On the occasion of the 2026 International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking (World Drug Day) and the Support Don’t Punish Global Day of Action on 26 June, 63 national, regional and international organisations call on the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) and its Member States to unequivocally condemn the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences and to uphold international human rights obligations, including by adopting concrete measures to restrict the use of the death penalty with a view to its full abolition. We further urge UNODC to ensure that none of its technical assistance, capacity-building, or support to drug law enforcement in retentionist States risk contributing, directly or indirectly, to the investigation, prosecution, conviction or sentencing of individuals to death for drug-related offences. 

At a time when executions for drug-related offences are reaching unprecedented levels, continued silence and inaction from UNODC and CND, the UN bodies mandated to guide the development and implementation of international drug policy, are untenable. We urge UNODC and CND to take a clear stance against this inhuman practice that contributes to the perpetuation of human rights violations in the name of drug control and to a systemic lack of transparency and accountability.  

Our organisations oppose the death penalty unconditionally and continue to call on all states that retain the death penalty to fully abolish it as a matter of urgency. 

THE DEATH PENALTY FOR DRUG-RELATED OFFENCES: RECORD-HIGH EXECUTIONS

 The death penalty is retained for drug-related offences in at least 35 countries, and it is mostly imposed in relation to the cultivation, manufacturing, trafficking or importing/exporting of controlled substances. 

Official information on the use of the death penalty is not publicly available for many countries; and only a limited number of state authorities globally respond to requests for information – often not providing disaggregated data by crime. In the absence of full transparency on the part of states, it is impossible to know the full extent of the resort to this cruel punishment, including for drug-related offences.  

However, independent research by civil society shows a sharp rise in drug-related executions in recent years, with such cases accounting for over 40% of all executions worldwide and reaching 46% in 2025. Reported separately by Amnesty International and Harm Reduction International, more than 1,200 people executed in 2025 are for drug-related offences, marking a significant increase compared to 2024 and the highest number recorded to date. This finding underscores the growing role of drug control as a driver of capital punishment globally and in many countries.

Amnesty International and Harm Reduction International recorded drug-related executions in five countries: China, where official sources confirmed drug-related executions, but for which neither organisation was able to present a total figure due to state censorship and lack of transparency; Iran, where almost half the executions recorded during the year were for drug-related offences; Kuwait, which also expanded applicability of the death penalty for drug offences in 2025; Saudi Arabia, where 240 executions for drug-related offences were recorded, doubling the corresponding total for 2024; and Singapore, where 15 out of 17 executions were drug related, also doubling the 2024 figure. Both organisations believe that it is likely that drug-related executions were carried out in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) and Viet Nam, but could not confirm it, again due to restrictive state practices. 

Civil society independent monitoring has also documented hundreds of new death sentences imposed for drug-related offences in at least 16 countries in 2025:  Bangladesh, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Laos, Libya, Malaysia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Viet Nam, and Yemen. In addition to these, Harm Reduction International recorded death sentences for drug-related offences in North Korea and Thailand.  

At least 2,450 people are estimated to be on death row for drug offences in 22 countries at the end of 2025; though actual figures are likely to be significantly higher.

Throughout the year, the authorities of Algeria, Kuwait, and the Maldives also drove legislative efforts to expand the scope of the death penalty for drug-related crimes. Positive steps to reduce the scope of the death penalty for these offences were taken in Viet Nam, where the death penalty was abolished for eight offences including drug transportation. In April 2026, the Ministry of Public Security proposed further amendments to the Penal Code to reduce the scope of the death penalty.

Recent developments in other countries suggest that, with sustained political will, a significant decrease in the global resort to the death penalty for drug-related offences is possible. In Malaysia, the repeal of the mandatory death penalty in July 2023, prompted a review of existing death sentences by the Federal Court and Court of Appeal, resulting in the commutation of more than 1,000 death sentences. Official figures show a further decline in the number of death sentences imposed by High Courts during 2025, with the overall total (15) decreasing by one third compared to 2024, when 24 new death sentences were imposed. The number of drug-related offences declined by two, from nine to seven. Once, again, Malaysia’s higher courts did not uphold any new death sentences for such offences during 2025. In July 2023, Pakistan repealed the death penalty for drug-related offences; the first country to do so in over a decade. 

These changes not only represent significant steps towards aligning national laws with restrictions on the use of the death penalty set out under international law and standards but also reflect a shift away from highly punitive approaches to drugs, of which the death penalty has been the most extreme example. 

