Support all your favorite nonprofits with a single donation.Donate safely, anonymously & monthly, in any amount. It's a smarter way to give online. Learn more
The Drug Policy Alliance Network (DPA Network) is the nation’s leading organization promoting policy alternatives to the drug war that are grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights.
Our supporters are individuals who believe the war on drugs is doing more harm than good. Together we advance policies that reduce the harms of both drug misuse and drug prohibition, and seek solutions that promote safety while upholding the sovereignty of individuals over their own minds and bodies. We work to ensure that our nation’s drug policies no longer arrest, incarcerate, disenfranchise and otherwise harm millions of nonviolent people. Our work inevitably requires us to address the disproportionate impact of the drug war on people of color.
Today, Drug Policy Action released its 2016 Congressional Voter Guide which grades members of Congress on how they voted on seven key drug policy reform votes in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2015 and 2016 (there were no drug policy votes on the Senate floor that could be scored).
A record number of U.S. House Representatives earned a perfect score (“A” grade) – more than double the number of Representatives who earned a perfect score from Drug Policy Action in 2014. More than half of all U.S. Representatives (177 Democrats and 64 Republicans) earned a “C” or better.
This surge in support for drug policy reform provides further confirmation of a major political shift underway in Congress toward favoring letting states set their own marijuana policies, as well as drug policy reform more broadly. Meanwhile, support for punitive, hardline drug policies is waning. In 2014, the year that saw the U.S. House of Representatives vote in favor of major marijuana law reform for the first time, 49 Representatives earned a perfect score from Drug Policy Action, compared to 110 in 2016. In contrast, Drug Policy Action’s 2008 voter guide could not name a single Representative who voted in favor of reform every time. The guide is designed not just to educate voters on which members of the U.S. House of Representatives support drug policy reform – but also to send a firm message to elected officials that they will be held accountable for supporting draconian policies that exacerbate the worst harms of the drug war.
“Voters have signaled time and again that they want new drug policies grounded in health and science, and elected officials in Congress are finally paying attention,” said Grant Smith, deputy director of national affairs with Drug Policy Action. “We’ve reached the remarkable point where more than half of Representatives in Congress are consistently responding to public opinion and voting in favor of letting states set their own drug policies, yet nearly half of Congress is still ignoring public opinion in favor of drug policy reform. It’s up to voters to let these Representatives know how they feel about their record on these issues,” said Smith.
Some highlights from the 2016 Congressional Voter Guide include:
- 110 Representatives – a quarter of the U.S. House of Representatives – have earned the perfect score of an A, which is more than double the number of U.S. House Representatives (49) that earned a perfect score two years ago in Drug Policy Action’s 2014 voter guide.
- 241 Representatives (more than 55 percent of the entire U.S. House) earned a C or better in this year’s voter guide. 177 Democrats joined 64 Republicans in supporting at least 50 percent of the floor votes profiled in this guide. This is consistent with results from Drug Policy Action’s 2014 voter guide.
- Drug Policy Action’s 2016 Champions are Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR/3), Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR/1), Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN/9), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI/13), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA/20), Rep. Joe Heck (R-NV/3), Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY/8), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA/13), Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA/33), Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY/4), Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA/4), Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO/7), Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO/2) and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA/48).
- Drug Policy Action’s 2016 Drug War Extremists are Rep. John Fleming (R-LA/4), Rep. William Keating (D-MA/9), Rep. Joseph Kennedy (D-MA/4), Rep. Joseph Pitts (R-PA/16), Rep. Harold Rogers (R-KY/5) and Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX/32).
The 2016 Drug Policy Action Congressional Voter Guide scored seven votes:
- A bipartisan amendment passed by the House for a second time by a margin of 242-186 and spearheaded by Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher that barred the U.S. Justice Department from spending any funding to undermine state medical marijuana laws. Congressman Rohrabacher’s amendment passed in the last Congress on a 219-189 vote.
- The 114th Congress also saw the first ever vote on completely ending federal marijuana prohibition. An amendment led by Republican Congressman Tom McClintock would have barred the U.S. Justice Department from spending any federal funding to undermine the implementation of state medical and non-medical marijuana laws. The vote on the amendment was surprisingly close, losing by a vote of 206 – 222, and came just months after two states had voted in 2014 to legalize marijuana like alcohol, as had Washington, D.C. residents to legalize possession and cultivation of personal amounts of marijuana.
