a street stop during their most recent contact with police (table 1; appendix table 2). A greater percentage of males (1%) than females (less than 1%) were involved in street stops during 2011. Persons ages 16 to 24 were more likely than persons age 35 or older to be involved in street stops. While no differences were observed in the percentage of non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic populations age 16 or older involved in a street stop, among those who were stopped, a smaller percentage of blacks (38%) than Hispanics (63%) or whites (78%) felt the police behaved properly during the stop.

"Traffic stops were a more common form of police contact than street stops in 2011. About 10% of the 212.3 million U.S. drivers age 16 or older were stopped while operating a motor vehicle during their most recent contact with police.¹ As with street stops, a greater percentage of male drivers (12%) than female drivers (8%) were pulled over in traffic stops. Across age groups, the highest percentage of stopped drivers was among drivers ages 18 to 24 (18%). A higher percentage of black drivers (13%) than white (10%) and Hispanic (10%) drivers age 16 or older were pulled over in a traffic stop during their most recent contact with police.

"A higher percentage of drivers in traffic stops (88%) than persons involved in street stops (71%) believed the police behaved properly during the stop. White drivers pulled over by police (89%) were more likely than black drivers (83%) to think that the police behaved properly, while no difference was observed between the percentages of stopped white drivers and Hispanic drivers who thought that the police behaved properly. There was also no statistical difference in the percentages of black and Hispanic stopped drivers who believed the police behaved properly."

"In 2018, juvenile justice administrators reported 2,467 allegations of sexual victimization in state juvenile systems and locally or privately operated juvenile facilities (figure 1). Of those allegations, 321 were substantiated based on a follow-up investigation. Sexual victimizations include youth-on-youth nonconsensual sexual acts and abusive sexual contact, and staff sexual misconduct and sexual harassment.1 The number of sexual victimization allegations rose 89% from 2013 to 2018, while the number of substantiated incidents grew 44%. The overall rate of reported allegations increased from 21.7 per 1,000 youth in juvenile facilities in 2013 to 54.1 per 1,000 in 2018. Youth made a total of 12,060 allegations from 2013 to 2018, more than half (52%) of which were allegedly perpetrated by staff. About 8% of these staff-on-youth allegations were substantiated, compared to 23% of youth-on-youth allegations."

"Our criminal laws, while facially neutral, are enforced in a manner that is massively and pervasively biased. The injustices of the criminal justice system threaten to render irrelevant fifty years of hard-fought civil rights progress."

"Allegations of sexual victimization rose sharply after the national standards’ 2012 release, then stabilized from 2016 to 2018, changing less than 7% annually during this 3-year period.³ About 6% of allegations during this period were substantiated, and 51% were unsubstantiated. From 2010 to 2018, most allegations of sexual victimization were found to be unsubstantiated after investigation (figure 2). The exception was in 2014, when most allegations were determined to be unfounded. The number of unfounded allegations reached a high of 11,169 in 2016, decreased to 10,084 in 2017, then increased to 10,869 in 2018.

"In 2018, 18,884 allegations of sexual victimization were reported by prisons (68%) and 8,651 were reported by jails (31%) (table 1). By comparison, in 2015 about 76% of sexual victimization allegations were reported by prisons and 24% were reported by jails. Allegations reported by state prison systems declined 4% from 2016 to 2018, from a high of 17,080 to 16,448. In jails, allegations increased each year from 2015 to 2018, going from 5,809 to 8,651 allegations.

"The overall rate of allegations in prisons increased 8%, from 12.5 per 1,000 inmates in 2015 to 13.5 per 1,000 in 2018 (table 2). The rate reported by jails rose 48% during the same period. Military facilities have had the highest rate since 2013, which peaked at 32.7 allegations per 1,000 inmates in 2018. State prisons had the second-highest rate in 2018 at 14.9 per 1,000.

"The number of allegations of all types of sexual victimization decreased from 2016 to 2017, after consistently rising after the implementation of the 2012 national standards (figure 3). Allegations of inmate-on-inmate nonconsensual sexual acts and abusive sexual contact as well as allegations of staff sexual misconduct then rose again from 2017 to 2018, while allegations of staff sexual harassment continued to decline from 6,943 in 2016 to 6,449 in 2018."