 

A CLEAR VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND DRUG CONTROL LAW AND STANDARDS 

International human rights law and standards restrict the use of the death penalty to the “most serious crimes”, which do not include drug-related offences. Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Safeguard No.1 of the UN Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, adopted through UN Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50, provide that the imposition of the death penalty must be restricted to the “most serious crimes”. The UN Human Rights Committee has stated that “The term ‘The most serious crimes’ must be read restrictively and appertain only to crimes of extreme gravity, involving intentional killing. Crimes not resulting directly and intentionally in death, such as […] drug and sexual offences, although serious in nature, can never serve as the basis, within the framework of article 6, for the imposition of the death penalty. […].” Among other UN mandates, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has similarly stated that “The death penalty may not be imposed for drug-related offences. In its 2023 report to the UN Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights highlighted that “[d]rug-related offences can never serve as the basis for the imposition of the death penalty”.   

The UN Drug Conventions – the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961), the Convention on Psychotropic Substances (1971) and the Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (1988) – do not make any reference to capital punishment, while several UN human rights and drug control bodies have reiterated the total opposition to the death penalty, including for drug-related offences. The UN task team on the implementation of the Common Position on Drugs has reiterated in unequivocal terms that the application of the death penalty for drug-related offences does not respect the spirit of the international drug control conventions and has the potential to become an obstacle to effective cross-border and international cooperation against drug trafficking. The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) has also noted that “States’ actions that violate human rights in the name of drug control policy are inconsistent with the international drug control conventions”; and has called on States that still retain this punishment for drug-related offences to consider abolishing it for such offences and commuting death sentences that have already been imposed.  More broadly, the INCB has stressed that respect for human rights is a prerequisite for the implementation of the international drug control conventions, and that measures adopted with the purported aim of furthering drug policy that are inconsistent with universally recognized human rights norms are a violation of the international drug control conventions. 

However, the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences remains a contentious issue at the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, preventing this body from taking a formal position on this important matter. While UNODC representatives have on occasions recalled the UN’s unconditional opposition to the death penalty, advocacy and advances towards abolition have not been included in programmatic documents of the Office. The continued and unequivocal public condemnation by UNODC of the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences would be critical, in the long term, to change the perception of this issue and foster a context for discussions that puts the protection of human rights at the core of international and national drug control policies. 

 

WORLD DRUG DAY AND THE DEATH PENALTY 

The International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, or World Drug Day, is an initiative designed to encourage international cooperation to address the risks and harms of drugs. Yet, in many countries, it has instead become an occasion to showcase and legitimiZe punitive drug control measures, with governments using the day to amplify “iron-fist on drug crime” stances. The authorities of Iran, for example, reaffirmed on World Drug Day their strong resolve to act as “the flag bearer of the global fight against narco-traffickers and death dealers”. In China, courts, including the Supreme People’s Court, use this day as a regular hook to issue judicial guidelines on how to apply the death penalty for drug related offences.

These narratives risk being reinforced by UNODC’s long-standing role in funding and providing technical support to narcotic-control programmes in countries that retain the death penalty for drug-related offences without sufficient safeguards to ensure that these operations do not risk contributing to the imposition of death sentences.  

The World Drug Day – and the global mobilisation taking place as part of the Support. Don’t Punish campaign – offer a timely opportunity for UNODC to confront these harms and set the abolition of the death penalty as a key priority in its work. The launch of the annual World Drug Report on 26 June, provides a public platform for the Office to condemn the use of the death penalty as a tool of drug control, and to recommend specific measures that retentionist countries can adopt to bring domestic drug policies in line with international law and standards; and to signal UNODC’s commitment to prioritise abolition of the death penalty in all of its work. 

The co-signatories reiterate their call on all international drug control mechanisms, including the CND and UNODC, to consistently incorporate human rights standards into their work, including in connection with the World Drug Day. In particular, we reiterate our call on the CND to establish a standing item in its agenda to address the human rights impacts of drug policies; and on UNODC to:  

1. ensure that human rights are part of its constant monitoring work, including through the inclusion in the World Drug Report of a specific chapter on human rights, and of updated information on use of the death penalty for drug-related offences, 
2. incorporate an explicit commitment to promote abolition of the death penalty (both generally and for drug-related offences specifically) in its forthcoming strategy; and 
3.  ensure that its cooperation with retentionist countries does not risk contributing to the use of the death penalty, in line with UN policy.  

1. Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran
2. ACAT-Liberia
3. Africa Network of People who Use Drugs [AfricaNPUD]
4. AIVL – Australia, Pacific
5. Amnesty International
6. Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) – Malaysia and Philippines / Asia Pacific
7. Capital Punishment Justice Project (CPJP), Australia
8. Center for Legal Support and Inmates’ Rehabilitation (CELSIR)
9. Center of Legal and Social Studies (CELS) – Argentina
10. Coalition of Somali Human Rights Defenders (CSHRD) 
11. Colegio de Abogados y Abogadas de Puerto Rico
12. Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide (CCDPW)
13. CrimeInfo, Japan
14. Dejusticia, Colombia
15. Doctors for Drug Policy Reform (D4DPR)
16. Drug Policy Alliance, USA
17. Drug Policy Australia
18. Drug Science, United Kingdom
19. ELEMENTA – Colombia and Mexico
20. Together against the death penalty (ECPM)
21. European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR)
22. Fédération Addiction – France
23. Forum Droghe – Italy
24. Groupement romand d’études des addictions (GREA), Switzerland
25. Hands off Cain
26. Harm Reduction Australia
27. Harm Reduction International
28. HAYAT, Malaysia
29. Instituto RIA, AC, Mexico
30. IHRNGO (Iran Human Rights)
31. International Drug Policy Consortium – Global
32. Italian Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty – Italy
33. Italian Federation for Human Rights (FIDU) – Italy
34. Japan Advocacy Network for Drug Policy
35. Journey of Hope…From Violence to Healing
36. Legalize NL, Amsterdam
37. Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat, Indonesia
38. lifespark – movement against the death penalty, Switzerland
39. My Brain My Choice, Germany
40. New York NGO Committee on Drugs (NYNGOC) – Global
41. Redemption Pakistan – Pakistan
42. Schildower Kreis, Germany
43. StoptheDrugWar.org (US)
44. SPINN: Suar Perempuan Lingkar Napza Nusantara, Indonesia
45. The French Collective for the Liberation of Mumia Abu Jamal
46. The Rights Practice, United Kingdom
47. Transform Drug Policy Foundation, UK
48. Youth RISE International
49. Correlation-European Harm Reduction Network
50. Safer Youth Norway
51. Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA)
52. German Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (GCADP)
53. Scottish Drugs Forum
54. Recovering Nepal
55. Richmond Fellowship Nepal
56. RESET – Drug Policy and Human Rights – Argentina
57. Humaania päihdepolitiikkaa ry – Finland
58. LDH (Ligue des droits de l’Homme/droits humains) – France
59. Akzept e.V. Bundesverband für akzeptierende Drogenarbeit und humane Drogenpolitik –Germany
60. HIV Legal Network/Réseau juridique VIH – Canada
61. Death Penalty Focus (DPF), USA
62. Rótin (The Root), Iceland
63. World Coalition Against the Death Penalty– Global
64. Kurdpa Human Rights Organization

MANILA – Today marks 20 years since the Philippines abolished the death penalty, a historic milestone for the nation as the first Southeast Asian country to legally end capital punishment and ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the international treaty abolishing the death penalty in the world. The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) commends this enduring achievement and urges the Philippines to maintain its unwavering commitment to the spirit of abolition despite attempts to reintroduce capital punishment. 

First Southeast Asian Country to Abolish the Death Penalty

On 24 June 2006, Republic No. Act 9346, or An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty in the Philippines, was enacted, abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines. A year later, the country signed on to the Second Optional Protocol. The abolition of the death penalty not only protected the country’s most vulnerable citizens from irreversible judicial errors, but also granted the Philippines the moral authority to successfully advocate for the lives of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) facing death row abroad, a recent example being Mary Jane Veloso, a human trafficking victim who narrowly escaped execution in Indonesia.

The Philippines first abolished the death penalty in 1987, setting a historic precedent as the first Asian country to do so. However, it was reintroduced in 1993 for 46 different offenses during President Fidel Ramos’s administration in an attempt to mitigate the rising crime rates in the country. Following a brief resumption of capital punishment in 1999, former President Estrada instituted an execution moratorium in 2000, which was then continued by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo who signed the law and commuted all death sentences to life imprisonment.

What has Happened Since? 

