Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1473504
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 17 JULY 2022 13 OPINION Employed as a double-edged sword by actors representing the interests of competing ideological and commercial groups, diplomatic consensus is strategically being employed to maintain the status quo at international level The right to health for people who use drugs THE World Drug Report of 2021 explains that despite a coordi- nated international approach to address drug use in society, the number of drug users increased by 22% between 2010 and 2019, with poor countries carrying the heaviest burden in health and social related matters. Interestingly, almost ten years before, the United Nations Spe- cial Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (UN- SR Health) presented a strong report denouncing current drug policies as constituting a di- rect infringement to the Right to Health for People Who Use Drugs. Explaining that the concept of a drug-free world has failed, the UNSR Health identified crimi- nalisation and excessive law en- forcement as key perpetrators of stigma and acting as direct barri- ers to the realisation of the Right to Health. The UNSR Health al- so emphasized that the Right to Health should be guaranteed for all, irrespective if using drugs for recreational purposes or if expe- riencing dependence. This research project looked at the Right to Health for PWUD and explored how discourse adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) and civil society in the format of Transnational Advocacy Net- works (TANs) has been protect- ing or hindering this right. The UN General Assembly is one of the most significant meetings in multilateral diplomacy as it gath- ers 193 member states to discuss various political, health, social and environmental matters. The official UNGA position stretch- ing between the years 1998 and 2021 was contrasted with that of TANs shadow reports analysing the effects of the war on drugs and the role of international pol- icy between the years 2009 and 2021. Through a Critical Discourse Analysis framework based on the four-stage model developed by Norman Fairclough (2012), this qualitative research project distinguished texts as important barometers for social change. Operating within historical and socially structured orders of dis- course, agents transpose their ideological positions in text, and through semiotic difference construe reality, strengthen the status quo or challenge hegemo- ny. The conscious inculcation of new discourse and therefore the use of rhetoric deployment to the dialectical process of opera- tionalising discourse is directly linked to the technologisation of discourse and social change. This study highlighted that the role of diplomatic consensus to adhere to a threat-based lan- guage and persistence to adopt international policies contribut- ing to the creation of 'unintend- ed consequences', continue to stall human rights developments for all PWUD. Following an in- creased number of countries in- troducing different levels of de- criminalised systems for drugs, or legal regulatory frameworks for the non-medical use of can- nabis, yet still blowing the pro- hibition trumpet at the UN, one questions the strengths of the Vienna consensus on drug policy and implications for the future. Employed as a double-edged sword by actors representing the interests of competing ideologi- cal and commercial groups, dip- lomatic consensus is strategically being employed to maintain the status quo at international level, and promote the UN family's vi- sion of eliminating narcotic and psychotropic substances. The drug free societies mantra has throughout the years changed intonation, yet it continues to reverberate morally positioned beliefs on human behaviour, and the use of mind-altering sub- stances. This dystopic approach is directly inflicting devastat- ing losses for all member states whilst further increasing health and social disparities across the north-south divide. Most strikingly, the Interna- tional Community continues to apply meagre human rights provisions when discussing drug policy, health and social justice matters. The ideology driven approach to pursue supply and demand reduction measures adopted by consensus at the ex- pense of diplomatic squabbles or the risk of a diplomatic inci- dence for the inclusion of spe- cific human rights terminology, such as Harm Reduction, con- tinues to dominate the Interna- tional Community's discourse and vision. In part, at a policy level, and from a North perspective, the UN Drug Control Conventions allow for flexible interpretation, so much so that certain countries have now moved to regulating the non-medical use of cannabis. This ever-increasing individual policy by UN member states, and therefore options leaning closer towards a human rights-based approach, are indicative of a re- contextualisation of discourse at the regional and individual member state level. Nonetheless, work by TANs to push forward a global decriminalised system prioritising health and human rights over a threat-based ap- proach has not been effective enough to translate into an up- dated UNGA human rights- based consensus on cooperation to address and counter the world drug (diplomatic) problem. The research work disclosed in this publication is partial- ly funded by the Endeavour Scholarship Scheme (Malta). Project part-financed by the European Social Fund – Oper- ational Programme II – Euro- pean Structural and Investment Funds 2014-2020 "Investing in human capital to create more opportunities and promote the well-being of society." Karen Mamo is a researcher and harm reduction professional Karen Mamo