UNODC and the Death Penalty for Drugs

Transcription

1 Complicity or Abolition? UNODC and the Death Penalty for Drugs Rick Lines & Damon Barrett HR2 - Harm Reduction & Human Rights Programme International Harm Reduction Association Harm Reduction 2008 IHRA s 19th International Conference Barcelona 14 May 2008

2 Thanks Rebecca Schleifer Aisling Reidy 2

3 Status of the Death Penalty Worldwide 137 states have abolished capital punishment in law or in practice 60 retentionist states Approximately half of retentionist states apply the death penalty for drug-related offences Majority being in the Middle East, North Africa and the Asia Pacific regions 3

4 Capital Punishment and Drugs Executions for drugs carried out in China Egypt Indonesia Iran Kuwait Malaysia Saudi Arabia Singapore Thailand Viet Nam % of all known executions took place in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USA 4

5 Capital Punishment and Drugs Malaysia (July 2004 July 2005): 36 of 52 executions were for drug trafficking Saudi Arabia (2003): 26 of 50 executions were for drug-related offences; in 2004 at least 33 executions were carried out for drugs Viet Nam (2003): Government reported to the UN that the death penalty has been mostly given to persons engaged in drug trafficking. Singapore ( ): 76% of all executions were for drug-related offences 5

6 Capital Punishment and Drugs China: UN International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Drug Trafficking 2001 Over 50 people were convicted and publicly l executed for drug crimes at a mass rallies, at least one which was broadcast on State t television i public executions in rallies across the country Chongqing: 24 people shot 6

7 Capital Punishment and the ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Art 6(2): In countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes. 7

8 International Human Rights Law Drug-related offences do not meet the threshold of most serious crimes in International Human Rights Law UN Human Rights Committee (2005) UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions (1996 & 2006) 8

9 Available at the IHRA booth 9

10 UNODC activities in death penalty states Viet Nam East Asia Iran Libya Yemen Laos Cambodia China Myanmar Thailand Viet Nam Singapore 10

11 UNODC activities in death penalty states Technical assistance, legislative l support and financial aid intended to strengthen domestic drug enforcement Performance indicators include increased arrests or successful prosecutions of drug offenders Such activities if successful result in the potential for increased death sentences Raises the issue of possible complicity with violations of international human rights law 11

12 Complicity in international law The UN is an actor in international ti law and as such is bound to observe international human rights law Global Compact -- UN guidelines on avoiding corporate complicity with human rights abuses within theirs spheres of influence Apply the terms of the Global Compact to UNODC activities 12

13 [Table from OCHCR Briefing Paper The Global Compact and Human Rights: Understanding Spheres of Influence and Complicity] 13

14 Avoiding Complicity The fact that the application of the death penalty is not the intended outcome of UNODC activities does not exclude it from responsibility for the human rights impact of its activities Proactive measures must be undertaken to ensure that its activities to not result in human rights violations, even if inadvertently Human Rights Impact Assessments (HRIA) 14

15 Complicity or Abolition? Autumn HRW signs on as co-sponsor of the report Dec IHRA/HRW release report Complicity or Abolition: UNODC and the Death Penalty for Drug Offences internally to UNODC UN High Commission for Human Rights UN Special Rapporteur on Summary, Extrajudicial or Arbitrary Killings 15

16 IHRA/HRW report recommendations 1. Publicly l denounce the use of the death penalty for drug offences and make clear that this practice is a violation of international human rights law 2. Make the abolition of the death penalty for drug-related offences a pre-condition of country-level technical and financial assistance, and other support for drug enforcement 3. Advocate, through the treaty and legal affairs division, for the abolition of the death penalty for drug offences 4. Develop guidelines in conjunction with the Office of the High Commission for Human Rights on law enforcement and human rights for UNODC programmes 5. Etblih Establish a formal and dtransparent tprocess for conducting human rights impact assessments as part of all UNODC activities and projects 16

17 IHRA/HRW engagement with the UN Feb IHRA meets with UNODC Executive Director and Legal Staff March Antonio Maria Costa makes a statement against the use of the death penalty for drugs in his opening speech at CND April UNODC submits its response to IHRA/HRW April UNODC holds full day meeting in Vienna with OHCHR, IHRA, HRW and Special Rapporteur A number of actions agreed 17

18 IHRA/HRW next steps Follow-up meeting with Mr Costa at IHRA conference IHRA/HRW preparing briefing paper for UNODC/OHCHR on the issue of human rights impact assessments and their application to drug control activities Report to be updated to reflect the ongoing positive engagement with UNODC and OHCHR and released at the UN Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva in September IHRA/HRW to raise the issue with EU donor states, who also have the legal responsibility to ensure that their funding of law enforcement does not make them inadvertently complicit in human rights violations 18

19 Although drugs kill, I don't believe we need to kill because of drugs. Antonio Maria Costa Opening Speech at CND, March

20 Rick Lines, Senior Policy Advisor net International Harm Reduction Association HR2 blog 20