Despite a long history of abolition, the Philippines has faced repeated legislative attempts to reinstate the death penalty, often fueled by populist rhetoric and “tough on crime” agendas especially under President Rodrigo Duterte’s tenure and his “war on drugs” campaign. In 2017, a bill to reintroduce the death penalty for serious drug-related offenses was passed in the House of Representatives, but stalled in the Senate. Following this, there were several other efforts to reintroduce capital punishment, despite local resistance by human rights groups and citizens.

Duterte’s campaign did not stop at the legislative level, he spearheaded a brutal crackdown that involved extrajudicial killings upon alleged “criminals” and those involved in the drug trade, majority of them being from poor and marginalised communities. The exact number of lives lost between 2016 and 2022 is unknown: Philippine police cite up to 7,000 deaths, while the International Criminal Court (ICC), Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW) estimate fatalities to be as high as 30,000. 

ADPAN views these attempts to restore capital punishment as inextricably linked to the climate of impunity seen during the “War on Drugs.” State-sanctioned violence, whether through judicial execution or extrajudicial killing, fails to address the root causes of crime.

In 2018, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) conducted a first-of-its-kind national survey showing that only 33% or less of Filipinos favoured the death penalty for illegal drug offenses. This groundbreaking study served as a critical counterargument to official claims regarding the popularity of capital punishment in the country.

The “War on Drugs” also received worldwide scrutiny due to the country’s status as a state-party to the ICCPR. Notable interventions include a 2016 open letter from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee’s adoption of General Comment No. 36 in 2018, which legally solidifies that states-parties to the ICCPR cannot reinstate capital punishment. This global consensus was further underscored in July 2019 when the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution dedicated to the promotion and protection of human rights in the Philippines.

What is Happening Now?

Although drug-related fatalities have decreased under the current administration of President Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos Jr., human rights monitors report that state-sanctioned and vigilante killings continue to claim lives. However, the tangible value of the Philippines’ 2006 abolition continues to bear fruit in the present day. Following her late-2024 repatriation from Indonesia, Mary Jane Veloso remains detained at the Correctional Institution for Women in Manila. While civil society and legal groups urgently appeal to the President to grant her executive clemency on humanitarian grounds, her safety from the death penalty underscores the importance and need for abolition. Her case also serves as a reminder that maintaining abolition domestically grants the state the moral authority needed to aggressively protect and defend overseas Filipinos facing capital punishment in foreign jurisdictions.

As we look ahead, ADPAN reiterates that true justice is built on accountability, human rights, and the rule of law—not state-sanctioned violence. 

Our Call to Action

On this 20th anniversary, we call upon:

1. The Marcos Administration to meaningfully address the legacy of the recent drug war, including holding all perpetrators to account and introducing transitional and restorative justice mechanisms;
2. The Marcos Administration and Congress to reject any and all future legislative attempts at the reinstatement of the death penalty and institute meaningful justice reform that addresses the root causes of crime without resorting to execution;
3. Having pioneered the path of abolition in the region, the Philippines as a state to mobilise and influence other states across the Asia-Pacific and the world to abolish the death penalty, along with other like-minded states in the region; and
4. The Marcos Administration, through the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Department of Migrant Workers, and other relevant agencies, to strengthen legal, consular, and diplomatic assistance for Filipinos abroad facing capital charges or death sentences, and to treat their protection as part of the Philippines’ principled commitment to abolition at home and abroad.

We thus urge the Philippines to embrace its role as a regional leader, actively advocating for global abolition and firmly upholding the Philippines’ standing as a beacon of human rights in Southeast Asia. 

We, the undersigned organizations, urge the Government of Bangladesh to ensure truth, justice, and reparation for victims and their families and guarantees of non-recurrence of enforced disappearances in observance of the International Week of the Disappeared.

In Bangladesh, enforced disappearance was systematically used as a tool of state repression during the 15-and-a-half-year rule of the Awami League government. During this period, secret and unlawful detention facilities operated across the country. Opposition leaders, activists, dissenters, and individuals labeled as “militants” were arbitrarily detained in facilities such as the Joint Interrogation Centre of the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence and the Taskforce Interrogation Centre of the Rapid Action Battalion. Detainees were frequently subjected to torture and other forms of ill-treatment. Many were later charged under fabricated cases using laws such as the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2009, the Arms Act, 1878 and the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. These practices contributed to a broader system of repression targeting political opposition and critical voices.

