Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament with a view to establishing a common European Union platform for the special session of the UN General Assembly on international cooperation in the fight against drugs
Date: 1998-01-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: UNO, action programme, drug addiction, international cooperation, narcotic

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 08.01.1998 
COM(97) 670  final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 
WITH A VIEW TO ESTABLISHING A COMMON EUROPEAN UNION 
PLATFORM FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE UN GENERAL 
ASSEMBLY ON INTERNATIONAL  COOPERATION 
IN THE FIGHT AGAINST DRUGS 

The  aim  of  this  Communication  is  to  help  prepare  the  EU  position  for  the 
Special  Session  of the UN  General  Assembly  on  international  action to  combat 
drug abuse and illicit drug production and trafficking  (UNGASS). 

The  decision  to  convene  this  Special  Session  for  8-10  June  1998  was  taken  in 
Resolution  51/64  of  the  General  Assembly  at  its  Plenary  meeting  of  12 
December  1996.  This  resolution  also  established  that  the  UN  Commission  on 
Narcotic  Drugs  (CND)  would  act  as  the  preparatory  body  for  the  Special 
Session. 

In  March  1997,  the  CND  established  the  agenda  for  UNGASS,  namely  an 
assessment  of  the  situation,  and  the  establishment  of  principles  for  action  on 
chemical  precursors,  synthetic  drugs,  money  laundering,  demand  reduction, 
judicial  cooperation,  alternative  development ,and strengthening  of the UN  drug 
control  mechanisms.  It  also  decided  on 
the  nature  of,  and  calendar  for,  the 
preparatory meetings to take place. 

Of  the  four  preparatory  meetings  proposed,  two  have  already  taken  place  (in 
July  1997 on chemical  precursors and  synthetic drugs; and  in  October  1997 on 
money  laundering, judicial  cooperation  and demand reduction). A third  meeting 
will  take  place  in  December  1997  on  alternative  development  and  to  prepare 
elements  for  a political  declaration.  The  last preparatory  meeting  is planned  for 
March  1998 to finalise  all the documents to be presented at UNGASS. 

In line with past Commission practice, the objective  of this Communication  is to 
launch discussions with and among Member  States of the European Union, with 
a  view to  establishing  a common  European  platform  for  the  Special  Session  of 
the General Assembly. 

COMMUNICATION  FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 
WITH A  VIEW TO ESTABLISHING  A COMMON EUROPEAN UNION 
PLATFORM  FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION  OF THE UN  GENERAL 
ASSEMBLY  ON INTERNATIONAL  COOPERATION 
IN THE FIGHT AGAINST DRUGS 

I-  THE  INTERNATIONAL  SITUATION:  DRUGS  AS  A  GROWING  AND  COSTLY 
INTERNATIONAL  THREAT 

Drugs  have  become  one  of the  major  threats  to humanity  today.  Individual  and  public  health, 
social  harmony,  public  safety,  political  stability  and  overall  security  are  frequently  threatened 
by  the  production,  trafficking  and  consumption  of  illicit  drugs.  The  huge  size  of  illicit  drug 
profits  dwarfs  the nonetheless  large amounts of national  and international  resources devoted  to 
preventing these illegal activities. 

The  economic  costs  of  drug  abuse  in  OECD  countries,  including  expenditure  on  law 
enforcement,  prevention  programmes  and  health  care  for  drug-related  diseases,  currently 
amount  to  about  $120  billion  per  year.1  The  contrast  with  the  regularly  quoted  estimates  of 
drug  profits  of  between  $300  and  $500  billion2,  shows  the  dimensions  of  the  problem, 
particularly  when it is considered that Africa's  total  GNP is barely above $300 billion and that 
Foreign  Direct  Investment  outflows  throughout  the  world  averaged  $245  billion  per  year  over 
the period  1990-953. 

The  fact  that  the  situation  has  not  become  any  better  since  the  international  community 
formally  addressed  the  issue  in  an  earlier  Special  Session  of  the  UN  General  Assembly 
(UNGASS)  in  1990 shows the need to adapt to a changing  international  environment,  to assess 
the impact of current efforts  and to draw lessons from  the policy experience to date. 

