vancouver police survey - VPD priorities

Saturday, November 14, 2015 | | 0 comments

Hi all,

The Vancouver Police Department is asking the public to help them establish the VPD priorities.

The survey only takes 2 minutes to complete.

Please spread widely,

Cheers,

Mark

 

http://fluidsurveys.com/s/VPDStrategicPlan/

FW: The Push for Legal Marijuana Spreads

Friday, November 13, 2015 | | 0 comments

New York Times
November 13, 2015


The Push for Legal Marijuana Spreads

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDNOV. 5, 2015

Support for making marijuana legal is increasing around the world, and that is a good thing. Earlier this week, the Mexican Supreme Court opened the door to legalizing the drug by giving four plaintiffs the right to grow cannabis for personal use.

In Canada, the newly sworn in prime minister, Justin Trudeau, has said he intends to change the law so people can use the drug recreationally; medicinal use is already legal in that country. And in the United States, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, recently introduced a bill that would let states decide if they want to make the drug legal without worrying about violating federal law.

Laws banning the growing, distribution and possession of marijuana have caused tremendous damage to society, with billions spent on imprisoning people for violating pointlessly harsh laws. Yet research shows that marijuana is far less harmful than alcohol and tobacco, and can be used to treat medical conditions like chronic pain.

The Mexican Supreme Court's ruling, which applies only to the four plaintiffs seeking a right to grow marijuana, does not strike down the country's marijuana laws. But it will open the way to more legal challenges and put pressure on President Enrique Peña Nieto and the Mexican Congress to change the law, which has helped to fuel drug-related crime in the country.

Prohibition in Mexico and elsewhere in the Americas will also become harder to maintain if California voters legalize recreational use of marijuana. Activists there are seeking to put legalization initiatives on the 2016 ballot. California was the first state to allow medicinal use of the drug in 1996, and it is a big market for illegal Mexican cannabis. It would make little sense for Mexico to spend countless millions a year in drug enforcement to ban a substance that is legal and regulated across its northern border all the way up the western coast to Canada. Oregon and Washington have already legalized the drug, as have Colorado, Alaska and the District of Columbia.

Some proponents of keeping prohibition in place might be encouraged by the defeat of an Ohio legalization initiative on Tuesday. But voters did the right thing by rejecting that measure because it would have granted a monopoly over the growing and sale of legal marijuana to a small group of investors. Even the acting administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Chuck Rosenberg, who opposes legalization, described that ballot measure as an "anomaly." (Mr. Rosenberg also said marijuana was "harmful and dangerous" but he acknowledged that other dangerous substances are "perfectly legal.")

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, The Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.

What's needed now is responsible leadership from President Obama and Congress. They ought to seriously consider the kind of legislation Mr.
Sanders has proposed. His bill would remove marijuana, or "marihuana" as it is called in federal law, from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, which is meant for drugs that have a high potential for abuse and no medical use.

This change would allow states to decide if they want to make the drug legal and how to regulate it without being limited by federal law. Mr.
Sanders's bill would also make it illegal to transport the drug across state lines. If Congress is unwilling to act, Mr. Obama should move on his own by ordering the attorney general to request a study by the secretary of health and human services, which would be needed if the administration is to remove the drug from Schedule I on its own.

A growing group of activists, judges and lawmakers is showing the world a path to more sensible drug policies. Mr. Obama and Congress should join them.
_______________________________________________
Dd-world mailing list
https://lists.tni.org/mailman/listinfo/dd-world

Webinar, Nov. 10th: Implementing marijuana regulation in Washington State: A 2015 Update

Friday, November 6, 2015 | | 0 comments

 

 

 

Webinar Topic:    Implementing marijuana regulation in Washington State:  A 2015 Update

DATE:    November 10, 2015

TIME:    9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. (Pacific Standard Time)

HOST: Clean Air Coalition British Columbia

 

If you would like to register for the knowledge exchange webinar, please go to www.cleanaircoalitionbc.com/webinars;  on the UPPER RIGHT HAND SIDE register for the session.

 

Overview

 

State-licensed production, processing and retailing of “recreational” marijuana began in 2014. Recent legislation is now bringing the sale of “medical” marijuana into the state system.  Our presenters will share how implementation is progressing, some of the lessons learned and how the various government agencies are involved.   There will be time for discussion.

 

Presenters

 

Dr. Gillian Schauer is a contractor with the Office on Smoking and Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In that capacity, she works on research and policy issues related to both tobacco and marijuana. She has been CDC’s on-the-ground lead working with states on marijuana policy and works closely with Washington, Alaska, Oregon, and Colorado.

