INCB Arrogance Sparks Anger ... and Bwrian Slams MSIC Again

Is it time for the INCB to close it’s doors? Considering the criticism they received about their latest annual report and recent barrage of mindless media announcements, it appears they are long past their due by date ... 1962.

A previous article here focused on a media statement from INCB board member, Brian Watters. We asked why several media statements had suddenly appeared from the INCB and we discovered that they have just released their annual report. This has prompted them to address several issues from their annual report in the media. As expected, the INCB hammered home Zero Tolerance policies and criticised any country that has grown disillusioned with the "War on Drugs" by modernising their drug laws.

The Board notes with concern that in countries in South America, such as Argentina, Brazil and Colombia (and in countries in North America, such as Mexico and the United States), there is a growing movement to decriminalize the possession of controlled drugs, in particular cannabis, for personal use. Regrettably, influential personalities, including former high-level politicians in countries in South America, have publicly expressed their support for that movement. The Board is concerned that the movement, if not resolutely countered by the respective Governments, will undermine national and international efforts to combat the abuse of and illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs. In any case, the movement poses a threat to the coherence and effectiveness of the international drug control system and sends the wrong message to the general public.
-International Narcotics Control Board (INCB)

Medical Marijuana

One issue raised by the INCB was medical marijuana especially in Canada. The INCB said Canada is operating outside international treaty rules. The accusation that medical cannabis violates the convention is not based on the assumption that member states cannot decide to legalise medicinal, (or even personal non-medical use) of drugs. Rather, it is based on a clause of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotics, which Canada has signed, and says the government must be the sole distributor of the otherwise illegal substance. Canada has more than a 1000 licensed growers who supply the medical marijuana market.  

So, these “breaches” of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotics regarding medical marijuana in Canada is not related to cannabis use at all but who supplies the product. Very sneaky.

The UN's International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) annual report released today pointedly criticizes Argentina, Brazil and Mexico for moving to decriminalize the possession of drugs for personal consumption, autioning that such moves may "send the wrong message." The INCB report expresses concern over "the growing movement to decriminalize the possession of controlled drugs" and calls for this movement to be "resolutely countered" by the governments of Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and the United States."

-TNI/WOLA Drugs and Democracy Email Forum (Read at Mark Haden Blog)

That’s it? The regularising of medical marijuana “sends the wrong message to other countries". It’s worth noting that the US federal government has regularly denied it has any plans to decriminalise or legalise cannabis. It’s the states that worry the INCB and the comments are directed discreetly at them with the blessing of the federal government, DEA and the UN.

Latin America

If the INCB were going fruity over medical marijuana, imagine their reaction to the Latin American countries that were decriminalising all drugs albeit for small amounts. 

The INCB told Bolivia very politely that they are breaching an international convention and that the use of the traditional coca leaf in their country is an "illicit" activity. This had led to accusations that the INCB are overstepping their mandate and attempting to over-ride national sovereignty. This is because article 3, paragraph 2 of the convention makes clear that the decision to criminalise personal use of any substance is subject to each member nation’s constitutional principles and legal system. But the report, released Wednesday, drew strong criticism itself by nongovernmental agencies that are calling the INCB's criticism of Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina an overstepping of the organization's mandate. The report's words for the Latin American countries constitutes "unwarranted intrusions into these countries' sovereign decision-making," said the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) and the Transnational Institute (TNI) in a joint statement 

The INCB report expresses concern over "the growing movement to decriminalize the possession of controlled drugs" and calls for this movement to be "resolutely countered" by the governments of Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and the United States. According to the Transnational Institute (TNI) and the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), the criticisms leveled today clearly overstep the INCB's mandate and constitute unwarranted intrusions into these countries' sovereign decision-making. TNI and WOLA are non-governmental organizations with expertise in both the UN drug control system and Latin American drug policy developments.

-Mark Haden Blog

Bwrian Watters (again)
Adding to the recent statements from the INCB, Brian Watters under the title as International Liaison Officer for DFA, has once again dismissed the success of one of his pet hates, Sydney’s Medically Supervised Injecting Centre (MSIC). 