- An amendment led by Democrat Congressman Earl Blumenauer to allow doctors that work for the Veterans Administration to discuss medical marijuana with veteran patients and recommend its use in states where it is legal narrowly failed by a margin of 210-213 when offered in 2015 but passed this year by a margin of 233-189.
- The House voted on two amendments protecting state-legal hemp cultivation. An amendment led by Democrat Representative Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) barred the U.S. Justice Department from spending any federal funds to undermine state laws that allow hemp cultivation and passed by a margin of 282-146. In the last Congress, the same amendment passed 237-170. Republican Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) also offered an amendment to prevent the U.S. Justice Department from using federal funds to block implementation of a federal provision that legalized hemp cultivation for academic and agricultural research purposes in states that allow it. The Massie Amendment passed on a 289-132 vote. In the last Congress, the same amendment passed 246-162.
- The House also voted on a measure that adds 22 novel psychoactive drug compounds to Schedule I of the federal Controlled Substances Act. The bill was authored and passed in response to media hysteria surrounding novel psychoactive compounds commonly known as “K2,” “Spice” and “synthetic drugs.” The bill passed 258 to 101, although more than 70 Representatives missed this vote (Drug Policy Action did not penalize Representatives for missing votes).
“This scorecard tell us that there is a bipartisan movement in Congress to end the drug war,” said Michael Collins, deputy director of national affairs with Drug Policy Action. “Not everyone is there yet, and some wish to stand on the wrong side of history, but the days when devastating drug war policies dominate the legislative agenda are over,” said Collins.
Today’s release of the 2016 Drug Policy Action Congressional Voter Guide comes just two weeks before voters weigh in on marijuana legalization initiatives in California, Massachusetts, Arizona, Nevada and Maine, as well as medical marijuana initiatives in Florida, Arkansas, Montana and North Dakota. Drug Policy Action worked closely with local and national allies to draft each of this year’s initiatives, build coalitions, and raise funds.
A new report released on October 13th by the Drug Policy Alliance brings good news for the states considering legalization and the broader marijuana legalization movement. Since the adult possession of marijuana became legal, Colorado, Washington, Alaska and Oregon have benefitted from a dramatic decrease in marijuana arrests and convictions, as well as increased tax revenues. During the same period, these states did not experience increases in youth marijuana use or traffic fatalities.
A newly released nationwide Gallup poll found that a record 60 percent of respondents support legalizing marijuana. In 2012, Colorado and Washington became the first two U.S. states – and the first two jurisdictions in the world – to approve ending marijuana prohibition and legally regulating marijuana production, distribution and sales. In the 2014 election, Alaska and Oregon followed suit, while Washington D.C. passed a more limited measure that legalized possession and home cultivation of marijuana (but did not address its taxation and sale due to a federal law passed by Congress in 2014 that bars D.C. from pursuing taxation and regulation).
Drug Policy Action is the c(4) political arm of the Drug Policy Alliance, the nation’s leading organization working to end the war on drugs and promote drug policies grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights.Author:
Date Published: October 25, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Action
On Monday, October 24, from 12-1pm ET, TheRoot.com will host a Facebook Live discussion on marijuana legalization, mass incarceration and women featuring Piper Kerman, author of the memoir Orange is the New Black: My Year in a Women’s Prison; Deborah Small, Johns Hopkins Public Health Fellow and drug policy reform thought leader; and the Drug Policy Alliance’s asha bandele.
Women are one of the fastest-growing segments of the prison population. Between 1980 and 2010, the number of women in state and federal prisons grew by 646%. An estimated 61 percent of women in state prison and 56 percent of women in federal prison are mothers of minor children. Two-thirds of these parents are incarcerated for non-violent offenses, a substantial proportion of which are drug law violations.
Monday’s discussion will have an important focus on California’s Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, which is designed to allow the responsible use of marijuana by adults and establish a strict regulatory system to facilitate the transition to a legal market.