A  number  of  indicators  show  that  in  spite  of  encouraging  signs,  and  notwithstanding  evident 
disparities  among  countries,  global  trends  have  hardly  improved  in  recent  years.  Driven  by 
steady  demand,  production  of  the  major  so-called  natural  drugs  has  continued  to  increase: 
opium  production  increased  by  20%  from  1990  to  1994,  while  coca  leaf  production  tripled 

1 UNDCP, Report on the Economic and Social consequences of drug abuse and  illicit trafficking,  1997 

2  UNDCP, World  Drug Report, Oxford  University  Press,  1997, p. 124 

3  United Nations,  Handbook  of Trade and  Development  Statistics, Tables 6.1  and 5.3 respectively, New  York and 

Geneva  1997 

from  1987 to  19944. At the  same  time, the  production  of  synthetic  drugs,  mostly  in  advanced 
economies, has exploded in the last decade. 

As  regards  consumption  of  illicit  drugs,  two  main  changes  are  particularly  disturbing.  Drug 
consumption  is  no  longer  a  nearly-exclusively  industrialised  countries'  problem,  but  is 
becoming a serious problem in a number of developing countries. At the same time, the marked 
increase in synthetic drug consumption  is also becoming a major  source of concern5. 

The  world  of  drugs  has  thus  become  highly  globalized  and  the  old  distinction  between 
producing  /trafficking  and  consuming  countries  is increasingly  irrelevant.  While  debating  the 
reasons  for  the widespread  character  and  intensity  of these  phenomena  is beyond  the  scope  of 
this  Communication,  no  serious  effort  at  fighting  drugs  can  take  place  without  an  analysis  of 
some of the main forces  at work.  After  all, while drugs have always existed and their abuse has 
often  been  a  source  of  individual  and  family  distress,  it  is only  in recent  years  that  they  have 
become  a  major  health  and  social  problem.  Three  main  factors,  all  significant  for  the 
understanding  of  the  problem  and  the  search  for  effective  solutions,  seem  to  account  for  this 
development. 

Firstly, the huge profits  associated  with drug production  and trafficking  allows the suppliers  to 
take great risks in their efforts  to make drugs available and thus make it worthwhile to  supply 
them.  Indeed,  the  legal prohibition  of illicit drugs raises their black  market  price, thus  making 
such drugs harder to obtain, and therefore  reducing their consumption.  Yet, perversely  enough, 
it  not  only  encourages  the  use  of  more  dangerous  substitutes,  but  also  contributes  to  the 
accumulation of large profits by organised crime. 

Secondly, two  seemingly  opposite  factors  paradoxically  fuel  a seemingly  insatiable  market  for 
illicit  drugs.  One  is  increasing  purchasing  power  resulting  from  rising  incomes.  The  other  is 
increasing  social  and  cultural  marginalization,  in both  industrialised  and  developing  societies. 
In  this  way,  while  the  poorer  groups  are  more  likely  to  fall  into  the  drugs  trap,  the  drugs 
spectrum ends up covering all social classes. 

4  UN  Secretariat,  "Crops  from  which  drugs  are  extracted  and  appropriate  strategies  for  their  reduction", 

E/CN.7/1996/11,  1  March  1996 

5  As regards  illicit  consumption  in  Europe, the  1997  report  from  the  European  Monitoring  Centre  on  Drugs  and 
Drug  Addiction  (EMCDDA)  gives  an  enlightening  picture  of  the  present  trends.  This  is'notwithstanding  the 
difficulty  of  such  an  analysis  which  results  from  both  the  illegal  character  of  drug  abuse  and  the  lack  of 
harmonisation  of  practices  in  data  collection  in  the  EU.  The  main  findings  are  that,  throughout  the  EU, 
cannabis  is the most commonly-used  illegal drug yet this use is commonly  occasional  or intermittent  rather than 
frequent;  that  in  most  countries  amphetamines  are the  second  most-frequently  used  illegal  drug  and  that  since 
the  late  1980s many  countries  are  reporting  that  amphetamines,  ecstasy,  and  in  some  cases  LSD, have  become 
more  popular  among  young  people,  linked  to  a  youth  culture  based  around  discotheques  and  large  "house" 
parties;  that  EU populations  have  less experience  of heroin  (1%) than  of almost  any other drugs though  heroin 
continues to dominate among populations  identified  as having problems related to drug use and remains a  major 
threat  to  public  health  and  public  safety;  that  more  people  have  tried  cocaine  than  heroine  (4%);  that 
combinations  of  drugs,  including  medicines  and  alcohol,  play  a continuing  and  increasingly  important  part  in 
drugs  problems;  that  capital  cities  tend  to have  problem  use  rates  higher than  provincial  cities  and  higher  than 
national  rates;  that  related  health  risks  like AIDS and  Hepatitis C are  serious public  health  risks (there  may  be 
half a million  drug users infected  with  hepatitis C in the European  Union  and that this disease  is 50 to  100 times 
more  infectious  than AIDS). 

