Agenda: Review of the Convention against illicit traffic in Narcotic Drugs and

Psychotropic substances

LETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD

As part of the Executive Board, it is our responsibility to facilitate your educational

experience at the simulation of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime at GNLU
MUN 2019. This background guide will give you an overview of the topic at hand and the
work of the committee. It contains some basic elements on the topic that will guide your
preliminary research, further specific links that will assist you in an in depth reading of the
agenda. However, such mentions do not limit the scope of discussion in the committee at all.
One of the agendas that we shall be discussing in the simulation is, “Review of the
Convention against illicit traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psycho tropic substances”, the agenda
at hand is a very broad ranged one and covers an array of thematic areas under Public
International Law and its inter mingling with recent developments in law enforcement
methodologies as well as change in people’s view of drugs in itself.
We expect active participation in the proceedings of this committee from all delegates, in
order to have a fruitful discussion on a pertinent global problem. For that purpose, extensive
and thorough research is expected of you over and beyond this background guide. Think of
this background guide as merely an initiation to your research, defining the broad aspects.
This goes without saying, if you have any questions or doubt regarding your preparation for
the committee please feel free to contact any of us, our email IDs are listed below. We wish
you all the best in your preparation for this committee and we are looking forward to a
fruitful debate at GNLUMUN 2019.

Regards,
Dhaval Mehta Sushruta Mitra
Chairperson Vice - Chairperson

Dhvlmhta97@gmail.com sushruta.mitra794@gmail.com
INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE

UNODC is a global leader in the fight against illicit drugs and international crime.
Established in 1997 through a merger between the United Nations Drug Control Programme
and the Centre for International Crime Prevention, UNODC operates in all regions of the
world through an extensive network of field offices. UNODC relies on voluntary
contributions, mainly from Governments, for 90 per cent of its budget.

UNODC is mandated to assist Member States in their struggle against illicit drugs, crime and
terrorism. In the Millennium Declaration, Member States also resolved to intensify efforts to
fight transnational crime in all its dimensions, to redouble the efforts to implement the
commitment to counter the world drug problem and to take concerted action against
international terrorism.

The three pillars of the UNODC work programme are:

• Field-based technical cooperation projects to enhance the capacity of Member States

to counteract illicit drugs, crime and terrorism
• Research and analytical work to increase knowledge and understanding of drugs and
crime issues and expand the evidence base for policy and operational decisions
• Normative work to assist States in the ratification and implementation of the relevant
international treaties, the development of domestic legislation on drugs, crime and
terrorism, and the provision of secretariat and substantive services to the treaty-based
and governing bodies

In pursuing its objectives, UNODC makes every effort to integrate and mainstream the
gender perspective, particularly in its projects for the provision of alternative livelihoods, as
well as those against human trafficking.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances of 1988 is one of the most controversial of the three main drug control treaties
currently in force. There have been calls for its repeal as well as denunciation by various
International organizations and political groups. The three main problems pointed out by
critics of the treaty are (A) Criminalization of Cannabis, (B) Provisions being subject to
constitutional validity in each nations, and (C) Increase in consumption and trafficking of
illicit drugs.

(A) Criminalization of Cannabis

Article 3(1) of the Convention states:

“Each Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish as criminal offences
under its domestic law, when committed intentionally... The cultivation of opium poppy, coca
bush or cannabis plant for the purpose of the production of narcotic drugs contrary to the
provisions of the 1961 Convention and the 1961 Convention as amended… The possession or
purchase of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance for the purpose of any of the
activities enumerated”

Therefore the treaty explicitly stipulates nations to criminalize the use of cannabis. However
in recent years there have been increasing calls to decriminalize and legalize the possession
of cannabis for either medical or recreational purposes or both, in nations around the world.
The harsh penalties that have been imposed in several nations against traders of cannabis
have also criticized. Therefore these clauses of the convention are contentious and
controversial.