 

Mary Segawa is the Public Health Education Liaison at the WA State Liquor and Cannabis Board, focusing on policy and education related to preventing the misuse and abuse of alcohol and marijuana, including underage use.

 

Kristi Weeks serves as Policy Counsel to the Department of Health, WA State, including overseeing the department’s implementation of marijuana regulation.

 

 

FW: Ruling in Mexico Sets Into Motion Legal Marijuana - The New York Times

Thursday, November 5, 2015 | | 0 comments

lift forum - deeping the cannabis dicussion

Wednesday, November 4, 2015 | | 0 comments

Mexico court ruling could eventually lead to legal marijuana #cannabis #drugpolicy

| | 0 comments

FW: Launch of the United Nations University Policy Report entitled What Comes after the War on Drugs?

| | 0 comments

UN Web TV
3 November, 2015

Launch of the United Nations University Policy Report entitled What Comes
after the War on Drugs?
Organized by the United Nations University (UNU).

Watch the full video:
http://webtv.un.org/watch/launch-of-the-united-nations-university-policy-rep
ort-entitled-what-comes-after-the-war-on-drugs/4594719766001


--

New UN Think-tank Report: What Comes After the War on Drugs? #drugpolicy

| | 0 comments

Huffington Post
November 03, 2015

New UN Think-tank Report: What Comes After the War on Drugs?*
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-cockayne/new-un-thinktank-report-w_b_846
5246.html


Should the United Nations support the decriminalization of drug use?
This was the question raised last week by Richard Branson, a well-known
entrepreneur and member of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, a private
group. Branson made headlines with a claim that the main United Nations drug
agency, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), was poised to
call for governments to decriminalize the use and possession of all drugs.
UNODC quickly denied the claims, suggesting a document circulated by Branson
did not represent the body's official policy.

Branson's claim comes half a year before members of the United Nations will
meet at a special session in New York to consider the state of global drug
control efforts, known by its acronym UNGASS 2016. Our new policy report for
the UN's own thinktank, the United Nations University (UNU), entitled What
Comes After the War on Drugs? argues that UNGASS
2016 will largely confirm the current approach to drug control, despite
growing calls for change. The report, based on a series of consultations
involving over 50 Member States, 16 UN entities and 55 civil society
organizations, considers the major political and policy trends leading into
UNGASS 2016, and offers recommendations for strengthening global drug policy
efforts at a time of deepening divisions.

Some states, particularly in the Americas, see UNGASS 2016 as an opportunity
to rethink global drug control, turning a page on the War on Drugs. Other
states in contrast see UNGASS 2016 as an opportunity to build flexibility
into the current approach, and to adapt to new drugs and new trafficking
patterns. States have not bridged this divide in preparing for UNGASS 2016,
so What Comes After the War on Drugs?
predicts that UNGASS 2016 will largely affirm the existing regime while
adding positive references to the protection of public health and human
rights.

We also predict support for the idea that states should have flexibility in
implementing their existing drug control obligations. The United States, in
particular, has championed the notion of flexibility since some U.S. states
began to permit recreational use of cannabis -- something traditionally not
permitted by the UN drug control system. The report cautions that states in
different regions will use the notion of flexibility to do very different
things. Some will certainly experiment with cannabis legalization and harm
reduction, while others will see 'flexibility' as a green light for a more
punitive approach, incarcerating users, forcing them into treatment options
without sound medical supervision, and even executing drug traffickers. This
will lead in time to policy fragmentation.

To avoid that outcome, Member States need to embed flexibility in a larger
discussion of what actually works in drug policy, based on certain shared
principles. We call this 'principled pluralism', and suggest that it is not
currently achievable at the UN's global drug policy discussion forum in
Vienna, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, partly because most countries are
not represented there. We argue that states should use the period until
2019, when a new UN Plan of Action is expected, to hold inclusive
discussions in New York. This could take the recent process that designed
the Sustainable Development Goals as a model, and be framed as an Open
Working Group on Drug Policy, open to all states and to civil society, and
guided by a Scientific Advisory Committee. This Open Working Group would
work towards Global Drug Policy Goals, to be adopted in 2019. Creating
shared goals has proven to be an effective way for states to define the key
objectives of a regime, direct resources, and work towards a shared vision
on a global issue.
Global Drug Policy Goals would help ensure coherence in a drug control
regime that is going to continue to be pulled in very different directions.