"Allegations of sexual victimization in all types of juvenile facilities increased by 995 (76%) between 2013 and 2016 (table 1). During that period, allegations increased by 477 (66%) in state juvenile systems and by 518 (88%) in locally and privately operated facilities. These increases can be partly attributed to juvenile justice authorities’ response to the 2012 release of the National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape.⁴ From 2016 to 2018, the number of allegations generally remained stable across juvenile facilities, though they increased by 177 (15%) in state juvenile systems."

"The overall rate of allegations in juvenile facilities increased from 2013 to 2018. From 2013 to 2016, state juvenile systems (up 117%) and local and private facilities (up 115%) saw their rates more than double. From 2016 to 2018, there was a further 32% increase in the rate in state systems (from 81.3 to 107 allegations per 1,000), while the rate in local and private facilities remained stable (30.7 per 1,000 youth in 2016 and 33.4 per 1,000 in 2018). From 2013 to 2018, state juvenile systems accounted for 52% to 62% of all reported allegations but about 30% of all youth held by juvenile justice authorities (not shown in tables). As a result, the rate of allegations has been 2.6 to 4.2 times as high in state systems as in local and private juvenile facilities.⁵"

"In 2011, 6% of drivers pulled over in traffic stops experienced some type of force used against them, from shouting and cursing, to verbal threats of force or other action, to physical force, including hitting, handcuffing, and pointing a gun (table 9). Of the 1% of stopped drivers who experienced physical force during the traffic stop, more than half (55%) believed the police behaved properly during the contact. A similar percentage of drivers who experienced verbal threats of force believed the police behaved properly (56%).
"Three in 4 (75%) stopped drivers who experienced any type of force believed the police actions were unnecessary. About two-thirds (65%) of drivers who experienced police use of force did not think the force was excessive. Among stopped drivers who experienced any type of verbal or physical force, 83% who believed the force used or threatened against them was necessary also thought police behaved properly, compared to 38% of those who did not believe the use of force was necessary."

"Everyone has the right to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. This right applies equally in the context of drug laws, policies, and practices.

"In accordance with this right, States should:

"i. Take deliberate, concrete, and targeted steps to ensure that drug-related and other health care goods, services, and facilities are available on a non-discriminatory basis in sufficient quantity; financially and geographically accessible; acceptable in the sense of being respectful of medical ethics, cultural norms, age, gender, and the communities being served; and of good quality (that is, with a solid evidence base).

"ii. Address the social and economic determinants that support or hinder positive health outcomes related to drug use, including stigma and discrimination of various kinds, such as against people who use drugs.

"iii. Ensure that demand reduction measures implemented to prevent drug use are based on evidence and compliant with human rights.

"iv. Repeal, amend, or discontinue laws, policies, and practices that inhibit access to controlled substances for medical purposes and to health goods, services, and facilities for the prevention of harmful drug use, harm reduction among those who use drugs, and drug dependence treatment.

"In addition, States may:

"v. Utilise the available flexibilities in the UN drug control conventions to decriminalise the possession, purchase, or cultivation of controlled substances for personal consumption."

"A civil rights claim arises when an individual or group asserts they have been discriminated against on the basis of their race, sex, religion, age, physical limitation, or previous condition of servitude. Most litigants in civil rights disputes are required to seek administrative remedies involving federal agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), in the case of employment discrimination, or the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in the case of housing discrimination. Litigants not satisfied with these administrative outcomes can file a civil rights lawsuit in the federal courts to seek monetary or injunctive relief."

"Young black and Latino men were the targets of a hugely disproportionate number of stops. Though they account for only 4.7 percent of the city’s population, black and Latino males between the ages of 14 and 24 accounted for 41.6 percent of stops in 2011. The number of stops of young black men exceeded the entire city population of young black men (168,126 as compared to 158,406). Ninety percent of young black and Latino men stopped were innocent."

"Collateral consequences are those legal, non-criminal penalties that attach to a conviction, but that were not part of the punishment at sentencing. These penalties have been called the 'invisible punishment'⁴ because they are civil penalties that do not fall within the jurisdiction of the criminal justice system. Collateral consequences can make an individual with a criminal history ineligible for various types of employment and occupational licenses, rendering a job search nearly futile."