Thirdly,  the  continued  improvements  in  means  of  transportation  and  communication  make 
deliveries,  financial  transactions  and  money  laundering  easier  and  cheaper  than  ever.  The 
globalization  of  economic  activities  and  the  Internet  revolution  with  its  drug-manufacturing 
and -using information  availability are just the most recent steps on this ladder. 

II. FACING THE INTERNATIONAL  THREAT 

Both  the  magnitude  of  the  problems  and  the  interdependencies  associated  with  it  require  that 
national  efforts  be supported  by international  cooperation.  Furthermore, as supply  and  demand 
reduction  mutually  reinforce  each other,  societies  must  act  simultaneously  on the  demand  and 
on the  supply  sides, the  latter  including  production  and  trafficking  of  illicit  drugs  and  money 
laundering.  On  both  grounds,  the  principle  of  shared  international  responsibility  must  preside 
over all efforts  to address the issue of drug control if there is to be any serious hope of success. 

In this regard, higher priority must be attached to five lines of approach: 

• 

integration  of  drug  control  components  into  mainstream  policies  such  as  health, 
education and research; 

•  promotion  of  sustainable  development  in the  broadest  sense,  as  drug  production  and 
trafficking 
is  a  consequence  of  differences  in  relative  profitability  of  economic 
activities  and  often  results  from  the  absence  of  opportunities  for  lawful  sources  of 
employment and income; 

•  focusing  drug  control  based  on the  strategic  viewpoint  that  consumption  of  the  most 
dangerous  drugs  results  not  only  from  individuals'  choices  but  also  from  social 
conditions that marginalise certain groups in society; 

•  encouragement  of  primary  prevention,  treatment  and  rehabilitation  through,  among 
other things, preventive education, research on the immediate and long-term effects  on 
human health, and information  on drugs as a source of psychiatric disorders; 

•  strengthening  of law enforcement  through judicial/police/customs  action on  producers 
and traffickers  and  on  money  laundering,  so as to  narrow  expected  profit  margins  of 
drug suppliers and thus reduce the opportunities for their enrichment. 

To ensure the impact on the world-wide  drug situation of these lines of approach,  coordination 
at  the  international  level  as  well  as  a  common  understanding  of  the  issues  at  stake  and  the 
measures to be taken  is needed. This is where the UN system can be at its most effective  since 
its  global  membership  and  Convention-making  capacities  mean  that  it  is  particularly  well-
placed for the task of addressing cross-frontier  problems. 

Indeed,  it  is  within  the  framework  of  the  UN  institutions  that  a  body  of  legally-binding 
instruments has been  developed.  It is also  in this  framework  that  an international  convergence 
has taken place as regards both the importance of the problem  and the broad  strategy  to  follow 
for  drug-fighting.  This  is  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  there  are  significant  disagreements 
among countries on the relative weight to be given to the various facets  of the problem  and thus 
on the priorities and methods for  implementing specific policies. 

III. THE UNION'S  BROAD OBJECTIVES FOR UNGASS 

Illicit  drugs  have  important  implications  for  the  stability,  security  and  well-being  of  the 
countries  and  citizens  of  the  Union  and  of  the  world.  To  the  extent  that  the  preservation  of 
these  is  an  objective  in  the  UN  Charter,  as  well  as  in  the  Treaty  on  European  Union,  the 
Community  and  its  Member  States  have  a  major  responsibility  in  ensuring  the  success  of 
UNGASS.  Both  our  citizens  and  our  international  partners  expect  us  to  exercise  this 
responsibility.  The  endorsement  by  the  1995  Cannes  and  Madrid,  and  1996  Dublin  European 
Councils of the  1990-1995 EU Action Plan to fight drugs provides political  legitimacy to those 
expectations. 

However,  as  in  any  other  major  international  conference,  a  balance  must  be  struck  between 
forward-looking  wishes  and  pragmatic  expectations.  Indeed,  the  European  Union  has  to  be 
realistic  about  what  can  be achieved  in this  session,  as it cannot  expect  (even  though  it  might 
wish)  that,  in  the  immediate  future,  all  countries  will  adopt  and  implement  the  far-reaching 
legislation  and measures its Members apply. Yet, at the same time, the Union must be  forceful 
in encouraging  the  international  community  to  examine  current  efforts,  to address  new  threats 
and to put shared responsibility  at the centre of the international fight against drugs. 