Proposition 64 also contains important sentencing reforms that eliminate or reduce most adult use and cultivation marijuana offenses. It ends the wasteful of expenditure of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year in California on the arrest, prosecution and incarceration of nonviolent, marijuana-only offenses. It also reduces barriers to entry to the legal market, and drives hundreds of millions of dollars in investments to low-income communities that have been most negatively impacted by the drug war.
What: TheRoot.com Facebook live Discussion on Marijuana Legalization, Mass Incarceration and Women
- Piper Kerman, author of Orange is the New Black: My Year in a Women’s Prison
- Deborah Peterson Small, Founder, Break the Chains: Communities of Color and the War on Drugs
- asha bandele, Senior Director, Drug Policy Alliance
When: Monday, October 24, 12-1pm ET
How: Tune in Live at 12pm ET on TheRoot.com’s Facebook pageAuthor:
Date Published: October 21, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Alliance
Nearly 100 groups working on criminal justice reform, including NAACP, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, and the Drug Policy Alliance today sent a letter to Representative Tom Reed (D-NY), opposing H.R. 6158, the HELP Act of 2016. The letter notes that “H.R. 6158 would also exacerbate the opioid epidemic our country is currently undergoing. The bill is out of step with the times, science, data, and public opinion and doubles down on 30 years of ineffective drug policy, and we ask that it be revised.” The proposal would mean that individuals caught selling certain quantities of fentanyl or fentanyl-laced heroin would receive the death penalty or life without parole, if the sale is linked to an overdose fatality.
“The Congressman would be better served by introducing progressive bills that are based in harm reduction rather than expounding on drug war tactics with more punitive action,” said Robert Tolbert, board member with VOCAL New York.
The bill is particularly disappointing given the U.S. Congress’s embrace of treatment over incarceration, as embodied by this year’s passage of CARA, and the bipartisan support for reducing sentences for drug offenses.
“The 1980s called and wants its bill back,” said Michael Collins, Deputy Director of Drug Policy Alliance’s Office of National Affairs, “Rep Reed should know that the War on Drugs has failed and that harsh sentences for drug offenses have no impact on drug use. The only consequence of this bill will be to contribute further to our mass incarceration problem.”
Just last month, House Speaker Paul Ryan committed to completing work on criminal justice reform in the lame duck session. The Reed bill flies in the face of these efforts.
Read the full letter here.Author:
Date Published: October 18, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Alliance
To date, President Barack Obama has granted 774 commutations. That is more commutations than the previous nine presidents combined and more commutations than any individual president in nearly a century.
The majority of people receiving commutations were convicted of drug offenses and sentenced to egregious mandatory minimum sentences. The announcement of commutations is commonly greeted with floods of adulation from media and advocates for fair sentencing that are laced with rhetoric calling America a nation of second chances. This conveniently frees policymakers and elected officials who stoked the flames of the war on drugs from accountability and places the onus to change on those who have been oppressed by life sentences in federal prisons due to draconian drug policy.
But when it comes to the drug war, it is America that needs a second chance. The blame belongs to the nation that criminalized substance use, liberally doling out punishment to those who needed care.
With the increase of deaths from opioid-related overdose, many policymakers and elected officials are embracing an evidence-based, public health approach to addressing individuals suffering from addiction. The call for a “gentler war on drugs” is the result of the perceived new face of heroin and opioid use, as nearly 90 percent of those who tried heroin for the first time in this decade were white. The deaths of white, suburban young people has led to conversations centering the humanity of people who use drugs.
Law enforcement programs around the country are realizing that America can’t arrest its way out of this problem.
This more compassionate approach to drug use did not exist for communities of color who struggled with the effects of poverty and cocaine addiction in the ‘80s and ‘90s, nor did it exist for black and Latino heroin users in the ‘60s. There wasn’t and isn’t empathy for people of color who lost their homes, their family, and their freedom due to the zero-tolerance drug policies that seeped into every administrative system. While there is some public acknowledgment of the differential response to white drug use and the overall failure of the drug war, there has been little in the way of a political response and no action to account and atone for the failures of the past and present. It’s time for that to change.
