top of page
Search

1/7 Southeast Asia & drugs - Introduction

  • Benjamin-Alexandre Jeanroy
  • Jun 14, 2016
  • 5 min read

The home continent of U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon still “bore some of the harshest and most repressive drug policies,” (Malinowska-Sempruch, 2015) in the world. And while many countries on the planet are currently experimenting alternative policies to drug control (1), several Asian nations still anchor their drug policy practice in the harshed form of discipline, such as the death penalty, public executions, corporal punishments, along with harboring dreadful drug detention camps (2). To this extent, the population of this continent “has suffered immensely at the hands of the current drug control regime.” (Ibid.) Southeast Asian countries possess some of the harshest laws of the continent in regard to drug related matters.

The fact that the U.N. “had clearly failed to achieve a “drug-free world” by 2008 (as planned in 1998) obviously did not deter the Southeast Asian nations to set their own unrealistic goal of obtaining a drug-free Southeast Asia.” (Chouvy, 2013) For Gloria Lai (2015), "after decades of increasing rates of drug use and dependence, there remain scarcely any humane, effective, evidence-based drug treatment services to speak of in the region.“ As such, notably in response to public health related problems, especially high HIV transmission rate (Global Commission on Drug Policy, 2012), several countries of the region have introduced limited policy reforms aiming to handle drug use as a health issue rater than a criminal one. Often, these policies evolve around the "seemingly well-meaning yet inaccurate and stigmatising slogan ‘drug users are patients, not criminals.“ (Gloria Lai, 2015. See also: Dorabjee, 2012, p. 354)

The debate around drug policy reforms in the region may seem somehow limited as “both the use and supply of controlled drugs are regarded as a threat to state security that must be eradicated, justifying the implementation of severely punitive drug policies.” (Sur, 2015) With little public support to foster reform of these policies, an inclusive and open conversation about the current approach with governments of the region is often quite challenging. Furthermore, there is little possibility for critical civil society engagement on the topic due to securitization processes in place which do not allow much space for drug reform advocacy. But despite such barriers, increasingly high HIV rate prevalence has forced many countries of the region to moderately “facilitate the establishment of harm reduction programmes in the region which enabled, to a limited extent, civil society organisations and networks of people who use drugs to gain a role as expert providers of essential health and harm reduction services.” (Ibid.) However, the premises on which are based current drug policy approaches have not changed. Drugs continue to be perceived as a “social evil” that must be destroyed and drug users, at best, as victims that need to be cured.

We will therefore argue here that the ASEAN and the agents supporting the stated ASEAN 2015 “drug-free” goal (ASEAN, 1998 & 2000) are closely related to the current problematic situation in the region. The goal, enacted in 1998, and the overall prohibitionist tone are still extremely present in the official declaration of the regional organization (3). However, the picture is far from being as homogenous as the ASEAN would like to publicly state. Several important initiatives are being undertaken across the region in order to reduce harms related to current drug policies. Countries such as Myanmar (4), Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam, are all to a different extent, experimenting with drug policy reforms. In this regard, we would like to show that countries in the region are themselves internally divided and that the pressure to meet the region’s “drug-free” goal systematically counteracts these domestic drug policy reform initiatives.

1) “Despite the trend in drug policy reform in the Americas and Europe, drug policy across Asia remains relatively stagnant and firmly wedded to prohibition.” (Baldwin, 2013).

2) Throughout the East and Southeast Asian continent, more than 235, 000 people are currently being detained in over more than 1,000 compulsory drug detention centers, “experiencing a range of human rights abuses during their time there - which can last from months to years.” (Malinowska-Sempruch, 2015)

3) As stated by the 2014 11th Meeting of the ASEAN Inter Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA) Fact Finding Committee (AIFOCOM), “at the present, all countries around the world are facing threats from drug, a common issue world-wide, a huge threat to humankinds, and obstacle to socio-economic development, a cause of crimes, corruption, and catastrophes to the lives of drug users and their families.” (AIFOCOM, 2014).

4) The issue regarding which denomination to choose for this country, whether Myanmar or Burma, is still very much debatable although it is not the place of this thesis to partake in it. Nevertheless, it it important to recall that the “official” name, “Union of Burma”, was instated by the British colonial power and later changed to the “Union of Myanmar” in 1989 after the military junta took control. Since the change in name was processed under - at the time, a widely perceived - illegitimate rule, many in the international community did not and do not recognize the legitimacy of this name. But acknowledging the colonial use of the name Burma is also important. To use either name is therefore not neutral. This thesis chooses to recognize, that since the 1988 coup d’Etat, the regime has been slowly but steadily recognized by the international community, especially since the beginning of timid, but actual economic and political reforms in the 2011, and the last 2015 parliamentary elections. Furthermore, it can also be argued that the term “Burma” does not properly represent the country other ethnic minorities. Much like Lao people are not the only people living in Lao PDR, there is not just Burmese in Burma. As such, we will choose here to use the appellation of Myanmar.

Comments

 

UPEACE

  • Facebook - Black Circle
  • Twitter - Black Circle
  • LinkedIn - Black Circle
  • SoundCloud - Black Circle
bottom of page