Dispatch from Vienna, Day Three: A Global Consensus for Drug Policy ReformThe first-ever meeting of ordinary people, representing the entire globe and discussing the state of the world's drug policy, concluded today in Vienna with a unanimous, united call for a new approach to drug control policy. Here are the highlights of our resolution:
In other words, we voiced the need for a very significant shift in direction for drug policy at just about every level. Of course, if the national governments decide to ignore this call from the grassroots, this could just be a grown-up version of the model U.N. club some of us did in high school. If you read my earlier blog posts , you'll know about the mysterious woman with the yellow badge — she worked hard to wreck the first day, but once she was gone on the second day, the more hard-line U.S. groups became fairly pragmatic and sensible. But the mystery woman showed up again today. I decided to introduce myself to the woman with the yellow badge. Today, she had a red badge, like the rest of us — meaning that overnight she had become a delegate, not an observer. Scary thought for how the day might go. I offered her my card, and got hers. I asked that she, as an official U.S. representative, please include the ACLU in future delegations. It turns out that June Sivilli is indeed in the drug czar's office. A quick Google search reveals that she's a big proponent of student drug testing, which may explain why she already knew who I was (thanks to the ACLU's heretical position that, because it's invasive and ineffective, we shouldn't drug test students.) She didn't offer to include me in future delegations, but was entirely civil. And then the day started with a bang: obstruction and delay from Drug Free America's Calvina Fay and a couple of her colleagues. What was interesting, though, was that many of her original allies were no longer going along with her tactics. Joined only by the "Drug Free Schools Coalition" and a group called Sundial , she renewed the call to remove any suggestion that current drug policies cause harm. Sivilli seemed to be at work again, mobilizing her dwindling troops. Things quickly became comical: one delegate made a motion for all official government employees (i.e., Sivilli) to reveal themselves. The chair denied the motion, but the point had been made. Then another delegate asked the chair why the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (love the name!) was no longer filming the meeting. A rumor had spread that Sivilli objected to being caught on camera whispering in the ears of the "drug-free" representatives. And I learned from one colleague that the Drug Free Schools Coalition representative had threatened to sue her for taking his picture and "reported" her to the U.N. (whatever that means), forcing her to erase the picture from her camera. Can anyone think of any other examples of the U.S. government these days trying to do its dirty work with no accountability or scrutiny, especially in the face of overwhelming opposition from ordinary people? (Yes, Drug Free Schools Coalition and Drug Free America are not actually the U.S. government, but they clearly were working hand-in-glove in the one space where the U.S. government representative could not speak for herself.) But I'm spending way too much time on the shenanigans and not enough on the tremendous promise that today brings. For almost half a century, world drug policy has focused overwhelmingly on "supply side" tactics — a euphemism for policies based on arrests and imprisonment. The U.S. has largely driven this process, in our name but without our consent and mostly without even our awareness. Other governments were initially dragged into this regime, and many have come to embrace it enthusiastically and viciously. Yet now, in this very official space, the people of the world have responded, and we say with one voice that things must change. I'll write one more time with some thoughts about how we can make sure our government listens. And I hope you'll all chime in with your ideas in the comments section. One more thing: thanks for taking the time to read this far. I hope it's been useful and maybe even a little bit fun.
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites. We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published. Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section. 4 Responses to "Dispatch from Vienna, Day Three: A Global Consensus for Drug Policy Reform" |
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Jul 10th, 2008 at 6:33pm
Graham, thanks so much for providing these informative (and entertaining) reports from the ground. It sounds like the good guys scored some key victories these past few days, so thanks for that also.
I wonder if the White House Drug Czar's office will also write about these important events on their blog at PushingBack.com. Check out their recent piece rabidly attacking the NYT editorial board in retaliation for making the White House ONDCP's "anti-drug" strategy look foolish.
Too bad ONDCP doesn't allow comments on their blog :-(
Jul 11th, 2008 at 10:46am
Nice work Graham, and excellent reporting.
There is one glaring omission in it all though: no one has the right to punish someone else for the things they do to themselves.
The most fundamental human right is surely the right to act upon yourself of your own free will.
Any government pursuing the punishment of (select) drug users is engaging in tyranny.
Jul 11th, 2008 at 3:18pm
It has been very enlightening and entertaining to read your observations from the week in Vienna. Thanks.
Jul 19th, 2008 at 8:30am
It makes me very happy to see sensibility finally being used, at least to some degree, in formulating international drug policy. Thank you so much for the excellent blogging on the meetings in Vienna! Since most drug laws cause far more harm than the drugs themselves, we are desperately in need of the more progressive ideas that were put forth at the meetings, especially the concept of 'harm reduction'.