"Like the war on terror, the war on drugs is framed as a response to an exceptional, existential threat to our health, our security, and indeed the very fabric of society. The 'Addiction to narcotic drugs' is portrayed as an 'evil' the international community has a moral duty to 'combat' because it is a 'danger of incalculable gravity' that warrants a series of (otherwise publicly unacceptable) extraordinary measures. This is not an exaggeration of the political rhetoric. This crusading language has created a political climate in which drug war policy and enforcement are not required to meet human rights norms."

"'Stops' refers to the practice of police officers stopping individuals on the street to question them. In general, police may do this to anyone at any time. But unless and until the police officer tells an individual he or she may not leave, a person stopped is free not to answer questions and to leave. As Supreme Court Justice Harlan said in his opinion in Terry [v. Ohio], ordinarily and unless there are specific facts sufficient to justify the officer’s suspicion that a crime is, has been or may about to be committed, the person stopped has a right to ignore the officer’s questions and walk away. But if the individual may not leave, this is called, as Justice Harlan put it, a 'forcible stop.'

"This is why, when stopped, it is always advisable to ask the police officer politely whether you are free to leave or not. If you are restrained from leaving, you should not resist. But at some point, if the stop is more than brief, you should ask whether you are being arrested. This is because more evidence is required to arrest someone than to stop them for questioning."

"In December 2000, the Prison Journal published a study based on a survey of inmates in seven men's prison facilities in four states. The results showed that 21 percent of the inmates had experienced at least one episode of pressured or forced sexual contact since being incarcerated, and at least 7 percent had been raped in their facility. A 1996 study of the Nebraska prison system produced similar findings, with 22 percent of male inmates reporting that they had been pressured or forced to have sexual contact against their will while incarcerated. Of these, over 50 percent had submitted to forced anal sex at least once. Extrapolating these findings to the national level gives a total of at least 140,000 inmates who have been raped."

"A pat-down frisk is a limited search subject to the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. It involves a police officer patting down an individual’s outer clothing, and only his outer clothing, if and only if, pursuant to a lawful forcible stop, the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the individual stopped is armed and dangerous. This is the only legal justification for a pat-down frisk. [Emphasis in original.]

"Reasonable suspicion of any other crime is enough to stop and question an individual, but it is not enough to frisk him. For that, reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous is required."

"It is evident that certain prisoners are targeted for sexual assault the moment they enter a penal facility: their age, looks, sexual orientation, and other characteristics mark them as candidates for abuse. Human Rights Watch's research has revealed a broad range of factors that correlate with increased vulnerability to rape. These include youth, small size, and physical weakness; being white, gay, or a first offender; possessing 'feminine' characteristics such as long hair or a high voice; being unassertive, unaggressive, shy, intellectual, not street-smart, or 'passive'; or having been convicted of a sexual offense against a minor. Prisoners with any one of these characteristics typically face an increased risk of sexual abuse, while prisoners with several overlapping characteristics are much more likely than other inmates to be targeted for abuse. Yet it would be a mistake to think that only a minority of extremely vulnerable individuals face sexual abuse. In the wrong circumstances, it should be emphasized, almost any prisoner may become a victim."

"People with criminal records now confront unprecedented employment challenges that are not solely the result of a weak labor market. States, for example, have collectively adopted more than 30,000 laws that significantly restrict access to employment and other basic rights and benefits for people with criminal records, according to an exhaustive analysis² by the American Bar Association."

"• As of 2016, an estimated 6.1 million people are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction, a figure that has escalated dramatically in recent decades as the population under criminal justice supervision has increased. There were an estimated 1.17 million people disenfranchised in 1976, 3.34 million in 1996, and 5.85 million in 2010.
"• Approximately 2.5 percent of the total U.S. voting age population – 1 of every 40 adults – is disenfranchised due to a current or previous felony conviction.
"• Individuals who have completed their sentences in the twelve states that disenfranchise people post-sentence make up over 50 percent of the entire disenfranchised population, totaling almost 3.1 million people."

