BANGKOK, 17 February 2011 (NNT)-The Ministry of Interior has picked next week to get all drug addicts across Thailand clean. Deputy Permanent Secretary for Interior Mr Surapong Pongtadsirikul has disclosed that there are approximately 30,000 drug addicts who have not been treated so far since the 3rd phase of the drugs eradication program has begun.

During 20-27 February, 2011, drug abusers in Bangkok will be brought to the rehabilitation centers to get clean. There will be those who are encouraged to receive treatment on their freewill and those who will be forced against their will. A rehabilitation camp will be open for addicts elsewhere in Thailand where a rehab center is scarce.

Related agencies will be coordinated and a staff training program will be carried out as well as the selection of a location which will serve as makeshift rehab center for drug addicts. Their names will be recorded in the database specifically designed for easy tracking and providing updates on their progress in the future.

http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news.php?id=255402170016

ABC News

DEA: Missile Deal, Drug Ring Arrests Prove ‘Interconnected World’ of Terrorist and Drug Runners

By LEE FERRAN

Feb. 14, 2011 —

Two U.S. citizens have been arrested in an international sting operation for allegedly agreeing to provide arms — everything from AK-47s to surface-to-air missiles — to the Taliban, according to court documents unsealed today.

The Americans were arrested in Bucharest, Romania, on Feb. 10 as part of a months-long operation that also nabbed five foreign nationals who allegedly told undercover federal informants they would smuggle “ton-quantities” of heroin and cocaine through West Africa to Europe and the U.S. for the terrorist organization. The missiles the Americans purportedly offered to sell the Taliban were to be used to protect heroin laboratories, the documents said.

“This alleged effort to harm and enrich the Taliban is the latest example of the dangers of an interconnected world in which terrorists and drug runners can link up across continents to harm Americans,” Preet Bharara, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement.

The two Americans, Alwar Pouryan and Oded Orbach, were not involved directly in the narcotics portion of the operation, according to documents, but were connected through foreign national Maroun Saade. Saade, a “narcotics trafficker operating in West Africa” and the only man charged in both the weapons sales and the narcotics deal, introduced the DEA’s confidential sources to Pouryan, who is described as an arms trafficker, the documents allege.

The DEA said Orbach helped arrange the particulars of the weapons deal, including the prices of each item — from night vision gun scopes to Stinger anti-aircraft weapons. Orbach also allegedly offered to send someone to train the Taliban in the use of the weapons.

Evidence against the Americans includes emails, taped phone conversations and recorded in-person meetings that took place in Ghana, Ukraine and Romania, the DEA said.

West Africa: Where ‘Drugs and Terror Intersect’

Drug smuggling through West Africa for the financial support of terrorism in the Middle East has become an increasing concern for officials. The arrests mark the second major bust of a West African smuggling ring with terror ties in two years.

“West Africa has emerged as a place where drugs and terror intersect,” DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart said.

In 2009 three men linked to al Qaeda were arrested in a similar sting operation for allegedly agreeing to transport shipments of cocaine as large as 1,000 kilos for the terror network. That arrest confirmed long-held suspicions that al Qaeda provided protection for narcotics trafficking in return for payment.

CLICK HERE to read ABC News full report on Selling Drugs to Fund Terror.

The Hezbollah Connection

The indictment unsealed today also provided evidence that Hezbollah, a Lebanese group designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization, could be a source of arms for the Taliban. In October, when one of the DEA confidential sources asked where the Taliban could procure surface-to-air missiles, Saade said he would inquire about getting them from Hezbollah, according to the documents.

The next month Saade and several other defendants met with Pouryan, who was described to the informants as a man associated with Hezbollah, as well as an unidentified member of Hezbollah about purchasing the weapons.

Then, according to the court filings, just days before the Americans’ arrest, an unidentified co-conspirator of Orbach’s received a text message from a phone in Lebanon that was intercepted by the DEA.

“Dear Friend… I can do it, no problem,” the text message read.

In the documents, an investigator said he believed the text was confirmation the weapons deal was ready to go.

The Americans are currently in custody in Romania awaiting extradition, the U.S. attorney’s office said.