The New York Policy Office of the Drug Policy Alliance is launching a reparative justice campaign, Color of Pain, to reduce the harms associated with drug use, reduce the harms of draconian drug policy, and repair the harms caused by the drug war in communities in New York State. To launch a campaign of this nature and magnitude in New York is critical because New York State lawmakers were national leaders in implementing punitive drug policies that others states quickly followed and that led to the rampant incarceration of black and Latino people for low-level drug offenses, the proliferation of communicable diseases, and the loss of life to drug overdose.
The effects of these decisions continue to negatively impact people of color in low-income communities who face a multitude of collateral consequences including barriers in accessing public housing, employment, and higher education due to of previous involvement with the legal system. Many believe that the “new approach” on drug use, albeit late, will benefit anyone who uses or misuses drugs. But history has taught us repeatedly that rising tides don’t lift all boats.
The opioid epidemic has underscored what we have always known about drug use and misuse. Addiction is not specific to racial group or economic class, but the effects of supposedly “race-neutral” or colorblind drug policy have had a disparate impact on communities of color. We need new thinking in drug policy that owns that truth and atones for the harm done.
The drug war’s racial impact was by design and any policy to change it must address racism or it will not benefit those who are persistently marginalized.
Dionna King is the policy coordinator at the New York office of the Drug Policy Alliance.
This piece first appeared on TheRoot.com.
Date Published: October 18, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Alliance
The new documentary “Do Not Resist” opened up last week, receiving positive reviews for its honest yet alarming look at the state of policing in the United States. From Ferguson, Missouri to Columbia, South Carolina my interview with Craig Atkinson highlights the areas of policing that must be done away with.
What inspired this film?
I was surprised by the way that the police approached the community in the days after the Boston Marathon Bombing. I’ve interviewed people who had been ripped from their homes, handcuffed and detained for hours without notification of why they were being detained, or subsequently have any charges filed against them. It seemed like in the wake of the fear that the bombings left behind, the police were treating the community as if they were an occupying force. It was the first time that I had seen the level of weaponry and armament that police had been given post 9/11. My father was a police officer for 29 years in a town outside Detroit and was a SWAT officers for 13 of those years. I was familiar with the war on drugs era of SWAT, but what I witnessed in the days after the Boston bombing was the War on Terror’s influence.
What audience did you have in mind for this film?
Now that it’s done, the film is intended for anyone whose life is affected by law enforcement, basically every citizen of the US. We’re not saying anything new for people who have lived this experience, this film is a visual example of headlines we’ve been seeing since Ferguson. I hope the film can serve as a teaching tool for law enforcement. We show areas of police work that need great reform. People have remarked that they’re thankful that we do not condemn officers, but rather let scenes unfold, allowing the viewer to make their own decision.
Why did you choose to film from the perspective of the police?
Typically when we see police shows on television and the camera is always glorifying the police and condemning the accused, but we were interested in showing the events from a more neutral, observational place. As time went on it became apparent that the most value that we could bring to the conversation was to remain focused on telling the perspective that other may have not been able to get.
In hindsight, is there anything you wish you did differently in the making of this film?
We didn’t get a scene where the SWAT teams could be justified for using the level of equipment. We kept thinking that our next raid would be the one where the police would find the weapons, the terrorist, or huge stashes of drugs, but we kept coming up empty. We did a half dozen raids during the course of making the film and never found anything more than a single joint of marijuana. If you look at how SWAT is deployed in this country over 80% is for search warrants, almost always for drugs. During the 13 years that my father was a SWAT officer his team conducted 29 search warrants. Contrast that to today when teams of a similar size are doing 3 to 4 a day, over 200 per year.
What’s your ideal outcome for your film and its success?
If we can continue to reach community members and law enforcement, that would be a huge success. I hope we get people to question how we are training our officers. I hope we continue the discussions around for-profit policing. I’m encouraged by New Hampshire and other states around the country which are beginning to pass laws requiring a criminal conviction before seizing one’s assets. I’m encouraged by any legislative action that gets our domestic policing policy back in line with the constitution. I hope this film is used to continue those efforts.
Ifetayo Harvey is a communications associate with the Drug Policy Alliance.
Image: Police in Richland County, South Carolina conduct a drug search warrant for marijuana. Courtesy of VANISH Films.
