United Nations drug control conventions

The United Nations drug control conventions, also known as the international drug control conventions, are three complementary and mutually supportive drug treaties that establish the legal framework for international drug control and the war on drugs. The treaties are the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961; amended in 1972), the Convention on Psychotropic Substances (1971), and the Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (1988). Their core function is to maintain a list of controlled drugs, ensure a consistent supply of these drugs for medical and scientific purposes, and prohibit other uses. Adoption is near universal among UN member states; each party is required to implement the treaty provisions in their country's domestic law, which allows a degree of interpretative flexibility at the national level.

The conventions
The three treaties are complementary and mutually supportive. The core functions serve to maintain a list of controlled drugs, to ensure a consistent supply for medical and scientific use, and to otherwise prevent production and distribution of those drugs (with some limited exceptions and exemptions). Adoption of the treaties is near universal among the UN's 193 member states.

The treaties are not self-executing, they operate indirectly by providing a skeleton template of provisions that have to be fleshed out in the domestic law of each party state. Thus each country has a degree of flexibility in conforming treaty obligations to their own socio-cultural, political and economic realities; this latitude has been described as a "vast grey area... subject to judicial interpretation and political contestation."

The cornerstone Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (as amended in 1972) integrates into a single framework nine pre-existing international drug treaties dating back to 1912. The subsequent two conventions addressed new developments and concerns; around 250 substances in total are listed across the three. For each of the conventions, an official Commentary provides comprehensive legal analysis to assist with interpretation.

Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs
The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 was adopted in 1961 and entered into force on December 13, 1964; as amended by the 1972 Protocol it has186 state parties. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the Single Convention aims to "combat drug abuse" by limiting "the possession, use, trade in, distribution, import, export, manufacture and production of drugs exclusively to medical and scientific purposes" and through "international cooperation to deter and discourage drug traffickers." The Single Convention classifies drugs in four schedules; Schedules I and IV are the most prohibitive and included opium, heroin, cocaine and cannabis (in 2020, cannabis was removed from the most restrictive Schedule IV ).

Convention on Psychotropic Substances
The Convention on Psychotropic Substances was adopted in 1971 and entered into force on August 16, 1976; it has 184 state parties. It addresses a number of synthetic psychotropic substances, such as amphetamines, barbiturates, and LSD, that had become widely used since World War II, and especially in the 1960s, and were generally not regulated internationally. According to the UNODC, the convention "responded to the diversification and expansion of the spectrum of drugs of abuse and introduced controls over a number of synthetic drugs according to their abuse potential on the one hand and their therapeutic value on the other." The convention classifies the drugs it concerns in a four-schedule system different in nature from the Single Convention schedules.

Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
The United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances was adopted in 1988 and entered into force on November 11, 1990; it has 191 state parties. The convention addressed concern over the rapid growth in international drug trafficking. According to the UNODC, it "provides comprehensive measures against drug trafficking, including provisions against money laundering and the diversion of precursor chemicals." The treaty essentially "criminalized the entire drug market chain, from cultivation/production to shipment, sale, and possession."

Philosophy, origins, architects
The UN drug conventions offer a degree of interpretative flexibility within a framework of control through prohibition. Controlled substances used for medical or scientific purposes are regulated, while other uses are prohibited; "each of the treaties encourages – and often requires – that member countries put in place strong domestic penal provisions."

A report on the history of the conventions identifies four themes as critical influences on the nature of the treaties: prohibition, United States involvement, external influences, and the outsized impact of certain powerful individuals. Prohibition, "as opposed to regulation", has been the central philosophy. The US has been "the key player in most multilateral negotiations" and the prohibitionist approach "derives largely from U.S. policy – the various forms, past and present, of the U.S. 'war on drugs'". Outside interests, including "racism, fear, economic interests, domestic and international politics, global trade, domestic protectionism, war, arms control initiatives, the Cold War, development aid, and various corporate agendas", significantly shaped the conventions. And powerful personalities played outsized roles in shaping the policies: "while in positions of power at opportune moments, their beliefs, morals, ambitions and single-minded determination enabled them to exert exceptional influence over the shape of the international drug control regime." The efforts from the 1930s to the 1960s of US drug control commissioner Harry Anslinger and his Canadian counterpart and policy ally, Charles Henry Ludovic Sharman, are particularly notable.