Bangkok Post

From fighting the communist insurgency and drug smuggling, this one-time boy soldier is now branching out into a new line and new life

Published: 30/01/2011
Newspaper section: Spectrum
Heroin and coffee. These two words come to mind when Lao Ta Saenlee, 74, smiles, gestures and chats while sipping Chinese tea at his newly-opened coffee shop in his village, Ban Huay Sarn, in Chiang Mai’s Mae Ai district. While coffee is his new-found passion, Lao Ta has long been infamous and associated with drugs and heroin trafficking in the North. Although it’s been three years since he was released from jail, a renewed passion for life still bubbles from every word as he talks about plans of starting a franchise of “Lao Ta Coffee” shops across the North.

FROM JAIL TO JAVA: Left, Lao Ta Saenlee reflects on his life. Right, at the time of his arrest in 2003.

But he will never be able to dispel decades of accusations of drug trafficking _ an image attached to prominent former Kuomintang (KMT) fighters who fled southern China into Burma in 1949 before settling in the northern hills of Doi Mae Salong in Chiang Rai in the 1960s.

His name has been associated with the now deceased “Opium King” Chang Chi-fu, or Khun Sa, and the current drug baron, Wei Hsueh-kang of the United Wa State Army. He knew them both but vehemently denies drug links with them.

FIRED UP: New Year at Lao Ta Saenlee’s home.

Lao Ta’s story is one of a boy soldier and young fighter whose life was moulded and shaped through the barrel of the gun. It ensured his survival during times of political upheaval and in the dense jungle along the border between Burma and northern Thailand during the Cold War.

Like other prominent former KMT fighters, his leadership qualities gained him armed supporters, but invariably living in a foreign land meant agreeing to be a pawn in Thailand’s fight against the communist insurgency from 1961-1982. He fought the insurgents in exchange for a place to live, and as a result his stature and influence grew. But like so many others who often lived and trod on the shadier side of life with frequent encounters with the law, he fell from grace and was imprisoned.

Now he’s back _ but it wasn’t easy.

Lao Ta advises: Drug problem here to stay
During the height of the campaign against drugs by former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, police arrested and seized the property of thousands of suspects. About 2,500 were killed. In June, 2003, the authorities moved against Lao Ta.
”I remember that day well. It was 4 or 5am, and about 100 troops, cavalry and police surrounded my home and village. All entrances were blocked. They blocked the road leading to my home with a tank. They searched all the houses in the village. ”They searched for two days but they didn’t find any drugs. They arrested some addicts and they confiscated a lot of weapons. But it’s normal for hilltribesmen to have weapons. The villagers need the weapons to defend themselves. There was a large quantity of weapons and ammunition in my home,” he admits.

For the next four to five days, Lao Ta _ and two of his sons, Vijarn and Sukkasem, who were also arrested _ were flown to Chiang Rai and Chiang Mai for press conferences by authorities and then flown back home. ”They wanted to make a big story out of my arrest,” he recalled.

Lao Ta spent fours in jail (from 2003-2007) and faced four separate charges of illegal possession of 336g of heroin, trafficking in 400kg of heroin with intent to sell to Malaysia, hiring a gunman to murder a man in Chiang Mai’s Fang district and illegal possession of firearms and ammunition.

By 2007, the courts dismissed the drug trafficking and attempted murder charges because of insufficient evidence _ a result of conflicting testimony from prosecution witnesses. He was slapped with an 18-month jail term for illegal possession of firearms.

THE HILLS COME ALIVE: left to right, Lao Ta Saenlee enjoys New Year’s festivities at home.

Thaksin even suggested that Lao Ta’s defence capitalised on loopholes in the law and bribed his way out.

But while he was imprisoned, a sizeable chunk of Lao Ta’s cash _ ”I don’t have millions I have only 76 million” _ along with his properties, comprising a 300-rai lychee orchard, five houses in an up-market housing estate in Chiang Mai’s Muang district, and a supermarket in Ban Huay San, were seized by the government.

All that was left was his home, a petrol station and land that he acquired as payment for fighting the communists. The government could not seize the property because he and his family do not own it but have legally-issued documents allowing him and his to occupy and earn a living off the land.