Three major  objectives  must  determine  the Union's  efforts  towards  a successful  conclusion  of 
UNGASS: 

• 

• 

the  practical 

the  consolidation  and 
the  principle  of  co-
responsibility,  in accordance  with the UN  Resolution  which  launched  UNGASS6 and 
with  the  1995  EU-Rio  Group  Declaration  of  Cochabamba  which,  for  the  first  time, 
made this principle explicit in EU external relations; 

implementation  of 

the  provision  of  political  impetus  throughout  the  UN  Member  States,  so  that  drug-
fighting  is  at  the  top  of  the  international  agenda  and  an  integral  part  of  mainstream 
policies; 

• 

the  achievement  of policy  advances  in areas  on which  the  Union  has already  defined 
its interest and has exhibited a degree of consensus. 

The latter applies in particular to reaching agreement  on a Declaration  on the prevention  of the 
abuse  of  illicit  drugs  ("Guiding  principles  of drug  demand  reduction"), which  will  be  a  major 
innovation as compared with the UN conventions, which address this question only  marginally. 
It is also the case as regards the new threats posed  by synthetic drugs. There  is a need  to  spell 
out the  implications  of  international  co-responsibility.  Likewise, it is in the Union's  interest  to 
encourage  advances  in  areas  of  Community  competence,  particularly  as  regards  money 
laundering  and  chemical  precursor  control. As regards the  former,  it is important  to push  for  a 
general  acceptance  of  the  FATF  forty  recommendations  and  for  stronger  action  on  financial 
safe-havens.  Precursor  control,  on the  other  hand,  has  important  implications  for  trade  policy. 
Finally,  there  is  a need  to  foster  the  role  of the  UN  institutions  in the  fight  against  drugs  and 
encourage the universal ratification  of UN instruments. 

6  International  action  to  combat  drug  abuse  and  illicit  production  and  trafficking.  Resolution  55/64  of  December 

1996. 

This Special  Session of the UN takes place as part of a series of UN Conferences  and  Summits 
(Rio,  Vienna,  Cairo,  Beijing,  Copenhagen)  the  aim  of  which  is  the  promotion  of  people-
centred  sustainable development. The way the drug issue is tackled must be in conformity  with 
the commitments  entered  into by the international  community  in this framework,  especially  as 
regards the full  respect for human rights and fundamental  freedoms. 

IV. THE UNION'S  SPECIFIC PRIORITIES FOR UNGASS 

In  parallel  with  the  preparatory  process  in  UN  bodies, the  Union  is  both  bound  and  eager  to 
discuss UNGASS at bilateral and regional meetings (including the San Jose and EU-Rio Group 
ministerials,  EU-ASEAN  and  EU-ACP  dialogues,  etc.)  in  the  early  part  of  1998.  It  is,  thus, 
particularly  important  that the Union establishes a common  set of priorities  on the main  issues 
to be addressed at UNGASS. 

In  March  1997,  at  the  time  the  CND  set  up  the  agenda  for  the  preparatory  process  for 
UNGASS, a number of topics were singled out for debate during this process. In chronological 
order these were: chemical precursors, synthetic drugs, judicial  cooperation, money  laundering, 
alternative development, demand reduction. 

The Union's contributions regarding these and other related topics should focus on: 

A. Demand  reduction 

1.  Emphasis on demand reduction as a critical instrument in any drug-fighting  strategy. 

2.  A  strong  accent  on  the  relationship  between  demand  reduction  and  social  integration  and 
cohesion.  In  particular,  there  is  a  the  need  to  build  on  policies  which  allow  all  people  to 
participate  fully  in  society  and  which  promote  human  values  which  include,  for  a  great 
many, a spiritual aspiration.  Fighting against drugs calls for an effective  priority  to be given 
to  job  creation,  especially  for  young  people,  more  inclusive  social  protection  systems, 
supportive public services, and a social environment that strengthens family  structures. 

3.  Recognition  that  drug  demand  reduction  covers  all  areas  of  prevention,  from  discouraging 
initial  use  to  reducing  the  negative  health  and  social  consequences  of  drug  abuse.  Thus,  it 
encompasses  information,  education,  public  awareness,  early  intervention,  counselling, 
treatment, rehabilitation, relapse prevention, aftercare  and social-réintégration. 

4.  Support  for  research  on  the  biological,  medical  and  socio-economic  aspects  of  drug 

addiction and on the impact of drug abuse on human health and life  expectancy. 