Administrative structure
Four entities are given authority under the drug conventions: the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), and the World Health Organization (WHO).

The 53-member CND, a subsidiary organ of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), is the UN's main drug policy body, responsible for the drug classification schedules and policy guidance. Members are elected by ECOSOC, one of the six UN main organs. The CND also is the governing body of the UNODC, which advises governments on implementation of the conventions and produces an annual World Drug Report. UNODC's focus is mainly on security and law enforcement, rather than public health.

The INCB is an independent treaty body, mandated by the Single Convention, that monitors implementation of the conventions, oversees the legal drug supply, and maintains discussions with countries regarding compliance issues. Central to its function is an annual set of reports, submitted to ECOSOC through the CND, that overlook the global drug situation. The reporting identifies and predicts problem trends and suggests corrective actions. Technical reports list estimated national requirements, and production, manufacture, trade and consumption data, for controlled drugs for medical and scientific use, gathered from individual countries. Trends in trafficking in precursors and essential chemicals for illicit drug manufacture, and evaluation of government measures taken to prevent that traffic, are also reported.

The WHO is responsible for providing the CND with the scientific evidence used in determining drug scheduling and evaluating proposed treaty amendments.

Obligations
The conventions are legally binding on its parties under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). In case of fundamental disagreements, the INCB engages in discussion; states can also withdraw from the conventions. Falling out of compliance or withdrawal, apart from denunciation by the UN, could have practical consequences, particularly for developing nations. The conventions regulate trade in legal pharmaceuticals, including the WHO list of essential drugs—leaving the system could make securing medicine more difficult. Being party to the three conventions is also a requirement for certain trade agreements, and for access to the European Union (EU).

The drug conventions do not explicitly prohibit, they establish control over a set of drugs. The use of drugs – personal consumption – is not outlawed, although possession is. And penalties are not specified, they are at the discretion of member countries, and can be milder or harsher than what may be indicated the treaties. In practice, this flexibility has been used to create a prohibitionist, punitive war on drugs. Negative effects of this hardline approach have led to an increasing number of states bucking the conventions; actions range from alternative legal interpretations to outright defiance. The quite large scale of deviation, including dozens of countries, among them, the US, undermines the credibility of the drug conventions, which in turn, to some degree weakens the entire system of UN international treaties.

The INCB, charged with monitoring treaty compliance, relies on direct discussion with individual states to address contentious issues. The Board can also call out non-compliance in its reports and in public statements – "naming and shaming" – and by alerting the CND and ECOSOC. Beyond that, it has no practical enforcement power.

Interpretation and deviation
As in other areas of international concern, interpretation of the drug conventions is "an art not a science". The conventions define "clear limitations [and] also provide a degree of latitude for policy choices at the national and subnational level." For instance, the Single Convention limits the use of controlled substances "exclusively to medical and scientific purposes", while providing exceptions and exemptions such as the cultivation of industrial hemp, the use of the coca leaf as a flavoring agent, and a general exemption of any drug used for "other than medical and scientific purposes". One study addressing this latitude established three categories of deviation by party states: permissible policies deviate while being generally accepted, contested policies are vigorously defended as in fact being within the guidelines, and impermissible policies are clear breaches of the conventions. Compliance with the UN drug conventions is also seen as creating risks to and violations of human rights laws.

Decriminalization and personal use
In 2001, Portugal decriminalized purchase and possession for personal use of all psychoactive drugs. It maintained its treaty obligations by changing the form of prohibition from criminal law to administrative law, replacing criminal penalties, with fines, reporting requirements, and treatment referrals; drugs still had to be obtained from illegal sources, as selling remained a criminal act. Initially taking a negative view, the INCB in 2005 accepted the policy as legitimate, finding that "the practice of exempting small quantities of drugs from criminal prosecution is consistent with the international drug control treaties".

Some two dozen countries have taken a similar approach to decriminalizing cannabis and other drugs for personal consumption. For instance, in Mexico in 2009, "personal use" quantities were established for a number of drugs – cannabis (5 g), cocaine (0.5 g), heroin (50 mg), methamphetamine (40 mg), LSD (0.015 mg) – possession of which would result in a referral for treatment.

