back to Chapter Three Contents
What are some examples of effective human rights programming in the area of harm reduction?
Introduction
In this section, you are presented with five examples of effective activities in the area of harm reduction and human rights. These are:
- Mobilizing human rights allies in advocating for harm reduction
- Responding to police brutality against people who use drugs in Vancouver
- Peer-to-peer human rights documentation among IDUs in Thailand
- Challenging illegal policing practices and detention conditions in Russia before the European Court of Human Rights
- Challenging police raids and criminalization of drug use in Hungary.
Rights-based programming
As you review each activity, ask yourself whether it incorporates the five elements of “rights-based”programming:
- Participation
Does the activity include participation by affected communities, civil society, marginalized groups, and others? Is it situated in close proximity to its intended beneficiaries?
- Accountability
Does the activity identify both the entitlements of claim-holders and the obligations of duty-holders? Does it create mechanisms of accountability for violations of rights?
- Non-discrimination
Does the activity identify who is most vulnerable, and how? Does it pay particular attention to the needs of vulnerable groups such as women, minorities, indigenous peoples, and prisoners?
- Empowerment
Does the activity give its beneficiaries the power, capability, capacity, and access to bring about a change in their own lives? Does it place them at the center of the process rather than treating them as objects of charity?
- Linkage to rights
Does the activity define its objectives in terms of legally enforceable rights, with links to international, regional, and national laws? Does it address the full range of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights?
Finally, ask yourself whether the activity might be replicated in your country:
- Does such a project already exist in your country?
- If not, should it be created? If so, does it need to be expanded?
- What steps need to be taken to replicate this project?
- What barriers need to be overcome to ensure its successful replication?
back to top
Example 1: Mobilizing human rights allies in advocating for harm reduction
Beginning in 2003 in collaboration with Human Rights Watch, OSI supported a series of meetings to bring together advocates for harm reduction with human rights organizations to discuss areas of common interest. The meetings led to a number of beneficial joint projects.
Project type
Networking; research and advocacy
Health and human rights issue
Protection of human rights is inherent to harm reduction, yet human rights and harm reduction advocates often do not have the opportunity to engage with one another. This project sought to build capacity of human rights organizations in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union to be allies in the struggle for harm reduction and against HIV and AIDS in the region.
Actions taken
A regional meeting in Budapest provided an initial networking opportunity for selected human rights organizations and harm reduction groups to identify key issues of common concern where human rights advocacy would be particularly fruitful. Through participatory discussions, the groups:
- Identified similarities and differences, issues of mutual interest, and potential for partnerships
- Agreed on a list of common interests and explored models of collaboration
- Identified opportunities for groups from individual countries to exchange ideas informally and reflect on areas of potential collaboration.
Results and lessons learned
- The Budapest meeting was replicated by participants in Russia, Tajikistan, and Ukraine during 2004-2005. A separate capacity-building meeting was held in Kiev in May 2003 with six participating NGOs from Ukraine, Russia and Tajikistan. The meeting also led to grants promoting research and advocacy for harm reduction-related human rights.
- The Moscow Helsinki Group, a leading human rights NGOs, received funds for a study on human rights abuses against people who use drugs in Russia. The Ukrainian Harm Reduction Network received a grant to support a human rights specialist to compile information and conduct international advocacy on human rights for people who use drugs.
- Throughout the meetings, harm reduction organizations examined how to motivate donors and governments to support human rights efforts. Benefits of creating a “common cause” between harm reduction and human rights groups can accrue to both sides, and include building new alliances, mobilizing new sources of funding, and forming productive collaborations. The meetings gave both harm reduction and human rights organizations resources and a common platform upon which to build.
back to top
Example 2: Responding to police brutality against people who use drugs in Vancouver
In Vancouver, Canada, home to the worst HIV epidemic in North America, a small legal organization gathered sworn testimonies from people who use drugs about police brutality, and used these testimonies to advocate for changes in police policy and practice.