5.  Importance  of fostering  both the  integration  of drug  concerns  into  mainstream  policies  and 
coordination  among  the  different  policies  and  programmes  which  have  an  impact  on  drug 
demand  reduction  (most  notably  research,  education  and  training,  health  and  legal 
measures),  and  of  supporting  demand  reduction  activities  through  adequate  means  of 
assessment and  evaluation. 

6.  Need  to  stimulate  exchanges  of experience  and  information  - taking  due  account  of  cultural 
background  and  specificity  - on the best health  and  social  initiatives.  Particularly  important 

in this regard  are those based on community  partnership, society  involvement  and actions in 
respect of vulnerable groups such as young people, drug abusers and former  drug abusers. 

7.  Need  to  redefine  national  health  policies,  in  developing  countries  in  particular,  so  as  to 

integrate demand reduction aspects of drugs control into existing health programmes. 

B. Synthetic drugs 

1.  Acknowledgement  that,  compared  with  other  types  of  drugs  and  psychotropic  substances, 
the emergence and development  of new synthetic drugs has become an acute problem  in the 
world  and  poses  special  challenges:  they  are  easy  to  produce,  their  chemical  structures 
change frequently  and many types of precursors can be used for making them. 

2.  Recognition that the social perception of the so-called "designer drugs" has been very  'soft', 
and  thus  not  commensurate  with  their  risks  and  the  ease  with  which  these  drugs  can  be 
manufactured. 

3.  Emphasis  on the need  to obtain  accurate  information  regarding  the  issue  of  synthetic  drugs 
and  thus  to  initiate  research,  increase  knowledge  and  collect  relevant  data  on  the  health 
effects  of,  as well as on the social, economic and cultural factors  behind, the consumption of 
amphetamine-type  stimulants (ATS) and to exchange and disseminate this information.  The 
example of the European Union work in this regard7 can be used in support of this proposal. 

4.  Recognition  of the  need to  strengthen  the  control  system  for  new  synthetic  drugs  and  their 
precursors. The joint action adopted by the Council on  16 June  1997 concerning  information 
exchange,  risk  assessment  and  the  control  of  new  synthetic  drugs  to  provide  the  basis  for 
bringing under control new synthetic drugs can be offered  as an example for addressing  this 
need.  Likewise,  the  more  flexible  scheduling  mechanisms  for  psychotropic  substances 
(emergency  list,  analogues,  generic  approach)  under  examination  in  some  EU  Member 
States, can also be referred to. 

5.  As regards prevention  campaigns, emphasis on appropriate  action targeted  at young  people, 
in  line  with  efforts  by  the  Community  Action  Programme  on  the  Prevention  of  Drug 
Dependence. 

6.  In  the  light  of  the  above,  endorsement  of  the  draft  Action  Plan  against  the  manufacture, 
trafficking  and abuse of ATS, proposed at July's CND preparatory  meeting for UNGASS. 

7  More particularly, the  information  provided  by both the EMCDDA  and the  Europol  Drugs Unit (EDU) on the 
levels  of  consumption  of,  and  trafficking  in,  synthetic  drugs.  Equally  significant  are the  transnational  pilot 
projects  supported  by  the  European  Community  and  aimed  at  building  up  a  system  to  recognise  trends  in 
consumption  among  the  young,  to assess  prevalence  of  drug  use  in  particular  settings  such  as  techno-scenes 
and  to  develop  transnational  exchange  of  data.  Finally,  research  priorities  regarding  the  particular  dangers 
posed  by  synthetic  drugs  have  been  identified  by  the  Community  in  three  areas:  medical,  pharmacological 
and toxicological; psychological  and sociological; and epidemiological  and  monitoring. 

C. Alternative  development 

1.  Reaffirmation  of  alternative  development  as  a  move  from  a  production  system  based  on 
illicit  cultivation  towards  a  licit  one,  taking  into  account  not  only  its  economic  dimension 
but, more broadly, the overall living conditions of the affected  populations. 

2.  Recognition  that  alternative  development  is  primarily  the  responsibility  of  the  countries 
where  production  of illicit  drugs takes place. Alternative  development  should  be  supported 
by international cooperation, as long as there are guarantees that the programmes will ensure 
the definitive  abandonment of illicit cultivation. 