Legalization and regulated markets
In 2012, two US states, Colorado (Amendment 64) and Washington (Initiative 502), legalized cannabis. The INCB had warned, "to allow for the recreational use of cannabis would be a violation of international laws." In August 2013, the federal government announced it would not act against states opening cannabis stores, with the expectation that state regulations would be ""tough in practice, not just on paper, and include strong, state-based enforcement efforts, backed by adequate funding." The UN did not propose sanctions against the US.

In 2013, Uruguay legalized cannabis, with the law taking effect in April 2014, making it the first country to do so. The INCB condemned the move and stated that Uruguay "knowingly decided to break the universally agreed and internationally endorsed legal provisions". The statement continued: "Cannabis is not only addictive but may also affect some fundamental brain functions, IQ potential, and academic and job performance and impair driving skills. Smoking cannabis is more carcinogenic than smoking tobacco."

In 2018, Canada legalized cannabis, with the law taking effect that October. In "A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada", it was acknowledged that "Canada is one of more than 185 Parties to three United Nations drug control conventions" and said: "... it is our view that Canada's proposal to legalize cannabis shares the objectives agreed to by member states in multilateral declarations", citing protection of vulnerable citizens, evidence-based policy, and public health, safety and welfare as "the heart of a balanced approach to treaty implementation." The CND and INCB stated, "... this decision contravenes the provisions of the drug control conventions, and undermines the international legal drug control framework and respect for the rules-based international order."

State reservations
In January 2012, Bolivia withdrew from the Single Convention over the indigenous use of the coca leaf. It soon re-applied to the convention with a reservation allowing traditional use of coca; the re-accession came into force in February 2013. Blocking the reservation required objection by 61 states, one-third of the, at the time, 183 parties to the convention; 15 countries objected by the deadline. The UNODC said it would "continue to work in Bolivia in accordance with its mandates to support the national system of drug control and the country's international cooperation in these matters."

Harsh penalties
, 35 countries have the death penalty for drug offenses; of those, the 33 UN full member states are parties to the UN drug conventions. Nine of those countries – China, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Malaysia, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Vietnam – are considered "high application" states that regularly perform drug crime executions. The conventions encourage criminal penalties but do not provide guidelines for what is appropriate, which can be "an invitation to governments to enact abusive laws and policies, especially in a global context where drugs and drug trafficking are defined as an existential threat to society and the stability of nations".

Modification and reform
Despite significant deviations from the conventions by upwards of two dozen countries, the prospect of fundamental amendments to the treaties seems distant at best, as the parties are roughly split between those who favor reform and those who adamantly back the existing hardline approach. Provisions for treaty revision in the conventions allow changes to be easily blocked by states supporting a more prohibitive approach.

While achieving the consensus required to amend the treaties remains unlikely, there is the option of withdrawing and re-acceding with a reservation, as in the case of Bolivia's coca leaf exception. A second option is inter se treaty modification, provided for in the VCLT, where two or more countries create a sub-treaty framework for, say, cannabis, and modify convention provisions to their needs; additional countries could accede at later dates.

UNGASS directives
Three Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGASS) sessions have been held on the subject of drugs: "Drug abuse" (1990), "World drug problem" (1998), and "World drug problem" (2016). These high-level gatherings, involving heads of state and ministers, are documented usually in the form of a political declaration, an action plan, or a strategy that provide additional treaty guidance.

In March 2016, the INCB stated that the UN drug treaties do not mandate a "war on drugs" and that the choice is not between "'militarized' drug law enforcement on one hand and the legalization of non-medical use of drugs on the other", health and welfare should be the focus of drug policy. That April, at the UNGASS on the "World drug problem", the Wall Street Journal assessed the attendees' positions as "somewhat" in two camps: "Some European and South American countries as well as the U.S. favored softer approaches. Eastern countries such as China and Russia and most Muslim nations like Iran, Indonesia and Pakistan remained staunchly opposed." The outcome document recommended treatment, prevention and other public health measures, and committed to "intensifying our efforts to prevent and counter" drug production and trafficking, through, "inter alia, more effective drug-related crime prevention and law enforcement measures." A statement signed by 189 civil society organizations criticized the 2016 outcome document, itemizing the lack of progress and calling out the "highly problematic, non-inclusive and non-transparent" process that made it possible for "a handful of vocal and regressive countries [to] block progressive language", and resulted in "an expensive restatement of previous agreements and conventions".