"• Rates of disenfranchisement vary dramatically by state due to broad variations in voting prohibitions. In six states – Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia – more than 7 percent of the adult population is disenfranchised.
"• The state of Florida alone accounts for more than a quarter (27 percent) of the disenfranchised population nationally, and its nearly 1.5 million individuals disenfranchised post-sentence account for nearly half (48 percent) of the national total.
"• One in 13 African Americans of voting age is disenfranchised, a rate more than four times greater than that of non-African Americans. Over 7.4 percent of the adult African American population is disenfranchised compared to 1.8 percent of the non-African American population.
"• African American disenfranchisement rates also vary significantly by state. In four states – Florida (21 percent), Kentucky (26 percent), Tennessee (21 percent), and Virginia (22 percent) – more than one in five African Americans is disenfranchised."

"Maine and Vermont remain the only states that allow prison inmates to vote. Thirty U.S. states deny voting rights to felony probationers, and thirty-five states disenfranchise parolees. In the most extreme cases, eleven states continue to deny voting rights to some or all of the “ex-felons” who have successfully fulfilled their prison, parole, or probation sentences"

"As Table 1 noted, there have been several significant changes in state disenfranchisement policies over the past decade. Most notably, Delaware removed its five-year waiting period for most offenses in 2013 and South Dakota began disenfranchising felony probationers in 2012. Governor Tom Vilsack of Iowa re-enfranchised all state residents who had completed their sentences by executive order on July 4, 2005 – though that order was then reversed by his successor, Governor Terry Branstad, in January 2011. In 2016 the Alabama legislature eased the rights restoration process after completion of sentence for persons not convicted of a crime of “moral turpitude.” Other states have also reduced disenfranchisement through streamlining restoration of rights or re-enfranchising certain groups of individuals with felony convictions. For example, both Rhode Island and Maryland now restrict voting rights only for those in prison as opposed to all individuals currently serving a felony sentence, including those on probation and parole. And in 2016, California restored voting rights to people convicted of a felony offense housed in jail, but not in prison."

"To grasp how many 'fellow citizens' are unable to vote because of a felony conviction, imagine this: If all of them congregated in a single, geographic area, it would become the nation's second largest city, right behind New York. It would be larger than Los Angeles or Chicago. If those deprived of their suffrage lived in a single state, it would be the country's twenty-sixth most populous - right after Kentucky, right before South Carolina."

"• Since 1997, 16 states have implemented reforms to their felony disenfranchisement policies
"• These reforms have resulted in the restoration of voting rights to an estimated 621,400 persons
"• By 2004, the total number of people disenfranchised due to a felony conviction had risen to 5.3 million
"• Among those disenfranchised, 74% are currently living in the community
"• In 2004, 1 in 12 African Americans was disenfranchised because of a felony conviction, a rate nearly five times that of non-African Americans
"• Voting is linked with reduced recidivism; one study shows that 27 percent of non-voters were rearrested, compared with 12 percent of voters"

"There is some evidence indicating that voting behavior and criminal behavior are related. In a longitudinal survey of 1,000 young adults, Uggen and Manza (2004) found that only around 5% of the voters had been arrested or incarcerated compared to the non-voters of whom 16% had been arrested and 12% had been incarcerated. And, among former arrestees, approximately 27% of the non-voters had been rearrested compared to 12% of the voters. Similar patterns emerged when examining self-reported crime such that voters reported significantly less crime than non-voters. Thus, voting appears to be part of a 'package of prosocial behavior.'"

"The basic principles for electoral democracy are laid out in international law. Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) declares that 'Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions:. . .(b) To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors. . .'; Article 2 sets out that this applies 'without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.'"

"Thirteen percent of all adult black men -- 1.4 million -- are disenfranchised, representing one-third of the total disenfranchised population and reflecting a rate of disenfranchisement that is seven times the national average. Election voting statistics offer an approximation of the political importance of black disenfranchisement: 1.4 million black men are disenfranchised compared to 4.6 million black men who voted in 1996."