3.  Recognition that alternative development  is not conceivable without a case-by-case  dialogue 
among  the potential  populations  affected,  the public  authorities  and,  possibly,  international 
donors. This dialogue should be on choices regarding new alternative sources of income and 
employment,  and  on  calendars  for  shifting  economic  activities  from 
illicit  to  licit 
productions, all of which implies the recognition of de-ceQtralised structures and  democratic 
participation. 

4.  Need  for  an  efficient  and  credible  monitoring  and  verification  mechanism,  based  on 
commonly  agreed  goals  and  objectives  to  guarantee  the  sustainability  of  eradication.  This 
system needs not only the support of the country's administration,  but also the  involvement 
of affected  populations through their representative institutions. 

D. Chemical  precursors 

1.  Recognition that a solely law-enforcement  approach has its limits: precursor diversion is the 
exception  to  licit  trade  transactions;  so  efforts  to  counter  diversion  have  to  take  into  due 
consideration  the  legitimate  needs  of  licit  trade.  Therefore,  co-operation  with  industry  is 
essential. 

2.  Acceptance  that  the  most  effective  way  to  tackle  precursors  diversion  is  by  targeting  the 
international  precursors  control  mechanism  towards  a  specific  and  limited  number  of 
chemicals under a system consistent with the nature and trade patterns of each product. 

3.  Recognition that precursor diversion is a three-way problem, with a shared responsibility  for 
importers,  transit  countries  and  exporters.  Therefore,  it  is  important  to  ensure  that  the 
appropriate  means  are  put  in  place  to  curb  diversion  at  a  global  level:  countries,  notably 
importing and transit  States, should identify  and provide regular up-dates to their partners on 
their  focal  points  for  sending  and  receiving  of  information  on  precursor  consignments; 
importing  countries  should  provide timely  feed-back  on pre-export  notifications.  Whenever 
a consignment  is suspected of being diverted, timely information  should be distributed to the 
relevant  administrative  bodies  within  the  affected  countries  so  that  action  is  taken  in  good 
time. 

4.  Bilateral  agreements  with  third  countries  are  to  be  encouraged  as  they  contribute  to  a 
widespread  information-sharing  in  the  combat  against  precursors  diversion  and  can  be  a 
useful  tool  for  maintaining,  enhancing  and  extending  the  precursors  control  system.  These 
agreements,  when  they  are  part  of  a  regional  approach,  can  take  account  of  the  cross-
boundary  nature of precursors'diversion. 

5.  In the light of the above, support  for the draft  Plan of Action for  Precursors presented  at the 
CND  preparatory  meeting  of  July  1997,  as  long  as  it  ensures  that  its  envisaged  control 
system is practicable and that data protection is ensured when sharing sensitive  information. 

6.  As  to  precursors  for  new  synthetic  drugs,  inappropriateness  of  establishing  a  control 
mechanism  similar  to  that  imposed  on  the  22  scheduled  substances  in  the  1988  Vienna 
Convention  as  these  precursors  have  a  rapidly  evolving  nature.  Therefore,  expanding  the 
number  of substances  could  only  result  in weakening  the  global  efficiency  of the  precursor 
control system while hampering the co-operation between operators and the authorities. 

7.  Reference  to  the  establishment  of  "special  surveillance  lists" for  non-scheduled  precursors 
used  in  the  manufacturing  of  synthetic  drugs  provided  those  lists  reflect  the  contracting 
parties' national  and regional needs, the evolving nature of any such surveillance  list and the 
principle of co-operation with industry and trade. 

E. Money  laundering 

1.  Recognition  that huge profits  are the driving force  of the international  drugs trade. The vast 
sums  generated  are  used  to  develop  and  facilitate  the  drugs  trade,  finance  other  criminal 
activities and, once laundered, they are also invested  in physical  and financial  assets, in real 
estate and in other legitimate businesses. 

2.  Acceptance that, contrary to the frequent  perception that financial  inflows  into a country  are 
always  desirable  and  beneficial,  dirty  money  ultimately  undermines  the  social, judicial  and 
political  stability  of vulnerable countries. It also has dangerous macro-economic  effects  and 
can undermine and destroy confidence  in the legitimate financial  sector. 

3.  Recognition  that  the  prevention  of  money  laundering,  the  prosecution  and  conviction  of 
money  launderers, and the pursuit and confiscation  of criminal  money  form  an integral  part 
of the effort  to combat drugs. 

