International - UN Press Release: UN Anti-Drugs, Antii-Crime Agency

[~lostgurl~]

UN Anti-Drugs, Anti-Crime Agency

Wednesday, 7 February 2007, 4:32 pm
Press Release: United Nations

Demand Surging for Services of UN Anti-Drugs, Anti-Crime AgencyNew York, Feb 6 2007 2:00PM
The world is turning increasingly to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) for help in the fight against illegal drugs, corruption, terrorism and other crimes, with the latest figures indicating that demand for the Office’s specialist expertise is surging.
Total spending on the UNODC’s operational programmes jumped by 32 per cent to $91.7 million last year, and the Office’s Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa said today he expected demand to keep rising, especially in the areas of tackling corruption, human trafficking and money laundering.
“The world is becoming a more dangerous place and States increasingly rely on the specialist expertise which UNODC can provide,” Mr. Costa said in a statement released from the Office’s headquarters in Vienna.
Spending on anti-narcotics initiatives, such as the training of drug enforcement officers, rose by 12 per cent to $69.1 million to last year, with marked increases noted in Western and Central Asia, as well as in South-East Asia and the Pacific region.
Expenditure on anti-crime measures soared by 186 per cent to $22.6 million, driven largely by rising demand for UNODC services in Afghanistan, West Africa, the Middle East and South Asia.
Central bankers and other financial officers have been given assistance to fight money laundering and programmes have been implemented, in countries ranging from Ghana to Pakistan, to improve the inspection of containers arriving at ports for illicit materials.
Voluntary contributions from Member States – which account for about 90 per cent of the UNODC annual budget – have also grown to meet the rising demand, with total contributions pledged last year increasing by 25 per cent to $150.7 million.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0702/S00111.htm

[renegades]

UN report unwittingly makes the case for prescribing drugs to addicts

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/n...b-d7aea900e4cb
Vancouver Sun

Published: Saturday, March 03, 2007
Political opposition to Insite, Vancouver's supervised injection site, is nothing new. But more often than not, such opposition serves to highlight the scientific evidence in favour of the site.
Now the most recent criticism, from the United Nations, might actually help to support the cause of providing prescription drugs to opiate and stimulant addicts.
The UN's International Narcotics Control Board recently said it will advise federal Health Minister Tony Clement to shut down Insite because it violates the 1961 UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.
This is not a new concern, as the issue of violating treaties was raised prior to the opening of Insite. But Insite's status under international law is not nearly as clear as the board seems to think.
According to Article 4 of the treaty, parties must "limit exclusively to medical and scientific purposes the . . . distribution of, trade in, use and possession of drugs."
The board concludes that Insite violates this article because, rather than operating for medical or scientific purposes, it exists to get "public nuisances off the streets." Now while it's true that Insite has helped to improve public order in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside, that was never its purpose.
Instead, the site, which was created under an exemption to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, exists to assess the efficacy of such medical interventions in improving the health of addicts and their communities. To that end, the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS has been acting as an external monitor of Insite.
Consequently, the site is permitting the possession and use of drugs for medical and scientific purposes, which would seem to be in keeping with Article 4. Indeed, this is the conclusion Health Canada lawyers came to before Insite was opened. Also, according to the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, the board's pronouncements on supervised injection sites "have controvened the findings of the board's own legal advisers."
The board, therefore, seems to be mistaken, but if it isn't, let's consider what that means. Local health officials could shut down the site, as the board advises, or they could ensure that addicts are provided with drugs in a medical setting.
This is precisely what is occurring in the North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI) trials, and what Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan plans to do by setting up trials providing stimulant addicts with substitute drugs.
The board seems to have no problem with these solutions and for good reason. Unlike Insite, addicts in the NAOMI trials don't have to rely on drug dealers, and can be assured of the purity of the drugs they're taking.
The medical provision of drugs appears to be a far better intervention than a supervised injection site. And thanks to the UN report, the world will be able to see that.

****those crazy guys over at the un can't make up their minds, no sooner did swim see this posting and found something to contradict it. Anyway who listens to the UN? Drug Users can do what Iran and N Korea did and just ignore their decrees.

[CRUNK]

I could see it now, if this happens then there will be so many people going those clinics for 'perscription medication' for their 'addictive habbit' it won't even be funny.