 |
 |
 |
 |
|
II. OPERATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL DRUG 38. The Board notes with appreciation that the Secretary-General sent letters to heads of States that had not yet ratified or acceded to the international drug control conventions in order to encourage them to become parties to those conventions. A. Narcotic drugs A. Narcotic drugs 1. Status of the international conventions on narcotic drugs 39. As of 1 November 1996, the States parties to the international conventions on narcotic drugs numbered 158, of which 16 were parties to only the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961(16) and 142 were parties to that Convention as amended by the 1972 Protocol. Since the Board last published its report, the following five States have succeeded or acceded to the 1961 Convention as amended by the 1972 Protocol: Estonia, Gambia, Sao Tome and Principe, Turkmenistan and Yemen. In addition, Bulgaria, the Russian Federation and Switzerland, which were already parties to the 1961 Convention, have become parties to that Convention as amended by the 1972 Protocol. 40. Of the States that have yet to accede to the international conventions on narcotic drugs, 10 are in Africa, 5 are in America, 5 are in Asia, 3 are in Europe and 6 are in Oceania. In addition, four independent States that had formed part of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics have yet to indicate whether they intend to succeed or accede to the international conventions on narcotic drugs. 41. The Board hopes that the States concerned will not only take speedy action to become parties to the international conventions on narcotic drugs, but will also enact the necessary national legislation and regulations to conform to those conventions. The Board believes that accession to the 1961 Convention could soon result from mechanisms already in place in States such as Azerbaijan, Belize, Bhutan, El Salvador, Grenada, Guyana, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Tajikistan and United Republic of Tanzania, which have already become parties to the most recent international drug control treaty, the 1988 Convention. Since all States are benefiting from international assistance, they should show clearly their commitment to international drug control by acceding to the 1961 Convention. 42. Some other States, namely Afghanistan, Algeria, Belarus, Chad, Lebanon, Morocco, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Ukraine and Zambia, which are already parties to the 1961 Convention, have not yet ratified the 1972 Protocol amending that Convention. The Board expects that its ratification by those States will take place soon since they have all acceded to the more recent international drug control treaties. The other States parties to the 1961 Convention that still remain to ratify the 1972 Protocol are Iran (Islamic Republic of), Lao People's Democratic Republic and Liechtenstein. 2. Cooperation with Governments 43. The information provided by Governments enables the Board to study the licit movement of narcotic drugs, thereby ensuring that all Governments strictly observe the provisions prescribed under the international conventions to limit the manufacture and importation of narcotic drugs to the quantities required exclusively for medical and scientific purposes and that measures are taken to prevent the diversion of narcotic drugs into illicit channels. This information, which is published every year by the Board, relates to the timely submission of annual estimates and statistical returns of narcotic drugs and should also be used by Governments to verify whether or not they have adequately applied the provisions of the conventions. (a) Furnishing to the International Narcotics Control Board annual estimates of narcotic drugs under the 1961 Convention 44. Annual estimates of narcotic drug requirements for 1997 were received from 152 States and territories. The Board established such estimates for 57 States and territories that had failed to furnish their own estimates for 1997. The Board notes with concern that, in spite of repeated reminders sent every year to Governments, no annual estimates of narcotic drug requirements have been received from an average of around 60 States and territories. The Board urges the Governments concerned to make efforts to more closely monitor the activities related to narcotic drugs in their countries and to provide the Board with the information required by the conventions. 45. No annual estimates of narcotic drug requirements have been received for the last three consecutive years from the following 21 States: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, Comoros, Djibouti, El Salvador, Gabon, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Republic of Moldova, Rwanda, Somalia, Sudan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tuvalu and Zambia. The Board understands that some of these States, because of their political and economic situation, are not yet in a position to cooperate. 46. The Board invites international organizations such as UNDCP and the World Health Organization (WHO), when implementing institution-building programmes in the above-mentioned States, to assist them in the development of adequate systems for controlling the licit movement of narcotic drugs in conformity with international standards, as well as in the assessment of their actual domestic requirements for narcotic drugs. Such assistance is necessary in order to ensure adequate availability of essential narcotic drugs for medical and scientific needs in those States. (b) Reporting to the International Narcotics Control Board statistical information on narcotic drugs under the 1961 Convention 47. As for the data to be furnished to the Board as required under article 20 of the 1961 Convention, 172 States and territories submitted statistical returns for 1995; of those, however, 76 submitted only partial data. The Board notes with satisfaction that Afghanistan, Belize, Bermuda, Cambodia, Djibouti, Micronesia (Federated States of), Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands, which did not submit any reports to the Board for several years, have started to furnish statistical data in 1996. Other States, such as Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Mongolia, New Zealand and Republic of Korea, have improved their cooperation with the Board by providing data for the past three years. For the first time, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan have provided data on narcotic drugs. 48. Several States parties to the 1961 Convention have submitted annual statistical reports for 1995 after 30 June 1996, the deadline established by the Convention for their submission, thereby preventing the Board from analysing such data and intervening on any shortcomings of control in a timely fashion. The Board urges the States concerned to ensure timely compliance with their reporting obligations. Moreover, no statistical data have been received for 1995 from 30 States and territories, of which the following have failed to furnish statistical returns for the past several years: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Comoros, El Salvador, Gabon, Gambia, Liberia, Mauritania, Rwanda, Somalia, Tuvalu and Zambia. The Board hopes that States that are not yet able to comply with that requirement will soon remedy the situation, if necessary by requesting assistance in establishing the required control mechanism. 3. Assessment of the operation of the international narcotic drug control system 49. In 1996, the number of supplementary estimates furnished by Governments continued to increase, exceeding 700, compared with an average of 500 before 1993. The frequent submission of supplementary estimates may be an indicator of a Government's response to growing medical needs. It may, however, also indicate that the government administration concerned has not adequately planned the medical use of such drugs or may even not be aware of actual requirements. Governments should critically examine their methods of assessing medical needs and make the changes required to ensure that future estimates accurately reflect their medical needs in order to avoid as far as possible the need for supplementary estimates. A well-functioning drug control administration should have complete information on the distribution and use of narcotic drugs in its country and should be able to judge whether the quantities requested by manufacturers or importers are in line with the actual medical requirements. 50. As in previous years, the most frequently amended estimates were those for morphine, codeine, fentanyl, methadone and pethidine. The increase in the number of supplementary estimates for morphine was mainly attributed to the increasing use of morphine in both injectable and oral forms to treat pain due to cancer and other conditions. In view of worldwide efforts by Governments, WHO and other organizations to improve the management of pain, in particular pain due to cancer, the consumption of morphine will continue to rise. Governments planning annual estimates should take into account this situation, as well as any foreseeable needs for other narcotic drugs, to ensure their adequate availability for medical and scientific needs. 