4.  Wider  acceptance  that,  as  reflected  at  UN  level  in  the  link-up  between  UNDCP  and  the 
Division for  Crime Prevention  and Criminal Justice, it is no longer sufficient  to target  solely 
the  laundering  of  drugs  money.  The  criminalisation  of  money  laundering  pre-supposes  an 
underlying  criminal  offence.  The  wider  the  range  of  sanctions,  the  easier  it  is  to  pursue 
criminal money and establish the necessary international cooperation. 

5.  Call  for  determined  action  against  all  forms  of  financial  or  corporate  safe-havens  for  illicit 

funds. 

6.  Affirmation  that  the  best  vehicle  for  a  comprehensive  and  effective  international  effort 
against  money  laundering  remains  the  Financial  Action  Task  Force  (FATF),  and  that  the 
international  standard to be followed  is the FATF's 40 Recommendations. 

F. Corruption 

1.  Recognition  that  corruption  is  intrinsically  linked  with  illicit  drug  trafficking  and  other 
forms  of organized  crime. To conduct their criminal trade, to escape punishment,  to conceal 

' 

10 

their  activities,  to  exert  influence  and  to  launder  illicit  profits,  traffickers  have  recourse  to 
corruption. 

2.  Completion  of currently discussed  international  legal instruments dealing with criminal  law, 
namely  the  OECD  draft  convention  on  combating  bribery  of  foreign  public  officials  in 
international  business  transactions,  and  the  Council  of  Europe  draft  convention  on 
corruption. 

3.  Raising  of  public  awareness  and  promotion  of  public  ethics,  as  well  as  calling  for  the 
provision of appropriate working  and living conditions which protect vulnerable  professions 
and targeted positions. 

4.  Maintenance  of  a  regulatory  environment  which  guarantees  as  much  transparency  as  is 

consistent with the need to achieve  effectiveness. 

G. Judicial  cooperation 

1.  Emphasis  on the  ratification,  where  appropriate,  of  multilateral  conventions  for  extradition 

and mutual assistance. 

2.  Encouragement  of bilateral treaties on extradition and mutual assistance, taking into account 

the guidelines set up in UN model treaties. 

3.  As  regards  the  answer  to  international  mutual  assistance  requests  dealing  with  serious 
crimes, need to attach a priority to them equivalent to that granted to national proceedings. 

4.  Setting  up  of  suitable  mechanisms  for  exchanging  information  and  facilitating  contacts 

among judicial authorities. 

5.  Support of exchange and training programs for magistrates and officials  associated  with the 

justice  system. 

H. Strengthening  of UN bodies for drugs control. 

1.  Ensuring that the issue of UN reform  in the drugs field remains  on UNGASS'  final  agenda. 
This  follows  not  only  from  the  EU's  strong  commitment  to  overall  UN  reform,  but  also 
from  the  need  to  provide  credibility  for  the  entire  UNGASS  exercise  which  would  be  put 
into  question  if UN  Members  decided  on  new  actions without  providing  the  structurés  and 
means to implement them  effectively. 

2.  Recognition  of the need  to  improve  the current  structure  and  functioning  of the  UN  bodies 
involved  in  drugs  control.  Acknowledgement  that  the  Secretary  General's  UN  reform 
proposals regarding the drugs field, even if implemented,8 do not address three current main 

8  Only two proposals  of the  UN  Secretary  General's  comprehensive  UN  reform  package  concern  directly  the UN 
institutions  dealing  with  drugs.  One  is the creation  of a common  managerial  structure  for  the  UNDCP  and  the 
Division  for  Crime  Prevention  and  Criminal  Justice.  The  other  foresees  the  merger  of  the  CND  with  the 
Commission  on  Crime  Prevention  and  Criminal  Justice.  The  first  proposal  has  been  dealt  with  in  General 

11 

shortcomings:  these  are  the  functioning  of  the  CND  and  the  governance  and  financing  of 
UNDCP.9 

3.  Call  for  improvement  in  the  agenda-setting  process  for  CND  and  in  the  Secretariat's 
preparatory  work  for  CND's  meetings.  The  Secretariat's  preparation  should  involve  all  the 
relevant  UN  bodies,  including  specialised  agencies,  Bretton  Woods  institutions  and,  where 
appropriate,  civil  society.  It  should  also  aim  at  facilitating  the  adoption  of  action-oriented 
recommendations to the UN bodies and to the Members of the UN. Call for  improvement of 
the substance of the debates in CND and for systematic follow up to CND resolutions. 

4.  Need  to  support  the  International  Narcotics  Control  Board  (INCB)  in  its  capacity  as  an 
expert  body  for  the  practical  implementation  of  the  UN  drug  conventions,  for  analysing 
trafficking  trends  and  for  drawing  up  recommendations  for  the  consideration  of  Member 
States in CND. 