”I had nothing left. My wife [he has three] had to sell 94 cows to live off while I was in jail. I could not even afford to buy pla too [mackerel] to eat,” he insists. At one point when he was feeling depressed, Lao Ta actually considered robbing a bank. ”I called up two of my most loyal supporters and suggested the idea. But they told me ‘Boss, we’re now 70 years old,”’ he said, smiling. He admitted thinking about selling methamphetamines but dismissed the thought quickly.

Fortunately, he got a call from ”a friend who used to traffic in drugs” who congratulated him on his release and asked how he was doing. Lao Ta told him that he needed money to get his life back on track. ”I told him I needed about six million baht. A few days later my friend put two million baht into my bank account. I tried to call and thank him but there was no answer and I have not heard from him since,” said Lao Ta.

GONE STRAIGHT: Lao Ta Saenlee, now hopes to own a chain of successful coffee-shops.

Financially replenished and feeling better, old habits die hard. Lao Ta held a party in the village to mark his freedom. ”We roasted pigs and had a grand party. I spent a lot.” But reality set in and he had to think long-term. Ironically, he thought about Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek. Both gave him the inspiration to move forward.

”In those days, both leaders headed countries that faced within insurmountable problems. They had nothing. But they both made something [their countries] out of nothing,” he said.

Lao Ta still had his home and the land. But he also had notoriety _ a name people dhremembered, at least in the North. And so the idea of Lao Ta Coffee was born.

Lao Ta’s resilience probably did not stem from his thoughts of Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek alone but because he’s had a life of struggle, depending on weapons to stay alive. Lao Ta says he ”dragged a gun” in Chiang Kai-shek’s army in southern China’s Yunnan province when he was just 13. In 1954, at 17, he joined remnants of the KMT’s 5th Regiment of the 93rd Division led by Gen Tuan Shi-wen into northern Burma. These forces fled Yunnan into Burma three years earlier and continued to fight against the forces of the new Chinese Communist regime.

In 1961, Lao Ta joined Gen Tuan and about 4,000 battle-weary KMT soldiers into Doi Mae Salong of Chiang Rai. In exchange for asylum in Thailand they fought Thai communist insurgents between 1961 to 1982. During this period they grew and sold opium to pay for their weapons. ”At one stage the Thai government asked us to choose between leaving for Taiwan or staying behind. Many decided to leave for Taiwan. I recall looking at a map of the world to find out where Taiwan was. We could see that we had to travel a great distance across the sea. I was scared of the sea and feared I could never return home [to China]. So I decided to stay in Thailand and Khun Sa did toowas the same like us,” Lao Ta recalled.

But his stay in Doi Mae Salong did not last long. He decided to move back into the Burmese jungles where he spent years trading in opium and building up his forces. ”We grew up with guns and weapons and over time we [including Khun Sa] started building up our forces.” Lao Ta said each individual leader built up their influence depending on the number of people loyal to them. He built up his followers from among the Muser, Lisu and Akha villagers.

”They spoke Chinese, so we could communicate with each other. You built up your position through your supporters and alliances with other groups. You needed this to survive. Opium was a commodity,” he said. ”I admit to having been a drug dealer,” he said in an interview in June, 2003, before his arrest. ”Back in the ’70s, in Doi Mae Salong, everyone did it. Opium was put in sacks and loaded onto helicopters. We didn’t have to take it to the market, buyers came to us.” He also admitted to having ”links” to Khun Sa after he took control of the Doi Lang area in the early ’80s. In those days Lao Ta himself controlled 700-800 armed men.

Lao Ta was not clear as to when he returned to Thailand. But when he did, he was invited to work for the Thai military. The deal was simple _ Lao Ta and his men could keep their weapons. They were paid half a million baht and given 500 sacks of rice. In exchange, they would fight the communist insurgents. Once their mission was completed, they were promised Thai citizenship and land. They would not own the land, but he and his men _ and their families and descendants _ would have the right to live off it.