51. The application of the worldwide system on estimate requirements and the submission of accurate and comprehensive statistical information in a timely manner in compliance with the provisions of the 1961 Convention have generally proved to be satisfactory. It allows the Board to verify the data provided by Governments and intervene immediately whenever a specific case of diversion is suspected. As mentioned in previous reports of the Board, the diversion of narcotic drugs from licit trade has remained relatively rare, despite the vast number of transactions involved. 52. The Board is, however, concerned about deficiencies in the working of national control mechanisms in a number of countries where pharmaceutical companies are not efficiently controlled and procedures for data collection are still failing. This has resulted in failure to furnish estimates and statistics or the submission of insufficient and inaccurate information, despite the assistance provided by the Board during training seminars and missions to some of those countries. The Board encourages Governments to take all necessary measures to ensure effective implementation of their control and reporting obligations under article 20 of the 1961 Convention. It stands ready to assist Governments in that regard whenever such assistance may be requested. 5. Timely provision of controlled drugs in acute emergency situations 53. The Board cooperated closely during 1996 with WHO to work out guidelines to be used by national authorities of exporting countries in order to conclude standing agreements with a limited number of bona fide suppliers of humanitarian aid for the provision of controlled drugs in acute emergency situations. In such situations, the normal, regular controls required by the 1961 Convention and the 1971 Convention would be amended by simplified procedures. The Board encourages Governments, suppliers and operators of emergency deliveries to take them into account. Their impact on emergency deliveries of controlled drugs should be closely monitored. 6. Study by the International Narcotics Control Board on the control of poppy straw 53. The Board cooperated closely during 1996 with WHO to work out guidelines to be used by national authorities of exporting countries in order to conclude standing agreements with a limited number of bona fide suppliers of humanitarian aid for the provision of controlled drugs in acute emergency situations. In such situations, the normal, regular controls required by the 1961 Convention and the 1971 Convention would be amended by simplified procedures. The Board encourages Governments, suppliers and operators of emergency deliveries to take them into account. Their impact on emergency deliveries of controlled drugs should be closely monitored. 6. Study by the International Narcotics Control Board on the control of poppy straw 54. In order to avoid abuse of preparations obtained from poppy straw and in line with the relevant resolutions of the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, domestic control has been tightened in certain major producing countries by the introduction of a licensing system and penal sanctions. However, the absence of adequate control measures for poppy straw, and the lack of voluntary measures of control at the domestic level, particularly in eastern European countries, have led to illicit activities, boosting the abuse of alkaloids derived from poppy straw. 55. In 1994, the Board, in its supplement on the effectiveness of the international drug control treaties, highlighted the need for enhanced controls over poppy straw.(17) It expressed its belief that, in coping with the changed situation, it was necessary to redefine the voluntary measures of control over the cultivation of the opium poppy and the production of poppy straw that were in force in some countries and to extend them to include all countries permitting production of poppy straw. 56. In view of the above and the fact that evidence of its abuse is increasing in several countries, a review of control of poppy straw will be undertaken by the Board in 1997. 7. Availability of opiates for medical needs 57. A special report entitled Availability of Opiates for Medical Needs(18) was published by the Board in 1996, based on the findings of its survey initiated in 1995. 58. In the above-mentioned special report,(19) the Board concluded that the recommendations contained in its 1989 special report(20) were far from having been implemented and that, while there had been efforts by some Governments to ensure the availability of narcotic drugs for medical and scientific purposes, it appeared that many others had yet to focus on that obligation. 59. The Board notes that among those Governments that did not respond to its survey questionnaire were most of the developing and least developed countries, as well as those Governments that frequently failed to submit their annual estimates of narcotic drug requirements as required by the 1961 Convention. While fully aware of the difficulty of least developed countries in meeting basic health-care needs, the Board encourages Governments of such countries to make efforts to examine their medical needs for narcotic drugs, as well as the impediments to their availability, to advise the Board of the results of those efforts and to inform it of any assistance required. 60. The Board reiterates that an efficient national drug control regime should involve not only a programme to prevent illicit drug trafficking and diversion, but also a programme to ensure the adequate availability of narcotic drugs for medical and scientific purposes. Governments that have done little or nothing to remove obstacles to the legitimate use of narcotic drugs should, in line with the recommendations contained in the 1989 special report of the Board, critically examine their methods for assessing medical needs for narcotic drugs and take effective measures to ensure their availability. The Board will, in cooperation with Governments, continue to monitor the implementation of the recommendations in its 1989 special report. 61. Bearing in mind the conditions prevailing in individual countries and the availability of resources, the Board believes that if the recommendations contained in its special report on the availability of opiates for medical needs10 are implemented, significantly more progress will be achieved towards ensuring adequate availability of narcotic drugs for medical and scientific purposes. The Board will continue its examination of the situation and monitor responses to its recommendations. 8. Demand for opiates and supply of opiate raw materials (a) Consumption of opiates 62. Since the beginning of the 1990s, annual global consumption of opiates has increased, from an average of 200 tonnes in morphine equivalent before 1991 to a maximum of 236.7 tonnes in morphine equivalent in 1993. In 1995, global consumption in morphine equivalent was again at the 1993 level. 63. As codeine consumption represents the bulk of opiate consumption and is mainly consumed in the form of preparations included in Schedule III of the 1961 Convention, the levels of codeine consumption of the major user countries have had a significant impact on the global consumption of opiates. In 1995, 180.7 tonnes of codeine in morphine equivalent were consumed; total global opiate consumption was 236 tonnes. The major user countries, in descending order, were United States, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, France, Canada and India. 64. Morphine consumption increased steadily from 2.3 tonnes in 1982 to 15.6 tonnes in 1995, the highest level ever recorded. With the improvement of the management of pain, in particular cancer treatment, in an increasing number of countries, it is likely that morphine consumption will further increase in the years to come. The upward trend of dihydrocodeine consumption observed over the past two decades has also contributed to the increase in global consumption of opiates. Pholcodine consumption remained stable at around 7 tonnes in morphine equivalent while ethylmorphine consumption continued to decrease, falling to 2.9 tonnes in morphine equivalent in 1995. 65. Judging from the trends of recent years, the annual aggregate consumption of opiates is likely to rise steadily in the next few years. (b) Production of opiate raw materials 66. Since 1995, in response to the need to rebuild stocks of opiate raw materials and to meet the increasing demand for opiates, efforts have been made by the major producing countries to increase the production of these raw materials. As a result, actual global production of opiate raw materials reached 290 tonnes in morphine equivalent in 1995, the highest figure recorded in the past 15 years. In 1996, despite increased production in Australia and India, global production of opiate raw materials was 255 tonnes in morphine equivalent, considerably less than the 291 tonnes originally projected for that year. That shortfall was mainly the result of a sharp decrease in the area of opium poppy harvested in Turkey in 1996. 67. As shown in figure I, global production of opiate raw materials in 1997 is expected to increase under normal climatic conditions to approximately 330 tonnes in morphine equivalent, which would represent the highest level recorded in the past 17 years. 