Whether or not that discussion happens in New York or Vienna, states should
ensure that UNGASS 2016 explicitly recognizes four principles for future
drug control discussions: 1) inclusiveness, 2) science-based
decision-making, 3) protection of human rights, and 4) promoting human
development. Without a commitment to these common principles, global drug
control discussions risk rapid fragmentation in coming years.

But there are also more specific things that states could achieve at UNGASS
2016, and we offer five operational recommendations. First, states should
use UNGASS 2016 to create a forum for sharing scientific evidence on the
impacts of penal policy interventions. Second, UNGASS
2016 should establish an high-level, independent, expert commission to
analyse global access to controlled medicines and report back on measures to
improve it. Third, states should ask the Secretary-General to develop
coherent, UN-system-wide guidance on drug treatment programming. Fourth,
states should initiate a workstream in the UN Statistical Commission to
develop new national statistics measuring the human development impacts of
drugs and drug control policies. And fifth, states should ask the
Secretary-General to develop UN-wide guidance on protection of human rights
in drug programming.

In the end, the direction of global drug policy is up to Member States
-- not UN agencies such as UNODC, or outside experts like Richard Branson.
But unless all stakeholders work together to use UNGASS 2016 to take
concrete steps, a golden opportunity to adapt the global drug control regime
to present-day realities risks being squandered. If states, in particular,
do not step up to the challenge, what comes after the War on Drugs may be,
in some parts of the world, just as bad -- or even worse.

*Dr. James Cockayne is Head of United Nations University's Office at the
United Nations.

*Ms Summer Walker manages United Nations University's global Drug Policy
Project.

The United Nations University (UNU) is a think tank established by the UN
General Assembly to contribute research to help resolve pressing global
challenges.

--
Transnational Institute (TNI)
Drugs & Democracy Programme
De Wittenstraat 25
1052 AK Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: + 31 20 662 66 08
Fax: + 31 20 675 71 76
Email: drugs@tni.org
http://www.druglawreform.info/en/home
http://www.tni.org/work-area/drugs-and-democracy

_______________________________________________
Dd-world mailing list
https://lists.tni.org/mailman/listinfo/dd-world

Ireland to 'decriminalise' small amounts of drugs, including heroin, cocaine and cannabis, for personal use #drugpolicy

| | 0 comments

Independent
November 03, 2014

Ireland to 'decriminalise' small amounts of drugs, including heroin, cocaine and cannabis, for personal use http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ireland-to-decriminalise-small-amounts-of-drugs-including-heroin-cocaine-and-cannabis-for-personal-a6719136.html

Minister also announced intention to implement 'injection rooms' in Dublin for addicts Rose Troup Buchanan

Many drug users pick up additional infections and medical problems as a result of using unclean needles - Getty

Ireland will move towards decriminalising substances including heroin, cocaine and cannabis as part of a "radical cultural shift", the country's drugs minister has said.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, the chief of Ireland's National Drugs Strategy, told a lecture at the London School of Economics on Monday that drug users will be able to inject in specially designated rooms in Dublin from next year.

The minister said attitudes to drugs needed to move away from shaming addicts to helping them and emphasised there was a difference between legalisation and decriminalisation.

It would remain a crime to profit – from either the sale or distribution of illegal drugs – but drug takers would no longer be criminalised for their addictions.

"I am firmly of the view that there needs to be a cultural shift in how we regard substance misuse if we are to break this cycle and make a serious attempt to tackle drug and alcohol addiction," said Mr Ó Ríordáin.

However, while Mr O Ríordáin told The Irish Times that there was a "strong consensus that drugs across the board should be decriminalised,"
he said it would be for Ireland's next government to discuss.

His comments follow a leaked report from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, appearing to call for a worldwide decriminalisation on
19 October.

The report was reportedly withdrawn after at least one nation put pressure on the international body to bury the findings of Dr Monica Beg, chief of the HIV/AIDs section of the UNODC in Vienna.