”I helped the Third Army fight the communists for many years. I was involved in no fewer than 200 operations,” he said. Lao Ta and his men fought in Phayao, Nan and Phetchabun provinces and once were trucked to fight in the northeastern province of Loei. His military career ended in 1977, when aged 40, he was granted Thai citizenship and was allowed to live near Doi Mae Salong.

He settled in Tambon Ta Ton in Mae Ai district, and founded Ban Huay Sarn, the village where he lives now and which comprises 600 families and includes four smaller surrounding villages of 40-50 families each. He started growing cash crops and raised cattle obtained from Burma. But how does that explain the millions in cash and property he amassed in Chiang Mai by the time of his arrest in 2003?

Lao Ta admits that he knew Wei Hsueh-kang, the current drug baron, when Wei was based in Fang district of Chiang Mai before he joined Khun Sa at Ban Hin Taek in the Mae Chan district of Chiang Rai. When Khun Sa was forced out of Thailand, and as his influence waned, Lao Ta admits doing business with Wei when the United Wa State Army settled in Mong Yawn inside Burma near the San Ton Du checkpoint, which is close to his village. ”The Wa needed supplies, food … everything,” he said. Lao Ta adds however that he made ”a great deal of money” selling petrol to the Wa, especially when the Ban Ton Du checkpoint was closed. He paid bribes to get his 10,000 litre fuel trucks across into Burma. ”But I was never involved in drug trafficking,” he insists.

Over the years in Mae Ai district, Lao Ta’s influence grew, not only among villagers, but local government officials as well. He was involved in many community projects aimed at helping the villagers but he made sure he involved and worked closely with local officials and government agencies. He contributed openly and regularly to cash-strapped agencies. TVs, refrigerators and other office equipment at the local police station and district office bear the name of his other brother, Charan.

Although his relatives and close associates may have been arrested for drug trafficking, and Lao Ta had been involved in clashes with the law, before his arrest in 2003, Lao Ta was nominated twice as the best village headman in Mae Ai district. But ominous signs appeared on the horizon before his arrest _ the Chiang Mai governor dismissed him as village headman. Despite serving time, Lao Ta still enjoys widespread respect among the hilltribe villagers in the area who turned up in full force for their New Year celebrations at his home earlier this month.

The celebrations lasted three days and nights. There was singing and dancing. They lit firecrackers while village leaders fired their hand guns in the sky. ”It’s a chance to clean the barrels of their pistols,” quipped Lao Ta with a broad grin. Lao Ta provided the feast _ 30 pigs and 20 jars of home-made liquor.

The party was more joyful than it had been in previous years because Lao Ta was back to Ban Huay Sarn, the village he leads. And even though he’s now into coffee, his legacy continues _ his eldest son Vijarn, who served time with his father, is now the village headman.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/investigation/218928/heroin-and-coffee—the-saga-of-lao-ta-saenlee

Date: 29 November 2010

To mark World AIDS Day 2010, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) have released a report highlighting the failures of governments and donors to effectively tackle HIV and injecting drug use, and the urgency with which a human-rights based, effective response is needed. A central message of the report is the importance of prioritising harm reduction over the criminalisation of drug use – because “it works and is a human-rights based approach”.

‘Out of Harm’s Way’ outlines the severity of the epidemic and the human rights violations routinely faced by people who inject drugs around the world. Amongst the report’s several recommendations are the decriminalisation of drug users, as well as access to due legal process and health services for those who use drugs both within, and outside prisons and other closed settings. It calls upon all stakeholders, but particularly governments, to respect the human rights of people who inject drugs and those at risk of, or living with HIV. Highlighting the poor investment made to date, the IFRC also calls upon governments and donors to exert all possible efforts to make comprehensive harm reduction programmes available to drug users, and in particular to commit to predictable long-term funding.

Download the full report:

http://www.ihra.net/files/2010/11/29/Harm_reduction_report-EN-LR.pdf

© 2010 International Harm Reduction Association.

(c) The Australian

November 27, 2010.

• By Stephen Lunn, Social affairs writer

An energetic case has been put for the country to regulate and tax the production of cannabis

A GLOBAL leader on innovative drugs policy in the 1980s, Australia has been stuck in a conservative rut since, at great cost to drug users and the broader community, a high-profile US drugs policy expert warns.