68. Australia, France and Spain have further increased their 1997 estimates for opium poppy cultivation areas. In Turkey, the estimated opium poppy cultivation area for 1997 remains at the same high level as for the previous two years. The total estimated area of 70,000 hectares has been licensed owing to the Government's success in increasing the number of applications received from licensed farmers. According to the Turkish Government, production can be expected to reach approximately 80 tonnes in morphine equivalent, a level similar to that of 1995, when 75.2 tonnes in morphine equivalent were produced. In India, as a result of the decision by the Government not to hire new cultivators for 1997, the estimate for the area of opium poppy cultivation for 1997 had to be reduced from 35,700 hectares to 32,000 hectares. However, with the increase in the minimum qualifying yield from 45 kg/hectare to 48 kg/hectare fixed for 1997 production, the Indian Government intends to attain a level of 107 tonnes in morphine equivalent. The Board has calculated probable areas to be harvested and production of opiate raw materials based on differences between projections by Governments and actual production during the past 10 years (see table). Figure I. Global production of opiate raw materials, in morphine equivalent, 1983-1997a aFigures for the years 1996 and 1997 are based on advanced statistics and projections. 69. In view of the above, production in 1997 can be expected to contribute substantially to the accumulation of sufficient stocks of opium raw materials unless weather conditions are unfavourable. (c) Balance between the production of opiate raw materials and the consumption of opiates 70. The relatively low production levels in 1993 and 1994, together with the increase in the global consumption of opiates in those two years, had a negative effect on the balance between global production of opiate raw materials and total consumption of opiates (see figure II). In 1995, however, because of a marked increase in production, particularly in India and Turkey, global production of opiate raw materials was well above total consumption of opiates: the balance amounted to about 54 tonnes in morphine equivalent. As current stocks of opiate raw materials are still considered insufficient to guarantee meeting demand requirements, particularly in years of poor harvest, global production will have to exceed total consumption in the next few years in order to achieve satisfactory stock levels. According to advanced statistical data provided by the major producing countries, global production of opiate raw materials in 1996 will probably exceed consumption of opiates by 14.5 tonnes in morphine equivalent. In 1997, production is expected to exceed total consumption by 80-90 tonnes in morphine equivalent, in view of the projected increase in all major producing countries. aFigures for the years 1996 and 1997 are based on advanced statistics and projections. (d) Exports and imports of opiate raw materials 71. In 1995, there was a further decline in the total amount of opium exported by India, only 48.9 tonnes being exported in morphine equivalent compared with 57.9 tonnes in 1994 and 66.8 tonnes in 1993. This was mainly due to significant reductions in the quantities imported by France, Japan and, above all, the United States. The United Kingdom imported only 2 tonnes of opium in morphine equivalent in 1995, thus maintaining the long established trend of relying largely on imported concentrate of poppy straw to satisfy its needs for opiates. Because of its difficult economic situation, the Russian Federation imported no opium in 1994 or 1995; it satisfied domestic demand in those years by releasing opium from special government stocks. 72. In contrast, international trade in concentrate of poppy straw has been rising continuously since 1991. As shown in figure III, exports of concentrate of poppy straw by the major producing countries continued their upward trend, reaching 118 tonnes in morphine equivalent in 1995. Turkey was the major world supplier of concentrate of poppy straw in that year, exporting 67 tonnes in morphine equivalent, representing 57 per cent of world total exports in 1995. Australia's net exports of concentrate of poppy straw in morphine equivalent in 1995 amounted to only 29 tonnes, the lowest figure recorded since 1990. That was because of a fall in production following a poor harvest caused by unfavourable weather conditions. In 1995, France exported 9.5 tonnes of concentrate of poppy straw in morphine equivalent and Hungary exported 7.1 tonnes. The United Kingdom and the United States continued to be the major importers of concentrate of poppy straw in that year, importing 41 tonnes and 31 tonnes in morphine equivalent respectively in 1995, a record level for each country. Figure III. Exports of opium and concentrate of poppy straw, (e) Stocks of opiate raw materials 73. The opium stocks held by India dropped from 226 tonnes in morphine equivalent in 1989 to 36.9 tonnes in 1994 (see figure IV). In 1995, the stocks further declined to 28 tonnes in morphine equivalent. The stocks of concentrate of poppy straw held by Turkey fell considerably from the previous years' levels, to a total of 10 tonnes in morphine equivalent at the end of 1995, the lowest amount recorded since 1982. The combined stocks of concentrate of poppy straw held by Australia, France and Spain were approximately 10.5 tonnes in morphine equivalent at the end of 1995. 74. The Board notes the decreased stocks of opiate raw materials held by India and Turkey and hopes that the Governments will consider taking the necessary measures to raise their stocks to a level that will ensure an adequate availability of opiate raw materials also in years with unexpected poor harvests. 75. Pursuant to Economic and Social Council resolution 1995/19, on demand for and supply of opiates for medical and scientific needs, an informal consultation was organized during the thirty-ninth session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs. It was concluded that there was a need to build up sufficient stocks of opiate raw materials in order to avoid shortages in the future. In response to that, efforts have been made by the major producing countries to improve their production planning for 1997. Figure IV. Stocks of opiate raw materials, in morphine equivalent, 1. Status of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971 76. As of 1 November 1996, the number of States parties to the 1971 Convention stood at 146. Since the last report of the Board, Estonia, Gambia, Sao Tome and Principe, Switzerland, Turkmenistan and Yemen have become parties to that Convention. 77. Of the States that have yet to become parties to the 1971 Convention, five States, namely Azerbaijan, Eritrea, Georgia, Kazakstan and Tajikistan, have recently become independent and have yet to indicate their intention to succeed or otherwise adhere to the 1971 Convention. The Board reiterates its requests to those States to confirm their adherence to the 1971 Convention at the earliest possible date. 78. Austria is the only highly industrialized State that has not yet become a party to the 1971 Convention, although its Government has, since 1988, repeatedly stated at international forums and to the Board that it would shortly accede to that Convention. The Board took note of the decision made in April 1996 by the Government of Austria to accede to the 1971 Convention. The Board urges Austria to implement that decision and to expeditiously introduce an effective control system for all psychotropic substances, including the control of the import and export of substances in Schedules III and IV of the 1971 Convention. 79. Some States, namely Azerbaijan, Belize, Bhutan, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Kenya, Nepal, Oman, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Tajikistan and United Republic of Tanzania, which have not yet acceded to the 1971 Convention, have already become parties to the 1988 Convention. The implementation of the provisions of the 1971 Convention is, however, a prerequisite for achieving the objectives of the 1988 Convention. Therefore, if the States concerned have not already done so, they should take immediate action to implement the provisions of the 1971 Convention. The Board hopes that all the States concerned will soon accede to that Convention. 80. The Board believes that control mechanisms for psychotropic substances already in place in some other States, including Andorra, Indonesia, the Lao People's Democratic Republic and Namibia, should enable those States to accede to the 1971 Convention promptly. 2. Cooperation with Governments 81. Approximately 170 States and territories annually provide the Board with statistical reports on psychotropic substances pursuant to article 16 of the 1971 Convention. The timely submission, comprehensiveness and reliability of the statistical reports indicate the extent to which Governments have implemented the provisions of the 1971 Convention and followed the recommendations of the Board, endorsed by the Economic and Social Council in its resolutions. 82. Unlike the situation with narcotic drugs, diversion of psychotropic substances from the licit manufacture and trade still occurs as a result of inadequate control mechanisms in some countries. Through its analysis of data received from Governments and subsequent investigation, the Board has assisted several countries in the identification of companies and individuals contravening domestic drug control regulations, including those diverting or attempting to divert psychotropic substances into the illicit traffic. 