"In the last two presidential races, voters gave almost equal support to Democratic and Republican candidates; in 2004 less than 2.5 percentage points separated President Bush and Senator Kerry and the margin in 2000 between then-Governor Bush and Vice-President Gore was less than half a percentage point. Even more startling, as shown in Table 1, in 2000, the margin between Vice-President Al Gore and Governor George W. Bush was less than 6000 votes in four states. In this contentious political climate voting rights and participation have taken on even greater significance and more Americans are paying attention to how policies affecting offenders in turn affect the electorate. To date, this concern is reflected by the emerging debate over the disfranchisement of felons, an issue that has received much attention from interest groups, media outlets, and politicians. In particular, much of this attention was directed at Florida, a state that permanently disfranchises individuals convicted of felonies."

"Another constitutional argument [against prosecuting pregnant women] is based on the right to privacy: the prosecution of a pregnant drug-addicted woman infringes upon a woman’s right to privacy, as established in Roe v. Wade.¹¹¹ In Roe, the Supreme Court held that the right to privacy, 'whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action ... or ... in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.'¹¹² Advocates of the right to privacy contend that a woman does not lose her right to privacy simply because she becomes pregnant, and the constitutional right to privacy 'extends to both women and men, regardless of their biological differences.'¹¹³ Advocates therefore contend that because the Constitution does not differentiate among persons who are able to enjoy the right to privacy, the pregnant woman remains a 'person' as defined and protected under the Constitution.¹¹⁴ Hence, the State’s mechanisms — prosecution by child abuse, endangerment, controlled substance abuse, manslaughter, and homicide statutes — infringe upon a drug-addicted woman’s fundamental right to privacy because these mechanisms punish her simply for exercising her constitutional right to procreate.¹¹⁵"

New York Times, 2005: "The Bush administration is replacing the director of a small but critical branch of the Justice Department, months after he complained that senior political officials at the department were seeking to play down newly compiled data on the aggressive police treatment of black and Hispanic drivers.
"The demotion of the official, Lawrence A. Greenfeld, whom President Bush named in 2001 to lead the Bureau of Justice Statistics, caps more than three years of simmering tensions over charges of political interference at the agency. And it has stirred anger and tumult among many Justice Department statisticians, who say their independence in analyzing important law enforcement data has been compromised.
"Officials at the White House and the Justice Department said no political pressure had been exerted over the statistics branch. But they declined to discuss the job status of Mr. Greenfeld, who told his staff several weeks ago that he had been asked to move on after 23 years of generally high marks as a statistician and supervisor at the agency. Mr. Greenfeld, who was initially threatened with dismissal and the possible loss of some pension benefits, is expected to leave the agency soon for a lesser position at another agency."

"As of March 2001, 16 of the 49 State police agencies with patrol duties required officers to collect the race or ethnicity of all drivers involved in a traffic stop (table 1). Thirty-seven State agencies collected the race or ethnicity of motorists when an arrest was made, and 22 agencies did so following a vehicle or occupant search. Ten State police agencies — Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Illinois, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Utah — did not require their State troopers to collect race or ethnicity data."

"... blacks are just 12 percent of the population and 13 percent of the drug users, and despite the fact that traffic stops and similar enforcement yield equal arrest rates for minorities and whites alike, blacks are 38 percent of those arrested for drug offenses and 59 percent of those convicted of drug offenses. Moreover, more frequent stops, and therefore arrests, of minorities will also result in longer average prison terms for minorities because patterns of disproportionate arrests generate more extensive criminal histories for minorities, which in turn influence sentencing outcomes."

Sociopolitical Research

"In addition to the increase in the number of States that required State law enforcement agencies to collect race and ethnicity statistics during traffic stops, States have recently enacted statutes that prohibit law enforcement officers from engaging in racial profiling (California, Connecticut, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Rhode Island). these statutes generally defined racial profiling as stopping a person based solely on race or ethnicity instead of an individualized suspicion arising from the person’s behavior."

At the start of the 1990s, the U.S. had more Black men (between the ages of 20 and 29) under the control of the nation's criminal justice system than the total number in college. This and other factors have led some scholars to conclude that, "crime control policies are a major contributor to the disruption of the family, the prevalence of single parent families, and children raised without a father in the ghetto, and the 'inability of people to get the jobs still available.'"

"Under a federal court consent decree, traffic stops by the Maryland State Police on Interstate 95 were monitored. In the two year period from January 1995 to December 1997, 70 percent of the drivers stopped and searched by the police were black, while only 17.5 percent of overall drivers – as well as overall speeders – were black."

