Struggling to present an image of unity, the UNGASS on drugs in April 2016 failed to hide the increasing diversity among Member States. This undeniable reality, earlier described by the Executive Director of UNODC as ‘a very b-r-o-a-d consensus’, was reflected in a weak outcome document.
Although the timing of the UNGASS was prompted by ongoing and disproportionate suffering and violence from the ‘war on drugs’ in Latin America, as on previous occasions, the event did little to address underlying structural problems, including arms trafficking and money laundering.
Despite constructive inputs from a range of UN bodies, Member States and civil society organisations, the Vienna-dominated UNGASS preparatory process suppressed discussion that questioned the existing architecture of the UN drug control system. While containing some positive attributes in relation to access to controlled medicines, health-oriented interventions and proportional sentencing, the outcome document in the main supports the status quo and fails to refer explicitly to harm reduction, decriminalization or the abolition of the death penalty for drug offences.
An increasing point of tension within the drug control treaty framework, the issue of regulated cannabis markets, remained very much the ‘elephant in the room’ with efforts within the outcome document to dissipate pressure resulting in denial and confusion.
In spite of a growing need to address the fragmentary UN approach and the recent adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the outcome document did much to sustain a siloed approach to the drug issue.
The UNGASS process as a whole has set the stage for more substantial changes at the next high-level meeting in 2019, in relation to human rights, the Sustainable Development Goals, regulated cannabis markets and the creation of an expert advisory group to improve the functioning and coherence of the global drug control system.