OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Inštitut za raziskave in razvoj "Utrip"

UTRIP

UTRIP is a non-governmental and a non-profit research institute.

Lobbying Activity

Response to EU Drugs Strategy and European Action Plan Against Drug Trafficking

16 Sept 2025

The new EU Drugs Strategy should adopt a genuinely balanced approach, ensuring that prevention, harm reduction, treatment, recovery, and supply reduction receive equal attention, funding, and measurable targets. Civil society must be meaningfully involved across all pillars. Prevention, Treatment and Care Services: The implementation of EU minimum quality standards in drug demand reduction should be mandatory, with Member States required to report annually. Prevention science must be scaled through European Prevention Curriculum (EUPC) training, with measurable targets for coverage. Early childhood, family-based and school-based prevention should be ring-fenced within national health budgets. The treatment gap must be closed by setting benchmarks for access, reducing waiting times, and ensuring trauma-informed, gender-sensitive, and culturally adapted services. Recovery-oriented systems of care, including housing, employment, and education reintegration, should be established, with recovery capital indicators monitored. Mental health must be integrated into all demand reduction measures. Civil society, especially organisations of people with living and lived experience, and youth organisations, should be systematically involved in programme design and evaluation. Drug-Related Harm: Harm reduction requires EU-wide coverage targets for opioid agonist treatment, take-home naloxone, and needle and syringe programmes, both in community and prison settings. EU-level joint procurement and stockpiling of naloxone and other countermeasures is necessary. The early warning system should be reinforced with toxicology, nightlife, and community data, enabling rapid alerts and responses. Equivalence of care in prisons and continuity post-release should be ensured. Cost-effectiveness and social return analyses must be integrated to demonstrate the economic and social value of harm reduction services. Supply Reduction and Security: Supply reduction should be linked more strongly with prevention and community safety. Monitoring should adapt to online markets, small-scale production, and the use of AI, with full respect for human rights and digital rights. The UNODC Guiding Document on the Role of Law Enforcement in School-Based Prevention should be promoted, helping shift police mindsets towards prevention and reducing demand at the local level. This would free law enforcement to focus on organised criminal networks and large-scale trafficking. Confiscated assets should be transparently reinvested in demand reduction. Indicators must track unintended enforcement consequences such as violence, displacement, and human rights impacts. International Cooperation: The EU should continue to speak with one voice in UN drug policy processes, especially during the 2027 expert review and 2029 Ministerial Declaration assessment, prioritising health, human rights (including childrens rights), and balanced approaches. Evidence-based demand reduction services should become accession criteria for candidate countries. Sustained funding is needed for European CSOs to engage in UN forums and regional platforms. International civil society cooperation should also be strengthened by linking the CSFD with global networks, such as VNGOC, ensuring cross-regional advocacy and expertise exchange. Research, Innovation and Foresight: The EU should fund EUDA-coordinated pilots on stimulant and cannabis interventions and require evaluation frameworks for all EU-supported programmes. Foresight capacities should be expanded, in cooperation with ECDC, Europol, and academia, to anticipate new synthetic threats, cannabis legalisation concerns, and evolving consumption patterns. Coordination, Governance and Implementation: Member States should publish annual budget allocations across supply and demand reduction, ensuring balance. A common outcomes framework should track treatment retention, overdose deaths, recovery capital, stigma reduction, and violence.
Read full response

Response to EU Drugs Agenda and Action Plan

14 Jul 2020

In September 2015, the Council of the EU adopted Council conclusions on the implementation of minimum quality standards in drug demand reduction (DDR) in the EU. Although non-binding for national governments, this document represents the political will of EU countries to address DDR interventions through an evidence-based perspective, including in the period covered by the new EU Drugs Agenda & Action Plan (2021-2025). In the period of 2017-2020, building on the insights gained from the assessment tool and feasibility study, CSFD has developed the Guidelines & Recommendations for the implementation of Minimum Quality Standards in DDR in the EU by Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) (http://www.civilsocietyforumondrugs.eu/tf4-working-group-on-quality-standards-in-drug-policy/). Drawing on the recommendations related to each specific standard, and on the feedback from the assessment and feasibility studies, there are a number of conclusions which are important to highlight with regards to the new EU Drugs Agenda. These are: A) DISINVESTMENT FROM INEFFECTIVE & HARMFUL INTERVENTIONS Responses to the assessment and feasibility studies highlighted that there are still many interventions in the field of DDR, which are not being carried out in line with minimum quality standards. Governments and CSOs should be aware of this and consciously seek to disinvest and moving support away from ineffective services and interventions. Correspondingly, they should invest more resources towards implementation of evidence-based and effective interventions, especially in the fields of prevention and risk and harm reduction. B) EDUCATION AND TRAINING & CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The responses to the assessment and feasibility study pieces also reveal that there is a perceived gap in quality education and training for the DDR workforce (both in relation to basic training and in respect of continuing professional development). Governments and CSOs should investigate the long-term value of investment in this area, and look to invest more resources into developing and maintaining quality (formal and non-formal) education and training programmes for professionals and volunteers in the field of DDR. C) MONITORING & EVALUATION According to the results of assessment and feasibility study, the evaluation culture is weak in Europe in the field of DDR. There is very little demand by (funding) authorities for monitoring & evaluation of programmes and other interventions (especially concerning outcome evaluation). Without evaluation there is impossible to say, which programmes and interventions are effective and has significant impact on the situation in the field of DDR. Governments & CSOs are advised to invest more in monitoring and evaluation, which would significantly improve the quality of interventions and motivation of professionals to continue with quality work. However, those involved in monitoring and evaluation need to make sure of selecting the correct and adequate metrics and evaluation methods in order to avoid large box-ticking exercises, that may draw time away from the provision of services. Therefore, a balance should be established between the time needed to provide quality services and conducting efficient monitoring & evaluation. D) SUSTAINABLE FUNDING RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARDS According to the results of assessment & feasibility study, there is almost no sustainable funding for programmes and interventions in the field of DDR. States and funding bodies at all levels are advised to relate funding programmes & schemes to the implementation of minimum quality standards, but at the same time invest significantly more resources to improve the capacity of CSOs (technical & financial) to comply with those standards. Without sustainable funding, improved knowledge & skills of the workforce, and an improved monitoring & evaluation culture, we cannot expect significant improvements & developments in the field of DDR.
Read full response