"The number of federal and state wiretaps reported in 2019 increased 10 percent from 2018. A total of 3,225 wiretaps were reported as authorized in 2019, with 1,417 authorized by federal judges and 1,808 authorized by state judges. Compared to the applications approved during 2018, the number approved by federal judges decreased 3 percent in 2019, and the number approved by state judges increased 22 percent.

"In 28 states, a total of 147 separate local jurisdictions (including counties, cities, and judicial districts) reported wiretap applications for 2019. Applications concentrated in six states (New York, California, Nevada, Colorado, North Carolina and Philadelphia) accounted for 79 percent of all state wiretap applications. Applications in California and New York alone constituted 50 percent of all applications approved by state judges.

"Eighty-six federal jurisdictions submitted reports of wiretap applications for 2019. The Southern District of New York authorized the most federal wiretaps, approximately 5 percent of the applications approved by federal judges.

"Federal judges and state judges reported the authorization of 938 wiretaps and 218 wiretaps, respectively, for which the AO received no corresponding data from prosecuting officials. Wiretap Tables A-1 and B-1 (which are available online at http://www.uscourts.gov/stati…) contain information from judge and prosecutor reports submitted for 2019. The entry “NP” (no prosecutor’s report) appears in these tables whenever a prosecutor’s report was not submitted. Some prosecutors may have delayed filing reports to avoid jeopardizing ongoing investigations. Some of the prosecutors’ reports require additional information to comply with reporting requirements or were received too late to include in this document. Information about these wiretaps should appear in future reports."

"Drug offenses were the most prevalent type of criminal offenses investigated using reported wiretaps. Table 3 indicates that 39 percent of all applications for intercepts (1,266 wiretap applications) in 2019 cited narcotics as the most serious offense under investigation. Applications citing narcotics combined with applications citing other offenses, which include other offenses related to drugs, accounted for 76 percent of all reported wiretap applications in 2019, an increase of 8 percent from 2018. Conspiracy, the second-most frequently cited crime, was specified in 13 percent of applications. Homicide and assault, the third-largest category, was specified as the most serious offense in approximately 4 percent of applications. Many applications for court orders revealed that multiple criminal offenses were under investigation, but Table 3 includes only the most serious criminal offense listed on an application."

"Table 5 provides a summary of expenses related to wiretaps in 2019. The expenditures noted reflect the cost of installing intercept devices and monitoring communications for the 1,715 authorizations for which reports included cost data. The average cost of an intercept in 2019 was $75,160, up 13 percent from the average cost in 2018. The most expensive state wiretap was in Georgia, where costs for a 178-day wiretap conducted to investigate an offense in the narcotics category resulted in 17 arrests and 1 conviction, totaled $1,920,777. For federal wiretaps for which expenses were reported in 2019, the average cost was $94,872, a 40 percent increase from 2018. The most expensive federal wiretap completed during 2019 occurred in the District of Maryland, where costs for a 120-day wiretap in a narcotics investigation that resulted in 5 arrests and no convictions totaled $2,511,137."

"In Kyllo [v United States], a federal agent used infrared thermal imaging equipment to compare the heat emanating from a triplex unit to the heat signatures of other nearby residences. Based in part on the equipment reading indicating that the defendant’s home was warmer than the others, the agent obtained a search warrant. Officers searched the home and seized marijuana plants growing inside. The government argued that the Fourth Amendment had no application, because the defendant had made no effort to conceal the heat escaping the walls of his home and had no reasonable expectation that passers-by would not take notice.
"The Supreme Court disagreed, 5-4, holding that the use of sense-enhancing technology not in general public use, in order to reveal details about the interior of a private home that could not otherwise be ascertained without entering the home, constitutes a search. The majority placed great emphasis on the fact that the technique was aimed at a private dwelling, yet it is not clear from the decision whether (or why) the use of such technology against a barn or private office should yield a different result."

"DEA officials state that without confidential sources, the DEA could not effectively enforce the controlled substances laws of the United States. Confidential sources come from all walks of life and are significant to initiating investigations and providing information or services to facilitate arrests and seizures of drugs and cash. According to the DEA, it has approximately 4,000 active confidential sources at any one time."