--
Transnational Institute (TNI)
Drugs & Democracy Programme
De Wittenstraat 25
1052 AK Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: + 31 20 662 66 08
Fax: + 31 20 675 71 76
Email: drugs@tni.org
http://www.druglawreform.info/en/home
http://www.tni.org/work-area/drugs-and-democracy

_______________________________________________
Dd-world mailing list
https://lists.tni.org/mailman/listinfo/dd-world

Legalizing cannabis on CBC almanac - Nov 3 2015

Tuesday, November 3, 2015 | | 1 comments

Legalizing cannabis on CBC almanac – Nov 3 2015

http://www.cbc.ca/podcasting/includes/bcalmanac.xml

why we should not stop at pot #cannabis

| | 0 comments

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/opinion/why-we-shouldnt-stop-pot

Death in a Dumpster: The Musical

| | 0 comments

I wanted to invite you to our upcoming production of Death in a Dumpster: The Musical. This is a really neat project we have been working on. It is a full musical theatre production created, directed and acted by homeless and street involved youth. All original music and actors will be accompanied by members of the VSO. I have attached a poster for the production to this email. You can also get more information at www.deathinadumpster.ca You are welcome to attend any of the nights but my mom, Nathalie and I will be at the opening night on November 7 if you want to join us?

 

I would also love it if you could pass this on to your networks as I am sure you know lots of people that I cannot reach on my own. Thanks for your help.

 

I hope all is well with you and your family.

 

Cheers,

 

Calum

 

 

<image003.jpg>

Calum Scott |Director 
Directions Youth Services, Family Services of Greater Vancouver

1136 Burrard Street Vancouver, BC V6Z 1Y7
604.633.1472 ext. 3551 (office) | 604.633.1473 (fax)| cscott@fsgv.ca

 

 

Please note: FSGV is prohibited by policy from including names or initials of clients in our email correspondence.

This e-mail message and any attachments thereto are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains information that is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure. Any distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete the message unread without making any copies. Thank you.

 

<DIAD-GS-ADVERT-Final-Poster.jpg>

The Wrong Way to Legalize Marijuana? #cannabis

| | 0 comments

Politico Magazine
November 01, 2015

The Wrong Way to Legalize Marijuana?
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/marijuana-legalization-monopoloy-213312#ixzz3qM335K9E

Ohio may be on the brink of creating America's first marijuana 'monopoly.'

By Josiah M. Hesse

On the surface, Ian James sounds like any other idealistic marijuana
advocate: He's critical of the war on drugs, he touts the economic and tax benefits of legalization and uses the familiar rebuttal against the "think of the children!" argument by pointing out that dealers are currently selling pot to kids and dispensaries will be carding customers. But James, the man behind this Tuesday's ballot measure to legalize marijuana in Ohio, is motivated by more than his political convictions.

James' controversial statewide ballot initiative, known as Issue 3, is designed to line the pockets of the investors he gathered to bankroll it—a brazen example of pay-to-play politics according to critics. But James is also unlike anyone in legalization who's come before him. He's the CEO of The Strategy Network, a political consultant group specializing in ballot measures. Unlike the marijuana activist color guard typically responsible for passing the country's prior legalization initiatives, James is a 30-year political operative who cut his teeth working for Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, not exactly an idealistic drug policy reformer.

Even though James' victory would mark a long list of marijuana legalization firsts—the first swing state to legalize, the first Midwestern state, the first privately organized legalization campaign—the Ohio measure's profit-driven nature has provoked resistance from a growing coalition of marijuana enthusiasts, who insist that the movement has long been about expanding individual freedom, not making profits. James, for his part, makes no apologies for his profit-driven brainchild in political economy; big money is what it takes, he argues, to upgrade the legalization map—to move beyond the weed-friendly states out West and make legalization a reality in the purple states of America's heartland.

"It's an incredibly daunting, detail-oriented process, and it requires funding," he says, noting previous attempts at marijuana reform via ballot measure in Ohio being underfunded and falling dismally short of gathering enough signatures. But James' bald-faced political calculations have left Issue 3 vulnerable to accusations of crony capitalism from his fellow legalization advocates. And from the usual anti-marijuana suspects.

"The values of Woodstock have been eclipsed by the values of Wall Street," says Kevin Sabet, president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana and former senior adviser to President Barack Obama's Office of National Drug Control Policy. "This is the big industry nightmare that we've been worried about, and now it's becoming a reality in Ohio. For anyone who thinks legalization is about pot anymore, they need to look at Ohio and see it's not about pot, it's about money."

The Ohio legalization effort has been a godsend to anti-marijuana groups like Sabet's, fitting hand-in-glove into the Big Business narrative they've been crafting for years. Almost universal rejection of Ronald Reagan's claim that marijuana is "probably the most dangerous drug in America" has forced those who remain critical of the plant to distance themselves from the after-school-specials of yesteryear. The new talking point against pot is that the cannabis industry is "Big Tobacco 2.0."
And James is their favorite new boogeyman.