Project type
Documentation and advocacy; legal aid
Health and human rights issue
Police abuse has been shown to increase HIV, hepatitis C, and overdose risk among people who use drugs, as it increases the likelihood that they will share or reuse syringes, stay away from needle exchange programs, and inject quickly and in concealed locations. In Vancouver, the municipal government supports needle exchange, methadone, and safer injection facilities. However, abuse of people who use drugs by police threatened to undermine the public health benefits of these programs.
Actions taken
The Pivot Legal Society, a small legal aid organization, undertook a series of actions to document police misconduct against people who use drugs and press for internal and independent investigations.
- Pivot collected over 50 affidavits from people who use drugs about improper use of force or other violations of due process by police. Affidavits are carefully documented statements that are sworn by lawyers to ensure both the veracity and accuracy of the information.
- The affidavits were compiled in a report that was used to advocate for compensation and reform of police practice.
- Following an unsatisfactory internal investigation, Pivot took the case to court and to the Police Complaints Commissioner to call for an independent audit of both the internal investigation and the underlying allegations.
Results and lessons learned
- A combination of documentation, ongoing advocacy, and sometimes litigation is necessary to bring about accountability for police abuse. Detailed recommendations such as improved complaints procedures and monitoring of police conduct are also needed.
- Both internal and independent investigations of police misconduct need to be carefully monitored. This requires time, resources, and expertise.
- Lack of access to complaint procedures and legal assistance is a barrier to justice for those who experience abuse of police authority. By the same token, increased accountability and surveillance of police officers not only benefits people who use drugs and other marginalized groups, but all people who are owed a duty of service and protection by police.
back to top
Example 3: Peer-to-peer human rights documentation among IDUs in Thailand
In May 2002, a collaboration between an HIV-positive former injecting drug user in Thailand and a New York-based human rights advocate fused two areas of expertise to generate human rights documentation that would lead to the formation of Southeast Asia’s only user advocacy group and unprecedented recognition of the health and human rights of people who use drugs in Asia.
Project type
Documentation and advocacy; community organizing.
Health and human rights issue
In Thailand, violence and discrimination against injecting drug users (IDUs) in the criminal justice and health systems have contributed to HIV prevalence of 50% since 1988. The Thai government flouts international standards for HIV prevention and treatment among IDUs, resorting to punitive drug treatment programs and rampant police abuse. IDUs are denied the benefits of Thailand’s HIV response and represent nearly one-third of the country’s new HIV infections.
Actions taken
Paisan Suwannawong, an HIV-positive former injecting drug user, partnered with Karyn Kaplan, HIV/AIDS officer at the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC), to document human rights abuses against IDUs in Central, North and southern Thailand. Specifically, they:
- Interviewed 33 IDUs, officials from the Narcotics Control Board, Attorney General and Ministry of Public Health, as well as drug treatment providers
- On International Human Rights Day (December 10) 2002, reported findings back to IDU and community-based AIDS organizations and conducted a human rights and harm reduction training workshop
- For the first time ever, reported violations of IDUs’ rights to the National Human Rights Commission and the Thai Parliament.
Results and lessons learned
- The project helped form Southeast Asia’s first user advocacy group, the Thai Drug Users’ Network (TDN). TDN and three partners received US$1.3 million from Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria to implement peer-driven HIV-prevention and harm reduction programs across Thailand.
- The project and Global Fund grant dramatically raised the profile of IDUs in Thailand and the region, leading to their unprecedented involvement in national and multilateral policymaking, funding, and program development.
- Additional user-driven human rights documentation projects, most notably during a violent “war on drugs” in 2003, were undertaken with Human Rights Watch and local experts, garnering further national and international awareness and solidarity for drug user issues in Thailand and the region.
back to top
Example 4: Challenging illegal policing practices and detention conditions in Russia before the European Court of Human Rights
In 1999, an epileptic HIV-positive Russian citizen, Mr. Khudobin, was arrested in Moscow for buying one dose of heroin for an undercover agent. A lawyer successfully challenged several aspects of his detention and conditions of confinement before the European Court of Human Rights.