While some nations have legalized recreational usage of cannabis in spite of being parties to
the convention, the convention has been criticized in recent years due to these clauses

(B) Provisions subject to Constitutional validity

Some provisions such as Article 3 (1) (c) and Article 6(8) have phrases such as “Subject to its
constitutional principles and the basic concepts of its legal system, each Party shall ...” which
allows nations to choose to adopt these provision in their legal system or not do so, based on
their individual Constitutional frameworks.
These provisions have been questioned and criticized for not being binding and rigid enough
to tackle a truly International problem such as illicit trading of narcotic drugs. While it must
be conceded that every sovereign nation’s Constitutional framework must be given due
importance while implementing any law that affects that citizens of the said nation, the global
nature of the problem must also be taken into account.

(C) Increase in consumption and trafficking of illicit drugs

According to a 2003 report by a committee of the European Parliament, narcotic drug

consumption and trade have exponentially increased in the past three decades since the
convention came into existence. This is despite the concerted policing efforts by several
nations in order to reduce said illicit drug trade. The report also detailed the extent of the
failure of policing efforts as it lead to an increase in police brutality and incarceration rates,
however, it did not lead to a decrease in consumption and trade of illicit drugs.

The lax provisions of the convention as well as the lack of efforts by parties to the convention
to rehabilitate users of illicit drugs, especially young people, have been blamed for this
failure. It calls for a reform based on effective treatment programmes and reduction in
prohibitionist laws. It also details how deployment of police to curb trafficking of drugs have
ultimately benefited organized crime groups and, therefore, have not led to the intended
effects
MAJOR BLOC POSITION

(A) United States of America

The United States federal government led a campaign to reduce illegal drug trade named
“War on Drugs”. Despite criticisms related to policing, incarceration rates and failure to
reduce illicit drug trade, the government has continued the effort in some form or the other.
Therefore, the United States and its allies in this effort have consistently been supporters of
all drug control treaties which seek limit illicit drug trade, including the United Nations
Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988.
The United States would stress the need for increased incarceration of criminals involved
drug trade and penalization of possessors of illicit drugs rather than rehabilitation.

(B) Pro Cannabis nations

Nations such as Canada and Uruguay which have decriminalized and legalized recreational
and medical usage of Cannabis have been criticized by several organizations and experts on
the subject for not withdrawing from the treaty before taking such measures. However these
nations are expected to criticize the treaty for its criminalization of the possession and trade
of Cannabis. These nations would also stress the need for rehabilitation of drug users and
increased funding for treatment programmes, neither of which, have been stressed in the
convention.

(C) European Union

A European Parliament committee, in 2003, recommended the repeal of the convention. This
recommendation was based on the committee’s findings that despite massive deployment of
police forces and other resources, the consumption and trade of illicit drugs have
exponentially increased since the treaty came into existence. Therefore, most nations
represented in the European Parliament, which is the legislative wing of the European Union,
are expected to criticize the convention and may even propose a repeal. Not all European
Union nations may have the same policies regarding this subject but most of these nations
such as Netherlands, Germany, and France have attempted to significantly reduce policing
efforts to reduce drug trade in recent years and there have also been efforts towards
legalization of certain narcotic drugs such as Cannabis.
CONCLUSION

Nations are divided about the implementation and validity of the treaty due to a number of
factors. With an increasing push for decriminalization and legalization of certain narcotic
substances around the world, governments are forced to rethink their positions on the “tough
on crime” approach with which they dealt with illicit trafficking of drugs. Opposition to
increased and policing and awareness about racial disparities in drug related incarceration
rates have also affected the way in which the international community deals with this issue.

Another contentious issue is the balance between penalization and rehabilitation. While most
nations agree that treatment facilities for users of illicit drug. However, some nations believe
that it is of utmost importance to penalize the possessors as well as traders of illicit drugs in
order to reduce drug trade. Some nations are also of the opinion that focus must shift towards
rehabilitation of users and treatment as punishing the possessors of illicit does not deter them
from abusing such substances. Also, increased policing have proven to ineffective in curbing
drug trade but have rather benefitted trade and criminal organizations.
LINKS FOR REFERENCE

https://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1988_en.pdf
https://www.incb.org/documents/Publications/AnnualReports/AR1994/E-INCB-1994-1-
Supp-1-e.pdf
https://wdr.unodc.org/wdr2019/index.html