It's easy to see why he has become a lightning rod. Issue 3 expressly states that commercial cultivation of marijuana in Ohio will be limited to 10 separate properties, whose addresses have already been determined.
And just who owns the land that will be granted exclusive rights to what is projected to be a billion dollar industry? The same investment groups, organized by James, that are financing the ResponsibleOhio campaign to legalize marijuana in the state.

The investment groups are set to spend around $25 million. (Colorado, by contrast, spent a mere $3 million legalizing in 2012.) Investors include familiar names like 32-year-old NFL star Frostee Rucker, NBA Hall of Famer Oscar Robertson and former singer of the boy-band 98 Degrees Nick Lachey, among others. Though these celebrities apparently have no problem being known to the public as weed tycoons, many of the other investors have chosen to remain anonymous and hide behind LLCs.

As the man who gathered together the 10 Issue 3 investor groups—and as ResponsibleOhio's executive director—James has been fending off accusations that he seeks to create a monopoly of the burgeoning weed market in the vein of Rockefeller with oil and Hearst with newspapers.
(Technically "oligopoly" would be a more accurate accusation, since there will be 10 companies—but the popular board-game title rings a little clearer in campaign literature.)

James dismisses these accusations by pointing to the fact that residents would be allowed to grow four of their own plants for personal use and to a provision in Issue 3 that says if the 10 cultivation centers cannot keep up with demand after four years time, more cultivation licenses will be issued to other companies. (Though any of the original 10 companies also have the right to solicit neighboring landowners to sell them their property, allowing the cultivation centers to expand and better meet demand.)

Yet James has received tremendous pushback—from legalization proponents, many of whom now oppose Issue 3 with the fire-and-brimstone politics typically reserved for their Drug War nemeses. Many advocates in Ohio have openly argued voting against Issue 3, imploring fellow legalizers to wait a year for a more policy-oriented, less profit-minded ballot initiative. To a degree, their opposition is couched in economic policy:
repulsed by the specter of monopoly, many longtime legalization activists say they want low barriers to entry, safeguards for medical patients, looser possession limits and more grow-your-own plants at home. But only part of this typology is economic: many legalizers'
opposition to this form of legalization speaks less to policy then it does to culture—and the tidal shift in a movement increasingly transforming tie-dye into suit and tie.

As a result, many legalization advocates are finding themselves sleeping with the enemy in the prohibitionist camp. Sri Kavuru, president of the marijuana legalization group Ohioans to End Prohibition, is one legalization supporter who has found himself shoulder-to-shoulder with anti-pot groups in the No On Issue 3 campaign, "We know that we're going to be going up against them next year," says Kavuru regarding a ballot initiative his group has drafted for 2016 that would legalize cannabis in Ohio under a free-market system. (While marijuana measures often do better during presidential elections, James believes that this measure won't be able to raise the necessary funds to even collect enough signatures to get it on the ballot.)

Kavuru and his Ohioans to End Prohibition are enjoying support from other groups like The Libertarian Party of Ohio and The Green Party of Ohio (both of whom are typically in favor of legalization) in their fight against Issue 3. "This isn't a proposal to restore rights to Ohioans. It's a crony scheme to line the pockets of a few wealthy investors," Libertarian Party of Ohio Political Director Tricia Sprankle said in a statement. Yet two of the oldest and most powerful marijuana groups in the country, NORML and the Marijuana Policy Project, have both tepidly endorsed Issue 3, with strong qualifications and distancing language from the initiative wording and method of passage.

"The Marijuana Policy Project supports the initiative to the extent that it would end the failed policy of marijuana prohibition and replace it with a system in which marijuana is regulated and taxed," says Mason Tvert, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project and co-author of Colorado's legalization amendment. "Ultimately, marijuana laws are going to vary from state to state just like alcohol laws vary from state to state, and the people in each state decide what those laws should be. So it's going to be up to Ohio voters to decide whether the proposed system is the best step forward for Ohio right now."

"The big national groups that have come out for it, all they're saying is that they're for it but they don't like it," says Kavuru. "These groups have no influence in Ohio, they've never done very much to legalize in Ohio. Most of the advocates in Ohio are against it, and those who are for it have a stake in it passing."

Kavuru claims that medical marijuana group, The Ohio Rights Group, retracted its statements denouncing Issue 3 after it was promised a percentage of one of the future cultivation centers.