Project type
Litigation
Health and human rights issue
This case raises several health and human rights issues faced by people living with HIV who are detained on drug charges, including: conditions of pre-trial detention; respect of detainee’s health status; and use of illegal policing practices.
Actions taken
Mr. Khudobin was arrested and detained on drug charges in 1999. After losing both his trial and appeal in Russia, he and his lawyer appealed to the European Court of Human Rights on the following grounds:
- That he had not received adequate medical treatment in the remand prison, and that the conditions of his detention were inhuman and degrading. (Despite his attorneys having informed the court of his medical status and requesting an independent medical review on behalf of his father, he remained in remand without a given reason)
- That, having spent more than one year in remand prison and having his detention repeatedly prolonged without reasons, his pre-trial detention exceeded the reasonable time
- That his applications for release were either delayed or not examined; and
- That his conviction was based on the police having illegally entrapped him.
Results and lessons learned
In January 2007, the European Court of Human Rights found that Russian authorities had violated Mr. Khudobin’s rights under articles 3, 5(3), 5(4), and 6(1) of the ECHR. The Court’s decision provides a legal basis for detainees in Russia to challenge the conditions of pre-trial detention based on their medical status. Specifically, the Court found:
- Under article 3, that Khudobin was refused proper medical assistance and denied the possibility of receiving it from other sources, and that his mental and physical suffering constituted degrading treatment.
- Under article 5(3), that Kudobin’s detention of one year and 23 days was not justified by “relevant and sufficient” reasons; and under article 5(4), that the reviews of the applications for release were unduly delayed.
- Under article 6(1), that the trial court should have considered evidence that Mr. Kudobin had been entrapped by the police, especially considering that he did not have a criminal record and the only allegations of his involvement in drug dealing came from the police informant.
Contact
Kseniya Kostromina (lawyer for Mr. Khudobin)
Tel: +749-569-277-63 or +749-591-254-41
back to top
Example 5: Challenging police raids and criminalization of drug use in Hungary
The Hempseed Association, a Hungarian drug reform activist group, and the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, Hungary’s leading drug policy NGO, challenged the police practice of raiding discos and conducting forced urine tests in order to catch people using drugs.
Project type
Strategic litigation and advocacy
Health and human rights issue
In Hungary, police regularly raided discos and forced young club-goers to undergo urine tests. This violated privacy rights and rules of criminal procedure, and potentially forced discos underground, making it more difficult to conduct harm reduction outreach with club-goers.
Actions taken
Led by the Hempseed Association and with legal advice and representation from the HCLU, in the spring of 2005 individuals reported to the National Police Headquarters in Budapest to confess their non-violent drug use. The aim of this “Civil Obedience Movement” was to challenge the practice of forced urine tests and to raise the issue of decriminalization of drug use.
- Every Wednesday for five weeks, “self-reporters” including celebrities appeared at Police Headquarters. The HCLU provided each self-reporter with a legal manual. More than 60 people self-reported in total.
- The action attracted significant media attention and dominated public debate for weeks. Activists expressed their views to the media about the illegal practice of police raids and about decriminalization.
- HCLU made freedom-of-information requests to the Police about the cost of police raids, and used the data to show the raids were not cost-effective.
Results and lessons learned
- The action succeeded in its main goal, which was to obtain a statement from the Police that urine tests could only be conducted someone following initiation of a criminal procedure against them. This effectively made the urine test raids unlawful. The number of police raids seriously decreased, with very few raids occurring in 2006.
- The campaign also succeeded in making decriminalization of drug use a subject of mainstream debate. More than 70 professionals working on the drug field signed a petition supporting the aims of the campaign. Three months after the action, the first-ever draft Bill on decriminalization was introduced in Parliament.
- The campaign showed that good stories and human faces are an important and successful way of achieving media coverage of drug policy campaigns.