Injecting Centre Pushes for Permanency

2SER's Razors Edge

MSIC only operates because of a loophole in the UN treaty that allows it to be classed as scientific research. After 10 years of continually being renewed as scientific research, there is growing pressure on the NSW government to make MSIC permanent. Supporters point out that it has saved 3,000 lives, cut down ambulance call rates in Kings Cross by 80% and reduced discarded syringes by 50%. It has also referred 8000 users for treatment. But saving lives is not high on the agenda for Brian Watters when the process is not of his moral standards. In other words, drug use is evil and any treatment that is not abstinence based is not legitimate. Watters even once said that drug addiction is a sin. He claims that no major treatment centre he knows of has received a single referral from MSIC but goes on to say that they have probably been referred to substitution programs like methadone maintenance which he doesn’t consider being treatment. Watters makes the wild claim that most methadone patients use other drugs as well ... and therefore, not treatment. Yep, he is one of seven who basically dictate drug policy worldwide.

Much of this article is based on a email comment from Paul Dessauer - Outreach Coordinator, WASUA.

Related Articles:
FaceBook - Keep the Kings Cross injecting center open - It save's lives!
Bwrian Rears His Ugly head
Mark Haden - INCB Interferes With Countries' Sovereignty

Bwrian Rears His Ugly head

We don’t hear from him for what seems like years and suddenly, WHAM!!! Brian Watters is back. And he’s back with a vengeance.  Maybe he felt overlooked because he was not nominated in the latest Bucket Head awards or he is pining for past glory as younger and better looking anti-drug nutters make a name for themselves. 

Australia High On Ecstasy List

ABC

February 2010

Australians are among the biggest users of ecstasy in the world, according to a United Nations report.

The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) says 36 per cent of the drug seized internationally had been destined for Australia.

Board member Major Brian Watters says Australia has been very successful at reducing drug deaths and the use of heroin.

But he says the result has been a move to drugs like ecstasy, which are regarded by many people as less dangerous.

"They don't kill people so they don't have that sort of immediate dramatic effect, but they do burn people's brains and cause very serious behavioural problems," he said.

"In the emergency wards and treatment centres they will tell you they'd much rather deal with a heroin addict than a person who has been on amphetamine who has become uncontrollable."

Afghanistan

The board also found a dramatic increase in the amount of heroin being produced in Afghanistan, despite the fall in poppy production and its confinement mostly to three provinces.

Major Watters says the Taliban and other terrorist groups are continuing to finance their operations from drug production.

He says nobody knows exactly how much heroin is being produced, but it is a substantial industry.

"There's a wall of silence and the quantities they bring in of a substance called acetic anhydride has to be at a high level and highly organised," he said.

"And there'd be large shipments with road tankers with thousands and thousands of gallons, so it's a very secretive business of course, but we know they've now moved in and are now converting it into heroin."

Lets see how accurate, Brian is.

Board member Major Brian Watters says Australia has been very successful at reducing drug deaths and the use of heroin.

Watters still believes that under his guidance, the “Tough on Drugs” campaign and the Australian Federal Police (AFP) ended the heroin epidemic around 2000. Brian Watters and John Howard almost got RSI from the amount of back patting they inflicted on each other until Mick Kelty ruined the facade and confessed that the AFP had not much to do with the sudden demise of heroin flowing in from SE Asia. He concluded that the Burmese drug lords had simply switched to supplying high grade methamphetamines known as ice. Doh!

But he says the result has been a move to drugs like ecstasy, which are regarded by many people as less dangerous.

“They[ecstasy] don't kill people so they don't have that sort of immediate dramatic effect, but they do burn people's brains and cause very serious behavioural problems," he said. “In the emergency wards and treatment centres they will tell you they'd much rather deal with a heroin addict than a person who has been on amphetamine who has become uncontrollable.”

Some addicts do move to amphetamines when heroin is hard to purchase but rarely do they switch to ecstasy. It’s a great example of his ignorance when he put’s ecstasy in the same class as amphetamines. A common mistake because of MDMA is a type of amphetamine but being in a different class of drug, it has very different effects. You would think that someone from the INCB board who control and monitors drug policies worldwide would know this.