83. While most parties to the 1971 Convention have regularly submitted annual statistical reports, the Board is concerned about the fact that the requisite data have not been received for three or more years from the following States: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chad, Gabon, Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Rwanda, Somalia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Zambia. While some of these States have not been in a position to submit the statistical data for obvious political reasons, the Board urges the others to resume their reporting on psychotropic substances as soon as possible. 84. Several parties to the 1971 Convention have submitted annual statistical reports for 1995 after 30 June 1996, the deadline established by the Board for their submission. The Board is concerned about the fact that among these States parties to the 1971 Convention are some developed countries that are important manufacturers and exporters of psychotropic substances. The late submission of annual statistical reports makes it difficult for the Board to monitor the international movement of psychotropic substances. The Board urges all the Governments concerned to adopt organizational measures to ensure timely compliance with their reporting obligations. 85. A few parties to the 1971 Convention, including Belgium, Canada, Luxembourg and New Zealand, do not yet control international trade in all substances in Schedules III and IV of that Convention and do not report to the Board on exports and imports of some of those substances. This situation has led to a serious gap in the control of the international trade in psychotropic substances, a gap that could be exploited by drug traffickers. 86. The Board notes with satisfaction the adoption in Canada in 1996 of new legislation on the control of psychotropic substances. The Board trusts that regulations under this legislation will soon be promulgated to ensure the control in Canada of international trade in all psychotropic substances. The Board urges the Governments of Belgium, Luxembourg and New Zealand to put in place, as soon as possible, adequate measures for the control of international trade in all psychotropic substances, in conformity with their treaty obligations and the relevant resolutions of the Economic and Social Council. A mission of the Board visited New Zealand in 1996 and discussed with the Government the control of the export and import of psychotropic substances (for details see paragraph 376, below). 87. The Board notes with appreciation that Governments of some importing countries have taken the initiative in drawing its attention to incidents in which their control measures for the import of psychotropic substances were disregarded by companies in exporting countries. The Board invites all Governments to keep it informed of violations by exporting and importing companies of control provisions for international trade in psychotropic substances. Governments should always investigate such cases and adopt appropriate measures to stop those violations. 88. The control system for licit international trade in substances in Schedules I and II of the 1971 Convention continues to work satisfactorily. In conformity with article 12 of that Convention, international trade in those substances is controlled by the system of import and export authorizations. In addition, pursuant to article 7 of the 1971 Convention, exports and imports of substances in Schedule I are restricted to small quantities needed for scientific and very limited medical purposes. For substances in Schedule II, the system of assessments (simplified estimates) has been in place since the early 1980s, providing Governments of exporting countries with a source of information on the legitimate needs for those substances in importing countries. 89. The knowledge of legitimate requirements for substances in Schedule II in importing countries facilitates the identification by the competent authorities of exporting countries of attempts to divert those substances by means of falsified import authorizations. It is noted with satisfaction that Governments of exporting countries continue to carefully review the authenticity of import authorizations for substances in Schedule II and consult the Board in cases of doubt. Several attempts by drug traffickers to divert very large quantities of such substances, mainly methaqualone and fenetylline, have been thwarted in recent years by Governments in close cooperation with the Board. No cases involving significant diversion of substances in Schedule II from licit international trade have occurred since 1990. It appears, therefore, that preparations containing amphetamines, fenetylline and methaqualone in the illicit traffic in various regions of the world originate almost entirely in the clandestine manufacture and not in the licit pharmaceutical industry. 4. Use of methylphenidate for the treatment of attention deficit disorder 90. The worldwide use of methylphenidate, a substance listed in Schedule II of the 1971 Convention, increased from less than 3 tonnes in 1990 to more than 10 tonnes in 1995. This global trend largely reflects developments in the United States, which accounts for approximately 90 per cent of total world consumption. Methylphenidate is used in the United States mainly for the treatment of attention deficit disorder (ADD)(21) in children. In Canada, the second largest user of methylphenidate, average consumption is approximately one half of that in the United States. The use of methylphenidate has also increased in several other countries in recent years, but it has remained substantially lower than in Canada or the United States. 91. In its report for 1995, the Board noted concerns of the competent authorities in the United States about the sharp increase in the use of methylphenidate in that country. Those concerns included the overdiagnosing of ADD, questionable promotional activities for methylphenidate, the diversion of the substance from licit distribution channels and an increase in its abuse. The Board expressed its concern at that situation.(22) 92. The Board notes with appreciation that following its expression of concern and following action by the competent authorities of the United States, proposals to weaken domestic control of methylphenidate in that country were withdrawn. The issue of the medical use of methylphenidate has also received increased attention by the medical community and the public in the United States. 93. In spite of these developments, the consumption of methylphenidate continues to rise in the United States. The competent authorities of the United States informed the Board that the use of the substance in that country was estimated at 10.5 tonnes in 1996 and was expected to rise to nearly 13 tonnes in 1997. The Board took note of reports that indicate that in some schools in the United States a very high percentage of students are receiving stimulants, primarily methylphenidate. With respect to abuse, according to estimates of the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) of the United States, the number of methylphenidate-related emergency room mentions for persons aged 10-14 has since 1990 increased more than 10 times and in 1995 reached the level of cocaine-related mentions for that age group. 94. The Board reiterates its previous request to the authorities of the United States to continue to carefully monitor future developments in the diagnosis of ADD in children and the extent to which methylphenidate and other stimulants (such as dexamfetamine and pemoline) are used in the treatment of ADD, in order to ensure that those substances are prescribed in accordance with sound medical practice as required under article 9, paragraph 2, of the 1971 Convention. The medical community in the United States is invited to continue to address the issue of increasing use of stimulants in the treatment of ADD. The Board notes with appreciation that a national consensus meeting on methylphenidate will be held by United States governmental agencies in 1997. 95. The Board reiterates its request to all Governments to exercise the utmost vigilance in order to prevent overdiagnosing of ADD in children and medically unjustified treatment with methylphenidate and other stimulants. The competent authorities of some of the countries in which methylphenidate is increasingly being used have informed the Board of their intention to initiate research on that issue. The Board welcomes such initiatives. 96. The control measures for international trade in substances in Schedules III and IV of the 1971 Convention have not prevented drug traffickers from diverting those substances from licit manufacture and trade. Since the mid-1980s, the Board has repeatedly urged all Governments to apply additional control measures to international trade in those substances. The Board has recommended controlling the import and export of substances in Schedules III and IV by means of the system of import and export authorizations and by a system of assessments (simplified estimates). Governments have been invited to include in their annual statistical reports to the Board details on imports and exports of those substances. All of those recommendations have been repeatedly endorsed by the Economic and Social Council in its resolutions, the most recent being resolutions 1991/44 and 1993/38. 