And in 2010, when Australia should be contemplating the regulation and taxation of cannabis and getting safe pharmaceutical heroin in the hands of addicts, it continues to prohibit drug use to demonstrably little effect, says Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the New York-based Drug Policy Alliance.

Nadelmann says countries that boldly declare “zero tolerance” or “a war on drugs” are deluding themselves that they can prevail over the global drug trade. Illicit drugs are cheaper and more plentiful than ever, he says.

“You really led the world when it came to implementing sensible harm-reduction policies that reduced the spread of HIV among injecting drug users,” he tells Inquirer.

“You kept your rates of HIV among injecting drug users to less than 2 per cent, whereas in America we let it explode to 40 or 50 per cent. If America had implemented the harm reduction policies in the 80s and 90s that Australia did, we’d have quarter of a million people alive today as a result.”

Nadelmann says drug policy reform in Australia then became “bogged down in politics” as European countries moved away from failing prohibitionist approaches.

His clarion call is to regulate and tax cannabis production, sale and use rather than ban it with the threat of criminal sanction.

The 2007 National Drug Strategy Household survey found more than 1.5 million Australians used cannabis in the previous year, and more than 600,000 in the previous week, evidence that prohibition is not making it more difficult to source drugs.

Nadelmann says most cannabis users aren’t addicts, or even regular imbibers, but admits the drug has adverse health consequences, with links to mental illness and schizophrenia, and poor educational outcomes for young users. The social costs of illicit drug use in Australia, including crime, health outcomes, lost productivity and road accidents, was put at $6.4 billion annually by economists David Collins and Helen Lapsley in 2008. Which is why government funds would be better spent on treatment programs for those with drug problems rather than law enforcement, he says.

The most recent data published by the Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence shows nearly 64,000 drug consumer arrests were made in 2007-08, and estimates of annual law enforcement costs run at between $1.3bn and $2bn.

“Marijuana arrests are the majority of all drug arrests in this country,” Nadelmann says. “It still gives people criminal records. You seem to have run out of steam when it comes to new ideas about changing this around.

“Regulating and taxing cannabis is not risk free but it’s a better approach than prohibition.”

Nadelmann visited Canberra during the week and met MPs including Malcolm Turnbull, Mal Washer and Rob Oakeshott. He says there’s an “emerging coalition” of politicians who are privately or overtly open to his case.

But one not for the turning is Bronwyn Bishop, who chaired a 2007 parliamentary inquiry into the effect of illicit drug use on families. Bishop says the public “just [doesn't] want illicit drugs legalised”. “The argument of the harm-minimisation lobby is stupid,” she says. “They say the war on drugs is failing, so it should be legalised. Would we do this with other crimes that harm people?

“The Australian public [is] smart enough to know that the more drugs are available, the more available they will be to their kids.”

She questions the way harm-minimisation proponents downplay the health effects of drugs such as cannabis.

“It’s a very damaging drug and it’s a known precursor to using other drugs,” she says.

“The public wants illicit drugs to stay that way and it’s only a few who seem to be agitating for this change that doesn’t have public support.”

Perth addiction specialist George O’Neil, who is trialling a naltrexone-implant to stop heroin addiction, is similarly unimpressed with the harm-minimisation message. “It’s disgraceful propaganda. There’s not a single mother in Australia [who] will swallow the story that’s being sold,” he says. “If an 18-year-old is using cannabis, mothers don’t want him to be given easy access to cannabis so he won’t have to commit crimes to get it. They want him not to use it.”

Undeterred, Nadelmann cites with approval the approach to drug use taken in Portugal as one that would be appropriate for his home country and Australia.

In 2001 Portugal decriminalised the possession of up to a 10-day supply of all types of illicit drugs. Those found in possession are referred to a regional committee that decides whether the person needs treatment. If no treatment is required, the possessor can be sanctioned with driving restrictions, bans from entertainment areas or fines.

Nadelmann also argues the case for more heroin injecting facilities and access for addicts to safe drugs. He says there is no medical argument that can be mounted against his case for regulation over prohibition, and the only objections are political.