Watters said that most people regard ecstasy to be less dangerous than heroin - probably because it is. Still, you have to admire the skill Watters has for spinning anti-drug rhetoric. For example, there is too much evidence now that MDMA causes very few problems in the short term so he is forced to stop using the scary warnings he is used to. But since longer term harms are still being debated, he capitalised on the uncertainty and still manages to produce a message of fear. Decades of practice is paying off.

Major Watters says the Taliban and other terrorist groups are continuing to finance their operations from drug production.

All the bitchin’ in the world won’t hide the fact that heroin is only of value to terrorists because of UN drug policy. The UN and the INCB have the capacity to end the $400 billion annual black market for illicit drugs and the carnage that goes with it. Meanwhile, organised crime become incredibly rich and terrorists build up their cash reserves. Yet they plod on, decade after decade with their failed policies and moralistic messages while millions are sent to jail or banished to a life of misery. 

Brian Watters is responsible for many of Australia’s worst drug policy decisions. He helped John Howard shut down the proposed ACT heroin trials, alienated several members of the ANCD and had them removed, help establish Drug Free Australia (DFA) and defamed the reputation of The Salvation Army. He is a major critic of harm minimisation and even said:

Heroin addiction is a fate worse then death

-Brian Watters. Salvation Army, Board Member of the INCB

A staunch prohibitionist, he argues that alcohol prohibition in the US during the 1920/30s was a success.

It [alcohol prohibition] was the most lawful period in US history

-Brian Watters. Salvation Army, Board Member of the INCB

And if you’re not convinced Watters should never be allowed to dictate drug policy, there’s this:

Drug addiction is a sin

-Brian Watters. Salvation Army, Board Member of the INCB

The INCB is the ultimate anti-drug group. The Valhalla for anti-drug warriors, earthly heaven for anti-drug crusaders, the Mecca of reefer madness. The INCB monitors the implementation of U.N. drug control conventions worldwide which is very handy for the UN when they want to encourage rogue countries to do the right thing e.g keep harsh laws for drug use, not to promote too many harm reduction strategies etc. 

Many drug law reformists want the INCB disbanded. The current board consists of representatives from Russian, China, Nigeria and of course, Brian Watters who all support hardline prohibitionist drug policies. They have very few reporting requirements to the UN and can basically do what they want. There is no appeal process or any official channel to question their decisions. Many reformist groups see them as a secretive organisation, set up to do the dirty work for the US/UN under the UN banner.

The statement from Watters was not the only recent media announcement from the INCB. They have also criticised the Latin American countries that have started to rethink their drug policies by decriminalising drugs. And they put out a warning about the growing trend for abusing pharmaceutical drugs. Why all these statements from the INCB came at once is a mystery. Maybe they are sensing their own demise as the world starts questioning their role in the bloody battle against drug users?

Related Articles

Brian Watters is the Anti-Christ

The Nutters from the INCB

The Salvos, Weak Minded Junkies, Giuliani & Media

Who are Drug Free Australia (DFA)?

4 Corners: The Politics of Heroin

The INCB vs. Coca ... and the World

The US "War on Drugs" has various regions in it’s sights but what some people might not know is that it also targets whole nations. The US obsession with blaming other countries for feeding their own massive consumer market for illicit drugs seems to have no boundaries where nothing is safe including traditions and culture. Traditional medicines and food substances that have been used for thousands of years like khat, coca leaves and opium poppies, have no leeway in the relentless "War on Drugs" whether the target country agrees or not. The secret weapon is the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) and I mean really secret. The INCB do not have an oversight committee or have to publish minutes of their meetings. In fact they do not face any scrutiny what-so-ever and can merrily make any decisions in secret that the US dictate, all under the cover of the United Nations.

The tragic irony is that it is the board's inhumane, unjust and irrational policing of the UN drug control system that has created or exacerbated most of the problems outlined in its report. The board is complicit in gifting the illegal drug market to terror groups, paramilitaries and organized criminals, contributing to the political and economic destabilization of producer and transit countries and putting millions at risk of contracting blood-borne viruses. The INCB and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime pose a greater threat to global well-being than drugs themselves. -Danny Kushlick of Transform on the INCB. March 2009

The question is, how long will the world be bullied and made to participate in a strategy that has failed dismally and controlled by the outdated, agenda driven and secretive INCB?