97. At present, export and import authorizations are required by national legislation in more than 120 countries and territories for all substances in Schedule III and in 100 countries and territories for all substances in Schedules III and IV. In an additional 40 countries and territories, the requirement of import authorizations has been introduced for at least some substances in those schedules. A total of 160 Governments have informed the Board of their assessments (simplified estimates) of annual medical and scientific requirements for substances in Schedules III and IV. The Board has regularly forwarded the list of assessments to all exporting countries. Nearly 90 per cent of Governments have provided the Board in their annual statistical reports with details on the countries of origin of imports and the countries of destination of exports for all psychotropic substances. 98. The Board welcomes the decision by Switzerland, a country that is a major manufacturer and exporter of psychotropic substances, to introduce the control of exports and imports of all substances in Schedules III and IV by the system of import and export authorizations as of January 1997. 99. In its report for 1995,(23) the Board noted the recommendation of the follow-up conference on control of international trade in psychotropic substances in Europe, held at Strasbourg, France, from 18 to 20 October 1995, that parties to the 1971 Convention should propose an amendment under the simplified procedure (article 30) to make it a treaty obligation to apply the system of import and export authorizations for substances in Schedules III and IV and the system of assessments (simplified estimates) for substances in Schedules II, III and IV. The Board expects that the countries that participated in the conference will soon act on that recommendation. 100. The Board notes that the Economic and Social Council, in resolution 1996/30, requested it to establish assessments of annual licit domestic requirements for countries that had not yet submitted such assessments. The Board has carried out preliminary studies on its course of action to establish such assessments. The Board notes, however, that its implementation of the request of the Council is subject to the availability of additional human resources for its secretariat. 6. Prevention of diversion of substances in Schedules III and IV of the 1971 Convention 101. The Board appreciates the fact that most Governments have already established effective mechanisms for the control of exports of substances in Schedules III and IV of the 1971 Convention. Many Governments consult the Board regarding the legitimacy of suspicious import orders. In 1996, the Board and the competent authorities of several exporting countries carried out joint investigations into the legitimacy of more than 60 commercial orders, thereby preventing the diversion of large quantities of psychotropic substances from licit manufacture and trade into illicit channels. The Board would like to commend, in particular, the competent authorities of Germany and India for their vigilance in the control of exports of psychotropic substances. 102. The Board is concerned that competent authorities of some countries, including Cameroon, Myanmar and Senegal, have failed to respond to its repeated requests for confirmation of the legitimacy of import orders placed abroad by companies from those countries. Those orders were considered suspicious for various reasons by the competent authorities of exporting countries. Such lack of cooperation by the competent authorities with the Board may hinder the investigation of diversion attempts or may cause delays in the import of psychotropic substances required for legitimate purposes. It is hoped that the competent authorities of the countries concerned will promptly resume their cooperation with the Board. 103. The analysis by the Board of statistical reports on exports of psychotropic substances revealed that several Governments, including those applying the system of export authorizations for substances in Schedules III and IV, have not yet verified every import order against assessments (simplified estimates) of importing countries. Large quantities of psychotropic substances were approved for export by some Governments in Asia and Europe in spite of the fact that those quantities were higher than the assessments of legitimate requirements of the importing countries. In some cases, exported psychotropic substances were diverted into illicit channels. 104. The Board requests all Governments to systematically use as a guide assessments of annual legitimate requirements of importing countries when reviewing the legitimacy of import orders. Exporting countries are urged to consult the Board in all cases when import authorizations or other supporting documents authorize imports in excess of the assessment of annual legitimate requirements of the importing country. Such cooperation between Governments and the Board is important in identifying attempts by traffickers to divert psychotropic substances by means of falsified import authorizations, the most frequently used method of diversion. 105. Exporting countries should exercise the utmost vigilance with respect to orders for the delivery of psychotropic substances to countries in which the political situation is unstable. In its report for 1995, for example, the Board referred to several orders for the delivery to Liberia of large quantities of capsules and tablets containing chlordiazepoxide and diazepam.(24) Those orders had been supported by documents that traffickers had falsified or that Liberian authorities, misled by traffickers, had erroneously issued. After the publication of its report, the Board was informed that pemoline manufactured in Europe had been diverted into illicit channels through Liberia in 1995 by means of falsified import authorizations; the quantity of pemoline diverted was sufficient for the illicit manufacture of nearly 50 million tablets. 106. Pursuant to article 16 of the 1971 Convention, Governments are required to inform the Secretary-General of the name of the authority empowered in their country to issue import authorizations for psychotropic substances. This information is forwarded by the Secretary-General to all other Governments for reference purposes. The Board notes that in a few countries import authorizations for psychotropic substances issued by authorities are different from those communicated by their Governments to the Secretary-General. The Board requests the Governments concerned to correct such inconsistencies as soon as possible. 7. Control of exports of psychotropic substances in some European countries 107. Several countries in Europe, including some important manufacturers and exporters of psychotropic substances such as Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland and United Kingdom, do not yet control the export of all psychotropic substances in Schedules III and IV of the 1971 Convention by the system of export authorizations. Traffickers may attempt to take advantage of such situations to divert psychotropic substances. 108. In Denmark, for example, where export authorizations are not required for substances in Schedule IV, the mechanism in place was not able to ensure, prior to export, that exporting companies observe the control measures for those substances in importing countries. In one such case, a company in Denmark exported in 1995 more than 1,700 kg of diazepam raw material to Nigeria while the assessment of annual legitimate requirements of Nigeria for that substance was only 700 kg. The investigation initiated by the Board revealed that Nigerian import permits, on the basis of which those exports had taken place, had been forged. The quantity of diazepam diverted from Denmark was sufficient for the illicit manufacture of several hundreds of millions of tablets. The Board urges European countries that do not yet control the export of all psychotropic substances in Schedules III and IV by the system of export authorizations to introduce such controls as soon as possible. 8. Diversion of psychotropic substances from domestic distribution channels 109. Significant quantities of psychotropic substances are diverted from licit domestic distribution channels into the illicit traffic. The substances are sold by traffickers for local abuse or are smuggled into other countries where illicit markets for the substances exist. In 1996, for example, several million tablets containing diazepam and chlordiazepoxide manufactured in Asia were seized in Nigeria during smuggling attempts. Similarly, large quantities of flunitrazepam tablets originating in some countries in Latin America were seized in the United States. 110. The Board encourages all Governments to cooperate closely in order to identify the companies and individuals involved in the diversion of psychotropic substances from domestic distribution channels. Governments of countries where large seizures are made should always provide relevant information to the Government of the country where the diversion originally took place, in conformity with the provisions of article 21 of the 1971 Convention. Governments should endeavour to obtain the cooperation of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors in the prevention of diversion and the investigation of diversion cases. 