By Evan Wood

People on both sides of the marijuana legalization debate have strong feelings about Proposition 19, the California ballot initiative that promises to regulate, control and tax cannabis. But science and empirical research have been given short shrift in the discussion. That’s unfortunate, because the U.S. government has actually funded excellent research on the subject, and it suggests that several widely held assumptions about cannabis legalization actually may be inaccurate. When the total body of knowledge is considered, it’s hard to conclude that we should stick with the current system.

One important question is whether laws criminalizing marijuana have effectively reduced supply and use. It would appear from available data that they have not. Despite billions spent on anti-cannabis law enforcement and a 30% increase in the number of arrests in California since 2005, marijuana remains the most frequently used illegal drug. Nationally, an estimated $10 billion is spent each year enforcing marijuana laws, yet an ongoing study funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse has concluded that over the last 30 years, the drug has remained “almost universally available to American 12th-graders,” with 80% to 90% saying the drug is “very easy” or “fairly easy” to obtain.

On the health side of the equation, scientific consensus is that while cannabis may pose some health risks, they are less serious than those posed by alcohol and tobacco. The approach taken to regulating these other harmful substances, however, hasn’t been to criminalize them but to regulate their distribution, to impose taxes on their purchase and to educate the public about their risks. These measures have been shown to be effective, as in the case of cigarette consumption, which has dropped dramatically.

On the other hand, cannabis prohibition has not achieved its stated objectives. As detailed in a report published last week by my organization, the International Centre for Science in Drug Policy, research funded by the U.S. government clearly demonstrates that even as federal funding for anti-drug efforts has increased by more than an inflation-adjusted 600% over the last several decades, marijuana’s potency has increased by 145% since 1990, and its price has declined 58%.

In this context, supporting Proposition 19 seems like a reasonable position, and recent polls have suggested that almost half of decided voters support the ballot initiative. However, there has emerged a strong assumption in the debate that, though legalization will save police time and raise tax revenue, this will come at the cost of increasing rates of cannabis use.

This notion is based on a widely cited Rand Corp. report, which used a theoretical model to conclude that rates of cannabis use will increase if cannabis is legalized. Though the authors of this report cautioned readers that there were “many limitations to our estimate’s precision and completeness” and that “uncertainties are so large that altering just a few key assumptions or parameter values can dramatically change the results,” few seem to have read past the headline that legalization is likely to increase cannabis use.

This may be the case, but it’s not a certainty. In the Netherlands, where marijuana has been sold in licensed “coffee shops” since the 1970s, about 20% of the adult population has used the drug at some time in their lives. In the United States, where it is largely illegal, 42% of the adult population has used marijuana.

Neither Rand’s theoretical model nor other commentaries have considered the potential benefits of the broad range of regulatory tools that could be utilized if the marijuana market were legal. The state could then license vendors, impose purchasing and sales restrictions and require warning labels. Although these methods have been scientifically proven effective in reducing tobacco and alcohol use internationally, it is noteworthy that successful government lobbying by the tobacco and alcohol industries has slowly eroded many of these regulatory mechanisms in the United States.

A bill has been introduced in the California Legislature to create a uniform statewide regulatory system under the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control if Proposition 19 passes. Such a system would allow, finally, for an evidence-based discussion of how to optimize cannabis regulatory regimes so that the benefits of regulation (including such things as tax revenue and reduced drug market violence) can be maximized while rates of cannabis use and related harms can be minimized.

Up to now, the fact that cannabis is illegal has meant that the unregulated market has been largely controlled by organized-crime groups, and the trade has sparked considerable violence, both in the United States and in Mexico. Given the widespread availability and use of cannabis despite aggressive criminal justice measures, there is no doubt that a saner system can be created if marijuana is strictly regulated rather than left in the hands of organized crime.

Evan Wood, a physician and professor of medicine at the University of British Columbia, is the founder of the International Centre for Science in Drug Policy.

Copyright © 2010, Los Angeles Times

Oct. 28, 2010.
WHO, Phnom Penh: The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, and his wife, Ban Soon-taek, visited Cambodia’s first methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) clinic earlier today in central Phnom Penh as part of a two-day visit to the Kingdom.