"The Fourth Amendment provides that

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

"In general, the amendment prohibits the government from conducting unreasonable searches or seizures of 'the people' and their property, in most cases (subject to a number of exceptions) requiring a warrant supported by a particularized description of the object of the search or seizure.³⁵ The term 'search' refers to a governmental infringement of an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable, that is, under circumstances where an individual reasonably expects that the privacy of his or her person, home, papers, or effects are protected from uninvited intrusion.³⁶ A 'seizure' occurs when there is meaningful governmental interference in a property interest³⁷ or intentional detention of a person.³⁸ Searches and seizures can involve intangible as well as tangible things.³⁹
"Government surveillance where there is no legitimate expectation of privacy does not amount to a 'search' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment and therefore carries no requirement for a warrant, probable cause, or even any semblance of reasonableness."

"The Supreme Court addressed whether an observation made from a low-flying helicopter constituted a search in Florida v. Riley,⁵⁸ a plurality concluding that it did not. At issue was the use of a police helicopter, hovering at 400 feet (an altitude prohibited for fixed-wing aircraft), to observe, through an opening in a greenhouse roof, marijuana growing inside. The plurality read [California v.] Ciraolo as establishing that so long as there was no breach of the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) safety regulations, the property owner had no legitimate reason to expect privacy with respect to non-intimate activities undertaken in the curtilage of his home that were plainly visible from above. Five justices would have preferred to consider how often members of the public actually make low-altitude helicopter flights over populated areas in determining whether the claimed expectation of privacy was reasonable. The plurality suggested that surveillance overflights that comply with FAA regulations might nevertheless constitute searches if they were to involve “undue noise, [] wind, dust, or threat of injury” or to reveal “intimate details connected with the use of the home or curtilage.”⁹"

"In recent years – in no small part as the result of the failed 'war on drugs' – Fourth Amendment principles have been steadily eroding. The circumstances under which police and other government officials may conduct warrantless searches has been rapidly expanding. The courts have allowed for increased surveillance and searches on the nation’s highways and at our 'borders' (the legal definition of which actually extends hundreds of miles inland from the actual border). And despite the Constitution’s plain language covering 'persons' and 'effects,' the courts have increasingly allowed for warrantless searches when we are outside of our homes and 'in public.' Here the courts have increasingly found we have no 'reasonable expectation' of privacy and that therefore the Fourth Amendment does not apply."

"Drug law enforcement in the United States has grown highly dependent upon the wholesale use of confidential informants (CIs), who are frequently lawbreakers in their own right. Driven by skewed police performance metrics and draconian sentencing policies, and corrupted through perverse incentives coupled with nonexistent oversight, the informant system as operated is antithetical to basic fairness, the proper administration of the justice system, and truly effective law enforcement. The pervasive abuse of the informant system, often by federally funded drug task forces, has had tragic implications for individuals and communities nationwide. Disproportionately targeted by drug law enforcement efforts, African American communities have, unsurprisingly, borne the brunt of this injustice."

"In recent years there has been growing attention to the human rights implications of the international narcotics control regime among non-governmental organisations⁶ and UN human rights monitors.⁷ [Special Rapporteurs] Human rights violations documented in the name of drug control in countries across the world include: the execution of hundreds of people annually for drug offences;⁸ the arbitrary detention of hundreds of thousands of people who use (or are accused of using) illicit drugs;⁹ the infliction of torture, or other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, in the name of ‘drug treatment’;¹⁰ the extrajudicial killings of people suspected of being drug users or drug traffickers;¹¹ and the denial of potentially life saving health services for people who use drugs.¹²"