9. High consumption of stimulants as anorectics in some countries in the Americas 111. Statistical data submitted by Governments to the Board indicate that stimulants included in Schedule IV of the 1971 Convention, used as anorectics, are consumed in some countries in the Americas in much higher quantities than in other regions. The countries with the highest consumption rate for anorectics are Argentina, Brazil, Chile and the United States. A number of Governments of other countries have also reported increasing use of anorectics under international control, although to a much lesser extent (see figure V). 112. Governments of countries in which controlled anorectics are prescribed in high quantities should closely monitor the situation to prevent their overprescribing, which could lead to the abuse of these substances due to their stimulant properties. Those Governments should support educational campaigns to inform the medical and pharmaceutical community, as well as the general public, of the dangers of indiscriminate use of stimulants. The media in those countries should play an important role in promoting a more responsible attitude to the use of stimulants as anorectics. 113. The Board notes the concern of some Governments, especially in Latin America, at the large-scale dispension of anorectics through prescription formulas, frequently in combination with other drugs affecting the central nervous system. The Board hopes that measures recently adopted by the Governments of Brazil and Chile to prevent the misuse of prescription formulas will be strictly implemented. The Board took note of information from Chile indicating the recent decline in the use of anorectics. 114. With regard to anorectics, the Board requests the Governments of all countries to strictly implement the provisions of article 10 of the 1971 Convention, which prohibits the advertisement of psychotropic substances to the general public. The Board is concerned about the activities of some medical practitioners and weight-reduction clinics in the United States that use Internet to promote the consumption of a preparation containing phentermine, a stimulant included in Schedule IV of the 1971 Convention, in combination with fenfluramine, a stimulant not under international control. 115. Cases involving diversion of anorectics from licit distribution channels into illicit markets have been reported in several countries. It has also been discovered that such stimulants are being smuggled into countries where illicit markets exist. In addition to peddling at the street level, health clubs, fashion shops and beauty farms have been identified as establishments through which such stimulants are illegally supplied. The Board urges all Governments to apply appropriate measures to stop the diversion of anorectics from licit manufacture and trade in order to prevent the further development of illicit markets for such substances. aStatistical data submitted by Governments were used to calculate the average annual consumption for each three-year period. 10. Survey on the use of psychotropic substances as heroin adulterants 116. The Board undertook a survey on the use of psychotropic substances as heroin adulterants. The survey was carried out in close cooperation with the Governments of several countries throughout the world. 117. Phenobarbital was identified as the psychotropic substance most frequently used as an adulterant in seized heroin; it was followed by diazepam and flunitrazepam. Other psychotropic substances, including various barbiturates, benzodiazepines and methaqualone, were also reported as being occasionally present in seized heroin. The frequency of the presence of phenobarbital in heroin has declined steadily since the late 1980s. That decline has followed the strengthening of control measures for phenobarbital in countries that are major exporters of the substance. In recent years, not more than 5 per cent of the heroin samples analysed for the presence of adulterants have contained phenobarbital. 118. As indicated by the survey, there has been little systematic research regarding the use of various substances, including substances under international control, as adulterants in heroin. While some countries, including France, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States, have undertaken more systematic studies on the issue, the information provided by most other countries has been based on information occasionally obtained during the analysis of seized heroin. The Board invites Governments to be vigilant with regard to the use of psychotropic substances as heroin adulterants. The Board would appreciate being informed of any trends indicating an increased presence of psychotropic substances in seized heroin. 11. Abuse of and illicit trafficking in ephedrine in Africa 119. In 1996, the Board received information from several countries in Africa on the illicit traffic in preparations containing ephedrine and the abuse of that substance as a stimulant. The Board encourages the Governments concerned to bring such information to the attention of WHO in order to facilitate its review of ephedrine for possible inclusion in one of the schedules of the 1971 Convention. 120. The Board notes with concern that the authorities of some countries in Africa approved in 1996 imports of large quantities of ephedrine that appeared to be higher than the medical requirements for the substance in those countries. The Board requests all Governments in that region to exercise the utmost vigilance with respect to imports of ephedrine to ensure that only quantities needed for legitimate medical purposes are imported (see also paragraph 176). 121. As of 1 November 1996, a total of 137 States and the European Community had become parties to the 1988 Convention. That number represents 72 per cent of all the States in the world. Since the report of the Board for 1995 was issued, 18 States have acceded to the 1988 Convention: Belize, Botswana, Cuba, Ireland, Jamaica, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malawi, Malta, Philippines, Sao Tome and Principe, Tajikistan, Gambia, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Republic of Tanzania and Yemen. 122. The Board welcomes this rapid development. It is particularly pleased to note that all the States in America are now parties to the 1988 Convention. Of the States that have not yet become parties to that Convention, 17 are in Africa, 15 are in Asia, 11 are in Europe and 11 are in Oceania. The Board requests again all those States that have not already acceded to the 1988 Convention to take, as a matter of priority, steps to establish the necessary mechanisms to implement fully the provisions of that Convention and to become parties to it as soon as possible. 2. Cooperation with Governments 123. The timely and comprehensive reporting of information to the Board as required by the 1988 Convention and the reporting of information required to detect suspicious transactions are the basis for the effective functioning of the international control system for precursors, as well as an indicator of the existence of adequate mechanisms to monitor precursors, appropriate coordination for data collection and relevant legislation. 124. As of 1 November 1996, a total of 117 States and territories had submitted to the Board information for 1995 relating to precursors pursuant to article 12 of the 1988 Convention. That figure represents 56 per cent of all the States and territories requested to provide information, a rate of return similar to that of previous years. 125. It is a matter of serious concern to the Board that nearly one half of the parties to the 1988 Convention again failed to submit the information required under article 12. Lack of reporting may indicate that the necessary framework and systems for adequate control are not in place. All those parties to the Convention that have not already done so should, as a matter of urgency, review their relevant administrative mechanisms and take whatever concrete steps are required to enable them to start reporting to the Board. 126. As was announced in its last report,(25) the Board for the first time requested, in respect of 1995, data on licit trade in, use of and requirements of substances in Table I of the 1988 Convention. That information was requested on a voluntary basis pursuant to Economic and Social Council resolution 1995/20. The Board notes that, as of 1 November 1996, 50 States and territories, including some major manufacturing, exporting and transit States in the Americas, Asia and Oceania, provided such information. Some others, including the European Commission, on behalf of the member States of the European Union, indicated that they would provide the information as of 1997. 