During his brief visit, the UN Secretary General unveiled a plaque to commemorate his visit and learned of the objectives of the methadone programme and its achievements since dosing began on July 1, 2010.

The UNSG and his wife met with six methadone patients who represent the wide range of socio-economic backgrounds of the current 61 clients enrolled in the programme.

Each of the six patients received their respective doses of methadone from the UN Secretary General, and his wife, who had requested the opportunity to assist.

Following the signing of the MMT Clinic visitor’s book, the UN Secretary General was presented with a silver plate depicting the famous temples of Angkor Wat by the Clinic Director, Dr. Chhit Sophal, and a representative of the methadone patients to thank him for his interest in the programme.

In this speech to the audience and crowd who can come to see the UNSG make this special visit, Ban Ki-moon noted that the methadone programme, “is providing an important service, not just to people struggling to conquer addiction, but to the broader community.”

The UN Secretary General continued, “I commend the Government of Cambodia for launching this pilot programme. Evidence shows that such initiatives are more effective than incarceration in addressing the social problems caused by addiction.”

The combined and ongoing efforts of several UN agencies in Cambodia was emphasised by Ban Ki-moon, in particular with respect to the new, innovative approaches to drug treatment in the Kingdom through the community-based drug treatment programme initiated by UNODC with the support of WHO and UNAIDS, that has been formally adopted by the entire UN Country Team in Cambodia.

The UNSG praised Cambodia for its successes in its response to HIV/AIDS whilst noting the challenges still ahead: “I would like to congratulate the Government of Cambodia on receiving the MDG Award [for] its work on HIV/AIDS. The UN System will continue to assist the Government to maintain its achievements and to focus on developing a continuum of prevention, care and treatment for HIV/AIDS for populations most at-risk – including entertainment workers, men who have sex with men, and drug users.”

At the conclusion of his remarks, the UN Secretary General commented, “I look forward to continued partnership between the Government and the United Nations system to deliver evidence-based approaches to drug-related problems.”

Summary compiled by Graham Shaw, Technical Officer: HIV/AIDS, Drug Dependence and Harm Reduction, WHO, Cambodia.

Article not available in English. Switch language on the top of the site, if you want to read the Danish article.

Date: 12 October 2010

IHRA has released a new briefing written in partnership with Human Rights Watch and Penal Reform International entitled ‘The Death Penalty for Drug Offences and International Support for Drug Enforcement’. The purpose of this briefing is to highlight the dangers associated with funding drug control activities in countries with capital drug laws as detailed in IHRA’s report Complicity or Abolition? The Death Penalty and International Support for Drug Enforcement.

The death penalty for drug-related crimes is a violation of international human rights law according to UN human rights monitors and treaty bodies. Such laws are also at odds with the goals of abolitionist countries that oppose the death penalty for all crimes. Yet many of these abolitionist countries provide financial assistance to counter-narcotics projects in countries where drug offences are punishable with death, putting them at risk of contributing to the practice.

This briefing provides recommendations to donor-countries to avoid such unintended consequences.

To view this briefing please click here.

© 2010 International Harm Reduction Association.

Source: RiaNovosti
27.9.2010.