Drug Use Of Innocent Coca Leaf Creates Rift With US The Irish Times March 2009 UN censure of Bolivia over the product highlights a misunderstanding of a plant employed in South American cultures for thousands of years, writes PHILIP THOMPSON in La Paz IN ITS annual report released two weeks ago, the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) reminded Bolivia that “allow the cultivation and consumption of coca leaf . . . in particular coca leaf chewing . . . is contrary to the provisions of the 1961 Convention on Drug Control”. The castigation comes at a time when Bolivia’s relations with international drug control efforts and particularly the US are at an all-time low. The description of the INCB’s words as “unjust” by Bolivia’s foreign minister highlights the difference of opinion between his country and the West over the controversial leaf. Located at almost 4km above sea-level, La Paz is the world’s highest capital. A common sight on its busy and colourful streets are groups of women sitting by the pavement over huge cloth sacks filled with small green leaves. They are coca sellers and their clients are not hard to spot. The tell-tale bulge in the left cheek signals a wad of leaves slowly dissolving and providing energy, a palliative to hunger and thirst and a host of vitamins and minerals. Though cocaine (a powerful drug which can be chemically extracted from the plant) has given the plant a bad reputation, the consumption of the coca leaf is in fact beneficial to the health. Its mild alkaloids also provide a vital barrier against altitude sickness and fatigue to impoverished farm labourers working at up to 3km above sea-level. The Bolivian government estimates that as many as 1.2 million kilos of the leaf are consumed through traditional uses every month. Villa Fatima, La Paz’s largest coca market, provides an idea of the scale. In a faded green warehouse, colourfully dressed men and women preside over thousands of enormous 23kg sacks. The coca has been shipped in from the Yungas, Bolivia’s traditional coca-growing region and is considered the country’s best. A government-designed market, there are no middlemen here giving the cocaleros (coca growers) an opportunity to maximise their income and avoid selling the leaves to intermediaries who might process them into cocaine. The vendors are delighted to promote their wares and hand out samples to buyers and the public. The fresh green leaves dissolve when clenched between the back teeth, releasing a bitter – though not unpleasant – flavour which is accompanied by a slight numbing of the gums. Criminalisation of the plant is a relatively recent phenomenon. It was categorised as a drug along with marijuana and opium in a 1961 UN convention on drugs. However, Bolivia saw few consequences until Reagan’s administration, as part of its war on drugs in the late 1980s, pressured the Bolivian government to restrict coca production. The subsequent US-sponsored crop-eradication programmes led to violent conflicts with Bolivian coca growers who felt they were being unfairly labelled as drug producers. Their argument was – and still is – that they are producing a traditional crop that is occasionally processed into cocaine for the US market by dug traffickers. The campaign against eradication culminated in the 2005 election as president of Evo Morales, a union leader and former coca grower from the highlands. Though generally accepted as being more moderate, Morales was perceived as part of the Latin American hard left, along with Chavez and Castro. His defence of coca production would inevitably lead him into conflict with US drug policy. Morales’s approach to drug control is summed up in the phrase “no to zero coca, but yes to zero cocaine”. He has cracked down on illegal drugs and plans to redirect the entire coca crop into a new legal industry producing coca-based products such as tea, medicines and cosmetics. If successful, this will create a growing market for coca allowing him to enlarge the area under cultivation and thereby improve the income of coca growers. However, the US government fears that any increase in production will inevitably make its way on to the illegal market. Consequently, US government organisations such as the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and USaid have avoided co-operation with Morales and the coca unions on drug policy within Bolivia. This has made it more difficult for both parties to achieve their objectives. In recent months, US-Bolivian relations dropped to a new low, following the US ambassador’s expulsion from Bolivia in September, accused of interfering with internal politics. Perhaps in retaliation, the US state department marked Bolivia on its “drug blacklist” for not having “co-operated with the US in important efforts to combat drug trafficking”. Bolivia is now in the same category as Afghanistan and Burma – one a failed state, the other a totalitarian regime. Yet Columbia, a US ally whose coca crop had grown by 20,000 hectares (up to 120,000 hectares in total), received no mention. It appears a little paradoxical, considering Bolivia’s total coca crop sits at just 22,000 hectares. Joining in this apparent tit for tat argument, Morales has now suspended the activities of the US’s DEA in Bolivia, essentially opting out of the US war on drugs. On the domestic front, Bolivia is going through a very sensitive period. A controversial new constitution has just been passed in a national referendum giving greater rights to the indigenous majority. There has been widespread opposition among Bolivia’s wealthy eastern provinces and it remains to be seen whether they will accept it. Further attempts by the US government to interfere in Morales’ coca strategy will only increase the old sentiment that the US treats Latin America like its own backyard. Some observers suggest that co-operating with a popular president who has the trust of coca growers and is attempting to develop a legal industry for the crop could be a unique opportunity for the US. The alternative is seen as isolating a potential partner and hampering the economic development of South America’s poorest nation. Both of these outcomes might well lead to an increase in the amount of cocaine ending up on US streets. It would be easy to blame the coca-cocaine fiasco entirely on the US. But much of the trouble concerning Bolivia originates in unwillingness on the part of the international community to accept coca as a licit substance that is an essential part of Andean culture. The recent censure by the INCB is just one example of this. As David Choquehuanca, Bolivia’s foreign minister said, “They need to open their eyes to the reality . . . the rules should reflect that reality, not run contrary to it.” The reality he is talking about is the fact that the majority of Bolivians chew coca, drink it in their tea or use it in religious ceremonies. As Maria Carmen, a lady in her 70s on the streets of La Paz, says, (a wad of leaves bulging in her cheek): “For us, coca is life!”.