127. Information on the licit movement of precursors is indispensable for preventing their diversion into illicit channels. As the Board has repeatedly emphasized in its reports, without such information competent national authorities could not monitor the movement of, and therefore would be unable to find suspicious transactions in, those substances in Tables I and II of the 1988 Convention as required under article 12. The Board again urges all States and territories that have not already done so to put in place, as a matter of priority, necessary mechanisms for such data collection and to provide the information to the Board, if necessary, on a confidential basis. The Board uses that information on a case-by-case basis to assist Governments in verifying the legitimacy of transactions. 3. Operation of the control system and prevention of diversion into the illicit traffic 128. The Board continues to examine action taken by Governments to implement the provisions of article 12 of the 1988 Convention. A detailed review of such action is given in the 1996 report of the Board on the implementation of article 12.(26) (a) General operation of the control system and further action required 129. In 1994, the Board reported the discovery of cases involving large-scale diversion and attempted diversion of ephedrine.(27) Based on those findings, it made specific recommendations for action.(28) In 1995, the Board highlighted special issues in precursor control;(29) they were findings from other major cases involving diversion and attempted diversion that had been uncovered. The Board presented those cases in detail in its technical report.(30) It then made proposals for further action that should be taken by Governments.(31) 130. Governments have responded to those proposals. An increasing number of competent national authorities are requesting the assistance of the Board in verifying the legitimacy of individual shipments or otherwise advising it of transactions that they have authorized and of shipments about which they have sent inquiries directly to their counterparts. An increasing number of Governments are providing alerts to other Governments about attempts at diversion. More and more competent authorities are sharing and effectively utilizing findings from seizures of illicit laboratories and of precursors to identify trafficking groups. 131. Thus, for instance, in 1996, Governments, in cooperation with the Board, prevented the diversion of or, because of suspicion, stopped the shipment of at least 16 tonnes of ephedrine, which is used as a precursor for methamphetamine, a stimulant widely abused in various parts of the world. That amount would have allowed traffickers to manufacture illicitly more than 10 tonnes of methamphetamine, corresponding to up to 1 billion street doses. As an example, the diversion of a total of more than 300 tonnes of acetic anhydride, a key chemical for illicit heroin manufacture, was prevented by one country alone. From that quantity, approximately 120 tonnes of heroin might otherwise have been illicitly manufactured, a quantity equivalent to 1 billion street doses or almost 10 times the quantity of the drug reported seized worldwide in 1995. As regards chemicals needed for cocaine manufacture, shipments totalling nearly 1,800 tonnes were stopped because of suspicion or irregularities. It is clear from these successes that it is becoming more difficult for traffickers to obtain the chemicals they require. 132. Many seizures of substances used in the illicit manufacture of drugs have occurred at the domestic level following the efforts of national law enforcement authorities. Large quantities of a wide range of chemicals used in the illicit manufacture of cocaine have been seized in Colombia. In India, investigations by customs authorities of trafficking in acetic anhydride have uncovered new methods of diversion, evidence that traffickers have tried to find ways around strengthened chemical controls in that country. New routes of diversion have also been identified, indicating that a large proportion of the acetic anhydride required for illicit heroin manufacture in south-west Asia is now diverted from or through member States of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in central Asia. The Board notes with appreciation that in North America tightened controls over ephedrine and pseudoephedrine have resulted in an estimated 250 tonnes of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine per year no longer being available for illicit manufacture. 133. Traffickers have turned to different methods for the illicit manufacture of methamphetamine. In particular, pharmaceutical preparations containing pseudoephedrine have been used in illicit manufacture in the United States. For other drugs such as amphetamines and hallucinogenic amphetamines such as methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, commonly known as "ecstasy") new methods of manufacture requiring different starting materials that are less well controlled have also been used. 134. It is true that substantial quantities of chemicals are diverted and reach the hands of traffickers in illicit laboratories. It is also true, however, that the controls in place, and the working mechanisms and operating procedures that have been developed to implement those controls, have had a serious impact on the availability of some chemicals. Through action taken by Governments using such controls, mechanisms and procedures to verify the legitimacy of transactions, often with the assistance of the Board, a number of major findings have been made. 135. Because relevant and accurate information is not always available, competent authorities often cannot establish whether a consignment is intended for legitimate purposes or not. Many competent authorities have therefore inquired of their counterparts in other countries or territories regarding the authenticity of individual transactions. By doing so, suspicious shipments have been identified and stopped or controlled deliveries have been arranged. In addition, to prevent traffickers from obtaining the chemicals that they require from different sources, major manufacturing and exporting countries need to be alerted to suspicious cases, particularly to stopped shipments. Some competent national authorities provide such alerts to their counterparts elsewhere and to the Board, and they in turn assist in passing on the alerts to others. 136. Examples of such cooperation, and the results, are given in the 1996 report of the Board on the implementation of article 12 of the 1988 Convention.18 They provide a solid basis for the Board's decisions on what further action it should take. (b) Rapid information exchange and other measures 137. Rapid information exchange between Governments has proved effective in identifying suspicious shipments and preventing diversions. The Board has been informed, for instance, that Belgium, China, Czech Republic, Germany, India, Switzerland and United States, as well as Hong Kong, regularly send importing countries information on exports of some, if not all, substances in Tables I and II or have otherwise been making inquiries, directly or through the Board, about the legitimacy of individual shipments. In working with Governments that exchange information on precursor shipments on a regular basis, the Board has identified a number of problems and issues that should be addressed. Some special issues are highlighted below. For a detailed discussion of the issues, see the 1996 report of the Board on the implementation of article 12 of the 1988 Convention.(32) 138. Mechanisms and systems for such rapid communication are not yet in place in all countries. The authorities of the exporting countries are frequently unable to be in touch immediately with the competent authorities of the importing countries, since often the identities of the competent authorities and their respective roles are not known. When they manage to do so and make inquiries before authorizing shipments to proceed, the competent authorities of the exporting countries often do not receive replies or do not receive them immediately. In the absence of apparent suspicion, in such situations the shipments would be allowed to proceed even though suspicion might later be established; such situations would also hinder legitimate trade. The Board contacts major exporting countries that regularly inquire about the legitimacy of transactions with a view to identifying those importing countries that do not respond to their inquiries. 139. When suspicion has been established, only a small number of Governments are currently able to take action to provide alerts to Governments that might be targeted by traffickers. Even when alerts about suspicious or stopped shipments are sent, they are sometimes shared only with the Governments of other countries in the region or only with Governments with which special bilateral agreements have been concluded. Such a situation makes those alerts less meaningful, as traffickers then target countries elsewhere. 140. The Board has noted a lack of monitoring of certain types of transactions. While, for instance, some Governments have put in place export controls, no mechanism exists to monitor their imports, thus making it difficult, if not impossible, to trace re-exports. All exporting and transit countries, particularly those in Europe, where there is a concentration of major manufacturing and exporting countries working through the European Commission, should examine the scope of their current controls over international trade and make amendments, where necessary. In other cases, a so-called "targeted approach" has been used, focusing on exports to "sensitive" areas. The Board wishes once again to draw attention to the fact that, as global controls have been tightened, traffickers have exploited each and every weakness that they have identified. In many cases, precursors have been shipped to neighbouring countries, out of which they are smuggled into other countries. Governments should be aware that any targeted approach can only be useful if all other transactions are, in fact, also monitored. 