"Mr. Kavuru is without question wrong. There is not now, nor was there ever been such a promise made to any board member, from the president on down," says Mary Jane Borden, president of the Ohio Rights Group. As for why she retracted her earlier criticism, Borden says, "We decided to set aside any differences we might have had with ResponsibleOhio and advocate for our real constituency, which are the sick, dying and disabled in Ohio."

"I can't stand with the prohibitionists just to make political points to defeat this so-called monopoly," she continues, criticizing Kavuru for joining forces with groups like The Fraternal Order of Police, Drug-Free Action Alliance, Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association and Dayton Regional Employers Against Marijuana, in the effort to defeat Issue 3.

Kavuru shrugs this off this criticism by saying this is simply "how politics works. Politics makes strange bedfellows, and I'm not certainly not sorry for it."

--
Transnational Institute (TNI)
Drugs & Democracy Programme
De Wittenstraat 25
1052 AK Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: + 31 20 662 66 08
Fax: + 31 20 675 71 76
Email: drugs@tni.org
http://www.druglawreform.info/en/home
http://www.tni.org/work-area/drugs-and-democracy

_______________________________________________
Dd-world mailing list
https://lists.tni.org/mailman/listinfo/dd-world

New Studies Reveal Increase in Incarceration for Drug Offenses in the Americas

| | 0 comments

 

 

CEDD FINAL JPEG FULL


Press Release
November 3, 2015
 

New Studies Reveal Increase in Incarceration for
Drug Offenses in the Americas

 
Mexico City—Today, the Research Consortium on Drugs and the Law (Colectivo de Estudios Drogas y Derecho, CEDD) will release a series of new studies showing that despite the current debate in Latin America on the need to rethink drug policy, mass incarceration for nonviolent drug offenses has increased across the region. The five thematic reports analyze the gap between discourse and reality, the criminalization of consumption, alternatives to incarceration, women imprisoned for drug offenses, and minors imprisoned for drugs in Latin America.
 
"In the majority of the Latin American countries surveyed, one out of every five persons in prison is incarcerated for drug offenses. Moreover, the population incarcerated for drug-related offenses in several of these countries has increased at higher rates than the general prison population," said Alejandro Corda, a CEDD researcher from Argentina. "But this incarceration has no impact on the drug trade because people in prison for drug offenses tend to be low-level traffickers, easily-replaced actors, and persons in vulnerable situations."
 

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REPORTS

 
In Colombia, the number incarcerated on drug-related offenses almost quadrupled in the past 14 years, increasing from 6,263 people in 2000 to 23,141 in 2014. In Brazil, the number increased 320 percent between 2005 and 2012, in contrast to a 51 percent increase for the general prison population.
 
According to the new research, between December 2006 and December 2014, the number of people incarcerated in Mexican federal prisons for drug crimes (delitos contra la salud) increased by 1,200 percent. Meanwhile, 60 percent of inmates in correctional centers in nine Mexican states are imprisoned for offenses related to cannabis.
 
The reports will be released in the House of Representatives of Mexico along with the Drug Policy Program at the Center for Research and Teaching in Economics (Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, CIDE) in a forum entitled People Deprived of Liberty for Drugs in Latin America: The Social Costs of Drug Policy.
 
"Taken together, the data presented show problems such as the feminization of drug crimes, criminalization and stigmatization of young people, and the large social cost implicit in the use of criminal law and incarceration to address the drug problem," said Mexican Congressman Vidal Llerenas.
 
The reports also highlight a worrying increase in the number of women incarcerated for drug offenses. According to the study, in Argentina, 65 percent of female prisoners are in prison for drug offenses. In Costa Rica and Peru, the percentages are 75.46 and 60.6, respectively. The vast majority are single mothers, young and low-income people, and often belong to ethnic minorities.
 
"The reports present evidence that the prison population incarcerated for drug crimes in the Americas has increased at a faster rate than the overall prison population," said Catalina Pérez Correa, Professor at CIDE and CEDD project coordinator. "Long and unfair sentences have had a particularly negative effect on women, whose imprisonment has been growing, and contributes to conditions of vulnerability for their children."
 

###

 
Contact:
Adam Schaffer
Program Officer, WOLA
+1 (202) 797-2171
press@wola.org
 




Click to view this email in a browser

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, please reply to this message with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line or simply click on the following link: Unsubscribe


Washington Office on Latin America
1666 Connecticut Ave., NW
STE 400
Washington, District of Columbia 20009
US

Read the VerticalResponse marketing policy.

Try Email Marketing with VerticalResponse!