Date Published: October 13, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Alliance
As Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada prepare to vote on the legalization of marijuana for adults 21 and over in a few weeks, all eyes are on the initial outcomes of those states that have already legalized marijuana. A new report from the Drug Policy Alliance finds a massive drop in marijuana arrests, no increase in youth marijuana use, no increase in traffic fatalities, and major fiscal benefits in states with legalized marijuana.
In 2012, Colorado and Washington became the first two U.S. states – and the first two jurisdictions in the world – to approve ending marijuana prohibition and legally regulating marijuana production, distribution and sales. In 2014, Alaska and Oregon followed suit, while Washington D.C. passed a more limited measure that legalized possession and home cultivation of marijuana (but did not address its taxation and sale due to D.C. law).
Despite decades of prohibition and aggressive enforcement, marijuana remains widely consumed and universally available. Marijuana prohibition has been a costly failure – to individuals, communities, and the entire country. A marijuana arrest creates a permanent criminal record that can easily be found by employers, landlords, schools, credit agencies and banks and operates as a significant obstacle in daily life. The huge number of marijuana arrests every year usurps scarce law enforcement, criminal justice and treatment resources at enormous cost to taxpayers.
As public attitudes toward marijuana have changed, some states have sought to pave a new way forward. And preliminary data from those states bring good news.
The new report reveals that statewide surveys of youth in Colorado, Washington, Alaska, and Oregon found that there were no significant increases in youth marijuana use post-legalization. Tax revenues in Colorado, Washington, and Oregon have all exceeded initial revenue estimates, totaling half a billion dollars in new revenue for those states. (Retail sales have not yet begun in Alaska.) Legalization has not led to more dangerous road conditions, as traffic fatality rates have remained stable in Colorado, Washington, Alaska, and Oregon.
Arrests in all states and Washington, D.C. have plummeted since legalization, saving those jurisdictions millions of dollars and preventing the criminalization of thousands of people. Legalization, however, did not abate the disproportionate enforcement of marijuana laws against black people. While thousands less are being arrested, blacks are still arrested at vastly disproportionate rates, even though white people use and sell marijuana at similar rates.
By shifting away from counterproductive marijuana arrests and focusing instead on public health, states that have legalized marijuana are diminishing many of the worst harms of the war on drugs, while managing to raise substantial new revenue for their state.
Joy Haviland is a staff attorney for marijuana law and policy at the Drug Policy Alliance.
Date Published: October 13, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Alliance
As Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada prepare to vote on marijuana legalization next month, all eyes are on the initial outcomes of those states that have already legalized marijuana. In 2012, Colorado and Washington became the first two U.S. states – and the first two jurisdictions in the world – to approve ending marijuana prohibition and legally regulating marijuana production, distribution and sales. In the 2014 election, Alaska and Oregon followed suit, while Washington D.C. passed a more limited measure that legalized possession and home cultivation of marijuana (but did not address its taxation and sale due to D.C. law).
A new report by the Drug Policy Alliance brings good news for the states considering legalization at the ballot on November 8, 2016, and the broader marijuana legalization movement. Since the adult possession of marijuana became legal, these states have benefitted from a dramatic decrease in marijuana arrests and convictions, as well as increased tax revenues. During the same period, these states did not experience increases in youth marijuana use or traffic fatalities.
“Marijuana prohibition has been a costly failure—to individuals, communities, and the entire country,” says Joy Haviland, staff attorney at the Drug Policy Alliance. “States that have chosen to legalize marijuana under state law should be praised for developing a smarter, more responsible approach to marijuana.”
The report’s key findings include:
- Marijuana arrests have plummeted in the states that legalized marijuana, although disproportionate enforcement of marijuana crimes against black people continues.
- Statewide surveys of youth in Colorado, Washington, Alaska, and Oregon found that there were no significant increases in youth marijuana use post-legalization.
- Tax revenues in Colorado, Washington, and Oregon have all exceeded initial revenue estimates, totaling $552 million.
- Legalization has not led to more dangerous road conditions, as traffic fatality rates have remained stable in Colorado, Washington, Alaska, and Oregon.