"The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 was set up as a universal system (replacing the various treaties signed until then) to control the cultivation, production, manufacture, export, import, distribution of, trade in, use and possession of narcotic substances, paying special attention to those that are plant-based: opium/heroin, coca/cocaine and cannabis. More than a hundred substances are listed in the four schedules of the convention, placing them under varying degrees of control.
"The Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, in response to the diversification of drugs of abuse, introduces controls over the licit use of more than a hundred-largely synthetic- psychotropic drugs, like amphetamines, LSD, ecstasy, valium, etcetera, again divided over four schedules. An important purpose of the first two treaties is to codify internationally applicable control measures in order to ensure the availability of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes, while preventing their diversion into illicit channels. The World Health Organization (WHO) is responsible for the medical and scientific assessment of all psychoactive substances and to advise the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) about their classification into one of the schedules of the 1961 or 1971 treaties.
"In response to the increasing problem of drug abuse and trafficking during the 1970s and 1980s, the Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988 provides for comprehensive measures against drug trafficking. These include provisions against money laundering and the diversion of precursor chemicals, and agreements on mutual legal assistance. The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) is the quasi-judicial control organ for the implementation of all three United Nations drug conventions. The board consists of thirteen members, three elected from a list of candidates nominated by WHO and ten from a list nominated by Governments."

"The primary goal of the international drug control regime, as set forth in the preamble of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961), is the 'health and welfare of mankind', but the current approach to controlling drug use and possession works against that aim. Widespread implementation of interventions that reduce harms associated with drug use — harm-reduction initiatives — and of decriminalization of certain laws governing drug control would improve the health and welfare of people who use drugs and the general population demonstrably. Moreover, the United Nations entities and Member States should adopt a right to health approach to drug control, encourage system-wide coherence and communication, incorporate the use of indicators and guidelines, and consider developing a new legal framework concerning certain illicit drugs, in order to ensure that the rights of people who use drugs are respected, protected and fulfilled."

"The current international system of drug control has focused on creating a drugfree world, almost exclusively through use of law enforcement policies and criminal sanctions. Mounting evidence, however, suggests this approach has failed, primarily because it does not acknowledge the realities of drug use and dependence. While drugs may have a pernicious effect on individual lives and society, this excessively punitive regime has not achieved its stated public health goals, and has resulted in countless human rights violations."

Article 24
"1. Indigenous peoples have the right to their traditional medicines and to maintain their health practices, including the conservation of their vital medicinal plants, animals and minerals. Indigenous individuals also have the right to access, without any discrimination, to all social and health services.
"2. Indigenous individuals have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. States shall take the necessary steps with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of this right."

Article 31
"1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.
2. In conjunction with indigenous peoples, States shall take effective measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights."

"In responding to the problem of drug use, many countries have introduced severe penalties for drug use and related crime, which have resulted in large numbers of people in prisons, compulsory treatment centres, or labour camps without significant long term impact on drug use, drug dependence or drug-related crime in the community and are in contradiction with human rights. At the same time, the long term incarceration of a large number of people who use drugs is expensive. It also results in high risk for the transmission of HIV, hepatitis, and TB, both in closed settings and beyond, that represents a significant public health risk to the community. Many countries are consequently looking for alternatives to incarceration for drug use and related crime."

"Much of this money [donations from wealthy donor states) goes through the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). Donors contributed approximately $273.2 million USD to the agency’s drug programme for the two-year period 2010–20112, of which $61 million went to counter illicit trafficking, very often in environments with serious human rights risks³. These funds are accompanied by millions more in bilateral aid to governments responsible for serious human rights violations.
"These funds are intended to reduce crime and human suffering by reducing the supply of and demand for illicit drugs. In reality, in the name of drug control, donors are supporting practices in other countries that they themselves regard as morally reprehensible and illegal."

"Certain fundamental principles underpin all aspects of national and international policy. These are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and many international treaties that have followed. Of particular relevance to drug policy are the rights to life, to health, to due process and a fair trial, to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, from slavery, and from discrimination. These rights are inalienable, and commitment to them takes precedence over other international agreements, including the drug control conventions. As the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navanethem Pillay, has stated, 'Individuals who use drugs do not forfeit their human rights. Too often, drug users suffer discrimination, are forced to accept treatment, marginalized and often harmed by approaches which over-emphasize criminalization and punishment while under-emphasizing harm reduction and respect for human rights.'⁵"

"A narco-terrorist organization is an organized group that is complicit in the activities of drug trafficking to further or fund premeditated, politically motivated violence to influence a government or group of people. Although the DEA does not specifically target terrorists, some of the powerful international drug trafficking organizations we have targeted have never hesitated to use violence and terror to advance their political interests."