Related Articles: The Inquisition of the INCB Closed to reason: time for accountability for the International Narcotic Control Board The INCB is out of control and needs to be stopped Bolivian peasants suffer in drug war, speaker says

UN Still Slaves to The US

The UN's narcotic arm, The INCB are slowly being exposed for the their real role in the international narcotics industry. This supposed independent organisation is nothing more than a front for the US led "War on Drugs" ... and it's getting some countries upset. The latest victim of the INCB is Canada and their bid to stop the spread of blood-borne diseases like HIV/AIDS. Part of the INCB annual report was an attack on Canada's safe injection facility and the distribution of disposable crack pipe mouthpieces. The INCB claims these programs breach part of the UN's convention against illicit traffic in narcotics. Of course it is all bullshit. When these countries signed the UN convention, they certainly didn't expect for the INCB to dictate their countries internal policies. Cindy Fazey who drafted the UN Declaration on the Guiding Principles of Demand Reduction had these harsh words about the UN in 2003:

Unfortunately these individuals also see their role not only as the guardians of the conventions, but also the interpreters of them as well. In their annual report they have criticised many governments, such as Canada for permitting the medicinal use of cannabis, Australia for providing injecting rooms and the United Kingdom for proposing to downgrade the classification of cannabis, which would entail less serious penalties than at present. These criticisms go far beyond their remit, and indeed it is hubris to criticise the Canadian Supreme Court.

Back in Canada, the safe injection facility known as Insite wasn't going to go quietly. Senator Larry Campbell, a former mayor of Vancouver and a former coroner, told reporters he would personally block Insite's doorway if officials tried to close it down. He went on to describe the narcotics board as:

"Stooges for a failed U.S. war on drugs"

Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan also dismissed the board's report by insisting it simply didn't understand Insite's success:

"The way we've approached drug addiction worldwide has been a failure, we need new approaches. We need to be open to innovations."

These programs have proven themselves over and over and over. How can any organisation, especially a humanitarian organisation like the UN, justify stopping programs that save so many lives and get addicts into rehab? It is so far from any logical reason that the UN now just look silly ... and corrupt. Any country that dares to stray outside the US style of zero tolerance is threatened by the UN to be contravening the narcotics control act which they have countersigned. Being a front for the US led "War on Drugs" and pushing US morals based drug policy on other sovereign countries is not the role of the UN. As Canada, England, Parts of Europe and Australia continue to be bullied, it won't be too long before these countries and others will start to ignore the UN and rely on their own evidence based findings. Banishing the arrogant and intimidating INCB to the history books can only be an improvement to the worldwide drug problem and a step forward for mankind.