By Diana Markosian

On a dimly lit street in north Moscow, two drunk men kill time outside a local pharmacy as they wait for the arrival of clean syringes so they can shoot up.
“I need three,” one of the men says to an outreach worker as he opens his backpack and pulls out a bag of clean syringes.
Two workers from the non-governmental Andrey Rylkov Foundation for Health and Social Justice make runs like this six times a week, distributing clean needles outside local pharmacies to Moscow’s heroin addicts.
“Every time I see them, I remember myself,” says Maxim Malyshev, 33, who is HIV-positive and injected heroin into his body for 15 years.
“When I am out on these runs, I try to talk to these guys as much as possible,” he goes on. “No one else talks to them; I know, I used to be one of them.”
Drug addiction was virtually unheard of, publically at least, until the collapse of the Soviet Union, when borders opened up and narcotics flooded in.
The number of drug addicts in modern-day Russia is estimated to be 500,000, according to government statistics. However, the Federal Drug Control Service believes the actual figure to be at least five times higher.
“I started six years ago,” says Maria, now 27, as she probes the surface of her skin with a needle.
“I don’t really know why,” she continues, as we sit in the chaotic apartment she shares with her boyfriend. “But now I can’t stop.”
Across the table, her boyfriend, who refuses to reveal his name, his arms and hands covered in the intricate coded markings of prison tattoos, prepares his fix carefully, his eyes narrowed in concentration.
Injecting drugs is the major cause of the spread of HIV in Russia. A report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDOC) estimates that 30,000 people a year are dying from drugs, more than the total number of soldiers killed in the almost decade-long Soviet military campaign in Afghanistan.
The Russian government estimates that as of 2009 more than 530,000 people out of a population of about 142 million are living with HIV. But the actual number is estimated to be double that amount, according to the global UNAIDS organization.
“The official figure is a passive way of controlling the epidemic,” says Dr. Lev Zohrabyan, UNAIDS regional adviser for Eastern Europe and Central Asia.
“The Russian government does not agree with the estimated number of HIV infected people generated by UNAIDS,” he says. “That is why we cannot rely on these estimates, and must work with the numbers that are officially registered.”
With the global community focused on HIV/AIDS in Africa, Russia isn’t an obvious front line in the fight against HIV. But across Eastern Europe and Central Asia, experts say drug use is driving the world’s fastest-growing HIV epidemic.
“The growth of AIDS has gone beyond being a medical problem,” Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Zhukov said at a recent meeting in Moscow “It has become an issue of the strategic social and economic security of the country.”
After being virtually silent on the issue for many years, the Russian government recently announced a major HIV/AIDS initiative including a dramatic increase in funding. The country is expected to invest more than $430 million in global healthcare before 2012, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said at 60th session of the European regional committee of the World Health Organization.
But not everyone is convinced of its commitment to dealing with the problem’s root causes.
“The problem is that all the investment is done for the sake of Russia’s political image,” says Anya Sarang, president of the Andrey Rylkov Foundation. “We are not a poor country, we are in the G8, we are civilized, but no investment is being put into HIV prevention within the country’s most vulnerable groups.”
She also noted that Russia refuses to adopt “internationally proven” means of treating opiate addiction such as methadone, a heroin substitute.
Russia believes that the West’s policy of supplying methadone to addicts simply exacerbates the problem and does little to prevent the causes of drug addiction. It similarly disapproves of needle exchange programs, claiming that they are a tacit approval of the low level crime that funds users’ habits.
Over the years, NGOs – largely funded by international donors like the Global Fund to Fight Aids – have plugged enormous gaps that the Russian government has failed to fill. They have poured in more than $365 million to prevent and treat HIV.
But a five-year grant provided by the Global Fund to Russian Health Care Foundation expired at the end of August last year and more than 40 prevention programs, most of them aimed at drug users, have expired. The Global Fund has not approved new funding, claiming Russia is no longer eligible for HIV and AIDS funding.
“Of course, the Global Fund has its own criteria for allocating grants,” says Zohrabyan of UNAIDS.
“Russia is also becoming more of a donor country rather than a recipient country. But, does the Russian government allocate enough money for HIV prevention? No.”
The problem of a lack of funding for HIV prevention and the absence of the political will is echoed by experts in the field.
“The problem is stigma,” says Mikhail Volik, regional director of Aids Foundation East -West, a Dutch non-governmental organization, which works to treat and prevent HIV. “They don’t want to acknowledge that the problem exists, but this is the first step to dealing with the epidemic.”
By: Diana Markosian

Injecting drugs is the major cause of the spread of HIV in Russia. The Russian government estimates that as of 2009 more than 530,000 people are living with HIV. But the actual number is estimated to be double that amount.© RIA Novosti. Diana Markosian

Injecting drugs is the major cause of the spread of HIV in Russia. The Russian government estimates that as of 2009 more than 530,000 people are living with HIV. But the actual number is estimated to be double that amount. © RIA Novosti. Diana Markosian