In Colorado, the total number of marijuana arrests decreased by 46 percent between 2012 and 2014, from 12,894 to 7,004. In Washington, the total number of low-level marijuana court filings fell by 98 percent from 6,879 in 2011 to 120 in 2013. In Washington, D.C., marijuana arrests decreased 85 percent from 2014 to 2015, with possession arrests falling by 98 percent from 1,840 in 2014 to 32 in 2015. In Alaska marijuana charges and arrests in Alaska decreased by 59 percent between 2013 and 2015 even though retail sales of marijuana have not yet begun. Marijuana arrests in Oregon declined by 50 percent from 2011 to 2014, from 4,223 arrests to 2,109 in 2014.
Nationally, there were 643,121 marijuana arrests in the U.S. in 2015, a decrease from 700,993 in 2014. Black and Latino people are arrested at vastly disproportionate rates, even though white people use and sell marijuana at similar rates. A marijuana arrest creates a permanent criminal record that can easily be found by employers, landlords, schools, credit agencies and banks. Additionally, the huge number of marijuana arrests every year usurps scarce law enforcement, criminal justice and treatment resources at enormous cost to taxpayers.
The Drug Policy Alliance and its electoral arm, Drug Policy Action, worked closely with local and national allies to draft each of this year’s initiatives, build coalitions, and raise funds. Voters in California, Massachusetts, Arizona, Nevada and Maine will vote on similar marijuana legalization initiatives next month.
“By shifting away from counterproductive marijuana arrests and focusing instead on public health, states that have legalized marijuana are better positioned to address the potential harms of marijuana use, while also diminishing many of the worst harms of the war on drugs,” added Haviland.Author:
Date Published: October 13, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Alliance
Alberto. Cesar. Reynaldo. Felix. Marvin. Benjamin. Noel. Christopher. Unidentified Filipino male.
Yesterday, dozens of activists gathered in front of the Philippines Consulate in NY to protest the recent brutal murders of people suspected to be involved in drug use or selling in the Philippines, and listened in silence as a long list of names of those who have been killed was read out. The names represent individual lost lives, and they are only a fraction of those who have been killed to date in President Duterte’s bloody war.
Upon assuming presidency of the Philippines in May, Rodrigo Duterte made a public call for police and citizens alike to execute people who use or sell drugs, telling Filipinos to “feel free to call us, the police, or do it yourself if you have the gun," and pledged to protect the killers from prosecution. Recently, President Duterte compared himself to Hitler, vowing to kill millions of drug users. Since making these harrowing calls to action, over 3,600 people suspected to have been involved with drugs have been murdered. A further 700,000 people who use drugs have turned themselves in to authorities – undoubtedly out of fear for their lives – and who will now face time in overcrowded prisons and likely be subjected to inhumane and involuntary drug treatment programs.
The protest in NY was part of a Global Week of Action to Stop the Killings in the Philippines. This week, in events taking place in cities across the world, activists are gathering to express their grief and outrage, and are presenting a letter to their local Filipino embassies and consulates. The letter, written by the Asian Network of People who Use Drugs and the International Network of People who Use Drugs implores President Duterte “to immediately call for an end to the extrajudicial murder of people who use drugs and instead focus on internationally accepted, evidence-based interventions and policies that place the reduction of harm and the wellbeing of the community front and centre.”
In August, in response to a joint letter released by more than 300 international organizations calling on the United Nations drug control agencies to break their silence on the killings in the Philippines, the United Nations released a statement saying that the murders “constitute a serious breach of the legal obligations to which the Philippines is held by the three UN drug control conventions and by the corpus of international legal instruments to which the country has adhered.”
We are also urging the United States to condemn these unlawful executions and to cut off security assistance to the Duterte administration. The Leahy Vetting Process requires that the State Department withhold assistance to foreign security forces if recipients are found to have committed gross human rights abuses. It is unconscionable for the U.S. to provide assistance to the Duterte administration while the state-sanctioned killings of people involved with drugs continue.
The heinous and fatal targeting of people who use or sell drugs in the Philippines is unprecedented. If President Duterte ignores international demands to stop the massacres, it will be time for the International Criminal Court to open an examination into the extrajudicial killings in the Philippines as crimes against humanity.
Hannah Hetzer is Senior International Policy Manager at the Drug Policy Alliance.
Date Published: October 12, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Alliance