141. The Board has also noted a lack of uniform action by certain Governments. While some Governments exercise strict vigilance over their exports, often as a result of full cooperation with the industry, others do not. Legitimate industry in countries with tight controls may suffer if and when certain other countries do not apply the same level of vigilance, as the industry of countries with lax controls may consequently take undue advantage of the situation while allowing drug traffickers to benefit as well. 142. The Board requests all Governments to take whatever practical steps may be available to them to secure rapid communication exchange. Sharing of information is crucial. What types of information need to be shared and by whom are fully detailed in the 1996 report on article 12 of the 1988 Convention.18 It appeals to all competent authorities to provide immediate feedback on whatever they can possibly do at present. It urges all Governments to share alerts with other Governments concerned, setting out minimum information that will enable diversion attempts to be identified. Sensitive information can be, and will be, protected. The Board wishes to remind parties to the 1988 Convention that, in any case, it is an obligation under article 12 to make such notification to the competent authorities of all other parties concerned whenever it is believed that a transaction is destined for illicit drug manufacture. The Board has, for its part, accorded the highest priority in the area of precursor control to assisting Governments in securing rapid communication exchange to prevent diversion. 143. To that end, the Board is making specific proposals for further action and has summarized its previous recommendations in its 1996 report on the implementation of article 12 of the 1988 Convention.(33) Many of those recommendations have been incorporated into Economic and Social Council resolutions, which translate the general provisions of article 12 of the 1988 Convention into concrete means to enable full implementation of the obligations. There can be other means but parties must devise and take such concrete action. The Board also expects Governments and other parties that supported those resolutions to implement them without delay. 144. With regard to, in particular, the use of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine in the illicit manufacture or the abuse of those substances per se, the Board requests the governments of affected countries or territories to consider requiring authorizations for all imports of such substances. Governments of importing countries that have decided to take such a step should immediately inform the Board or other Governments to ensure that all other Governments concerned are aware of the relevant import requirement. (c) Final observations 145. The Board supports all initiatives to facilitate the implementation of article 12 of the 1988 Convention. It has noted with satisfaction the successful outcome of the INCB/UNDCP Workshop on Precursor Control in South and South-West Asia and the Central Asian Republics, held at New Delhi from 19 to 23 August 1996. The Workshop was aimed at establishing working systems for sharing information within and between regulatory and enforcement authorities at the national, subregional and regional levels. 146. At the international level, the Board is pleased to note the Conference on International Chemical Control Communications, held at Bangkok from 10 to 12 July 1996. The Conference, sponsored by the Drug Enforcement Administration of the United States, brought together competent authorities from a number of important manufacturing and exporting countries and attempted to develop the basis for a global precursor communication network. 147. The Board is convinced that special attention should be paid to maintaining and developing cooperation between Governments and to facilitating the sharing of information worldwide. The recommendations adopted by workshops and conferences such as the above-mentioned ones in India and Thailand further support that view. The Board therefore has decided to convene an international meeting to help to develop cooperation and information exchange between national competent authorities and with INCB. It is proposed that the meeting be held in 1997. 148. Programmes of work at the national, regional and international levels must be established if practical results are to be achieved. The Board reminds all Governments that since the 1988 Convention came into force, much groundwork has already been done in outlining options for control, information requirements and approaches to information sharing. Governments should therefore review the findings and recommendations of earlier regional and international meetings that have dealt with those issues. In that connection, the Board urges all Governments and the relevant competent international bodies to prevent duplication of effort by building on existing systems for information sharing and, where necessary, by utilizing already existing tools and materials to develop training packages. 149. In recent years, the Board has become increasingly aware of problems that Governments are facing in monitoring the licit trade in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursor chemicals channelled through free zones. Therefore the Board has requested the cooperation of Governments to review the implementation of the provisions of the international drug control treaties in free zones. 150. The diversion of controlled substances into the illicit traffic has taken place in free zones. While, in most countries, legislation provides for the same control and monitoring measures in free zones as in the rest of the country, in practice cooperation between competent drug control authorities and free zone authorities is often inadequate and actual control over the activities in such zones is lacking. 151. Inadequate international communication and cooperation are largely the result of difficulties in identifying whether transactions are destined for free zones. Therefore, the Board, in cooperation with Governments, will prepare a comprehensive list of all free zones in the world, indicating contact addresses and telephone and fax numbers. 152. In addition, the Board recommends that exporting countries, before allowing narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursors destined for free zones to be shipped, or trans-shipped, especially substances not subject to import or export authorizations, should contact the authorities concerned in order to ensure appropriate surveillance. 153. Furthermore, as free zones are under customs control, the Board has contacted the Customs Co-operation Council (also called the World Customs Organization) and, as part of the current revision by that organization of the International Convention on the simplification and harmonization of Customs procedures,(34) concluded at Kyoto, Japan, on 18 May 1973, has proposed amendments to the guidelines regarding the monitoring of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursors in free zones, contained in annex F.1 to that Convention. E. Substances beyond the scope of international control 154. In addition to the information on the abuse of or illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, the Board has received from more than one region reports on the non-medical use of or illicit traffic in the substances mentioned below. 155. The non-medical use of ephedrine, which is controlled as a precursor and not as a drug as such, has been reported in most regions in the world. In addition to ephedrine, the non-medical use of a great variety of Ephedra-based herbal preparations has been reported in different regions, most frequently in North America. Ephedrine or pseudoephedrine is the active ingredient in such preparations and the Board wishes to draw the attention of WHO and the Commission on Narcotic Drugs to the public health consequences connected with the misuse of such plant materials. That should be taken into consideration during the ongoing review of the current control status of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine. 156. There are continuous reports in Europe, North America and Oceania on seizures of khat (Catha edulis) originating in eastern Africa. 157. Sodium oxybate (gamma-hydroxybutyrate, also called GHB), is increasingly being used by young people who are abusers of "ecstasy"-type drugs. 158. The hallucinogenic properties of ketamine (an anaesthetic used mainly in veterinary medicine) are being exploited by some young drug abusers in Europe, North America and Oceania. 159. The abuse of inhalants (organic solvents) by street children in big cities has remained a major problem in South America, but the same social and health problem has been reported in most other parts of the world, above all in some countries in Africa, Asia, Central America and North America.
|
|