5.  Recognition that CND's  strength  lies in its normative role rather than in its present  function 
as the governing  body of UNDCP.  Call  for  a more efficient  governing  structure that would 
promote  dialogue  between developing  and  developed  countries  and which  would  be  in  line 
with  the  existing  governance  structures  of  other  UN  funds  and  programmes.  The  new 
governing  structure  should  consist  of  the  present  Major  Donors  and  representatives  from 
developing  countries/regions. 

6.  Call  for  improvement  in  the  financing  of  UNDCP  activities  so  that  more  funds  are  made 
available  for  core  tasks, thus  reducing  the  current  concentration  on voluntary  contributions 
for  UNDCP's  operational  activities.  One of  UNGASS'  objectives  should  be  to  devise  new 
funding  approaches reflecting  the principle of partnership, shared responsibility  and capacity 
to  pay, which  would  guarantee  sufficient  and  predictable  resources to  finance  the  activities 
that UNDCP is expected to carry out. 

V.  CONCLUSIONS 

Considerable efforts  have been undertaken in the last two decades to address the drugs problem 
at the  international  level. The  recognition  of the  importance  of both  demand  reduction  and  of 
the threats  posed  by  the  new  synthetic  drugs  are two  cases  in point.  Yet,  much  remains  to  be 
done. 

What  is  most  needed  is  to  ensure  the  recognition  of  drugs  as  a  global  concern,  the  fight  on 
which  must  be  based  on  the  principle  of  shared  responsibility  among  producing,  consuming 
and trafficking  countries. 

Assembly  Resolution  A/RES/52/11  and  has  already  been  implemented.  Whether  the  second  proposal  will  be 
eventually  approved  by Member States  is not certain. 

9  The problem  of the functioning  of the CND (or the new Commission  still to be created  ) is not addressed  in the 
Secretary  General's  reform  package.  Likewise, the problem  of UNDCP governance  is not tackled  at all. Finally, 
UNDCP  financing  is not  addressed  as  such  but  some  recommendations  in  the  package,  particularly  as  regards 
financing  of development  assistance could be of interest for the UNDCP. 

12 

Further,  the  drugs  issue  must  be  accepted  as a cross-cutting  issue  in  all  international  debates, 
whether  the  focus  is on  sustainable  development  or on security  issues. In this context,  priority 
should  be  given  to  schemes  designed  to  foster  cooperation  and  encourage  response  from  host 
countries, rather than those which imply unilateral actions. 

The  reduction  in  both  demand  for,  and  supply  of,  illicit  drugs  requires  societal  and  policy 
changes to ensure income and employment  growth and, frequently,  a more equitable  sharing in 
the  fruits  of  development.  The  lack  of  sufficient  progress  in  the  fight  against  poverty,  and 
towards  more job  opportunities  and  fairer  social  conditions,  which  was  urged  by  the  Social 
Development  Summit,  help create environments  which  are conducive  to drug  abuse as well  as 
to the cultivation of,  and trafficking  in, illicit drugs. As, in spite of the efficiency  gains brought 
about by globalization  and by economic  growth, social conditions seem to worsen in a number 
of countries and social groups, governments must ensure that options and choices remain open 
to  disadvantaged  groups.  UNGASS  provides  a  unique  opportunity  for  raising  the  stakes  and 
bringing  producing,  consuming  and  trafficking  countries  to  face  these  complex  common 
challenges. 

As  a  conclusion  to  the  present  Communication,  the  Commission  therefore  requests  the 
Council: 

a)  to take note of the present Communication  and use it as its common platform  for  statements 

by the Community and its Member States during the Special  Session; 

b)  to take note that the Commission  will present at UNGASS, on behalf of the Community,  its 

agreed positions on chemical precursors; 

c)  to  authorise  the  Commission  to  endorse, on behalf  of the  Community,  in the  framework  of 
its  competences  and  after  coordination  with  Member  States,  any  political  declaration  or 
commitments  which would  be adopted  at the  Special  Session  and which  are  in c  onformity 
with the principles, objectives and priorities laid out in this  Communication; 

d)  to note that the Commission will to this end closely consult with the Member States. 

13 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(97) 670  final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

05  11  10 

Catalogue  number  :  CB-CO-97-688-EN-C 

ISBN  92-78-28731-8 

Office  for Official  Publications of the European Communities 

L-2985 Luxembourg