On 5 August 2024, a mass, popular uprising led by students resulted in the fall of the Awami League government. Subsequently, the interim government formed a Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances, which documented over 1,600 cases. Of these, 251 individuals remain missing, while 1,282 resurfaced after periods of enforced disappearance and illegal detention. More than 60% of the victims were found to have known political affiliations. The Commission also documented several cases involving cross-border renditions to India.

A key cause of the persistence of enforced disappearances in Bangladesh has been a permissive political and institutional framework. Security-driven narratives helped normalize unlawful practices and effectively embed them within governance structures. These violations were closely linked to the widespread and systematic practice of torture, with victims subjected to prolonged physical and psychological abuse. A culture of impunity became deeply entrenched, with the criminal justice system manipulated to legitimize repression and shield perpetrators. Survivors faced intimidation and were reluctant to come forward.

Bangladesh acceded to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED) on 29 August 2024. Prior to this, no specific domestic law criminalized enforced disappearance. In response to its international obligations, the interim government promulgated the Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Ordinance, 2025, and the National Human Rights Commission Ordinance, 2025 to criminalize enforced disappearance and to strengthen the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) respectively.

However, following the 13th National Parliamentary Election, the newly elected Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP)-led government, despite securing a two-thirds majority, decided not to enact these ordinances into law, rendering them void. Despite assurances from the government regarding the enactment of stronger legislation, recently proposed draft laws on enforced disappearance and the NHRC would significantly weaken institutional independence, oversight, and effectiveness. Under these proposals, the NHRC would be unable to investigate serious human rights violations, including enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings, and would be limited to requesting reports from the government—mirroring the limitations of the 2009 NHRC Act. This marks a regression from the 2025 ordinance, which granted the Commission authority to directly investigate security forces.

Both draft laws appear to be diluted versions of the 2025 ordinances and risk undermining accountability mechanisms. Failure to enact the Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Ordinance, 2025 into law constitutes a grave injustice to victims and contradicts the spirit of the July mass uprising. It also contradicts a key provision of the ICPPED requiring states parties to enact domestic laws in line with the treaty. Further, both the 2025 ordinance and the new draft legislation include the death penalty as a sentencing option, and extending the death penalty under this legislation would conflict with Bangladesh’s obligations under Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

To date, families of those who remain missing have not been provided with official disappearance certificates, preventing them from accessing bank accounts or managing the property of the victims. Many families continue to live in uncertainty, while many survivors who have returned face ongoing harassment through fabricated legal cases and prolonged court proceedings.

Although the interim government initiated steps toward justice, including investigations by the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances and the International Crimes Tribunal, progress has significantly slowed since the installation of the elected government in February 2026. Victims and their families continue to endure profound psychological distress and uncertainty.

We consider the failure to enact the 2025 Ordinances and the proposal of weaker legislation to be serious setbacks that undermine victims’ rights and contradict the BNP’s commitments in the July National Charter 2025 to “ensure justice for all victims” of disappearances, killings, and torture. We reiterate that truth, justice, and reparation are essential to restoring the rule of law and preventing recurrence.

We call on the Government of Bangladesh to:

1. Enact comprehensive legislation criminalizing enforced disappearance, following meaningful and inclusive public consultations, in line with the ICPPED, and exclude the death penalty as a sentencing option. 
2. Ensure access to justice and comprehensive reparation, including full compensation, satisfaction, rehabilitation, and psychosocial support for victims and affected relatives as well as guarantees of non-repetition. Those reparation measures should be adopted with the participation of victims and civil society.
3. Provide legal recognition of the status of missing persons and protection to victims’ families, enabling families to access bank accounts and manage movable and immovable property, and official documentation.  
4. Withdraw all fabricated cases against victims of enforced disappearance and release those wrongfully detained, including individuals convicted on the basis of coerced confessions or torture. 
5. Conduct prompt, impartial, and independent investigations into all cases of enforced disappearance and prosecute those responsible with strict adherence to international fair trial standards and regardless of their institutional or political affiliation through appropriate judicial mechanisms, ensuring that no form of impunity is granted. 
6. Enact comprehensive legislation to strengthen the independence and mandate of the NHRC, following meaningful and inclusive public consultations, including by enabling the NHRC to investigate allegations against state actors, including security forces. 
7. Establish transparent diplomatic engagement with India to determine the whereabouts of any Bangladeshi nationals who may have been transferred or detained across borders following enforced disappearance.

Signed by:

• Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
• ARTICLE 19
• Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD)
• Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
• Capital Punishment Justice Project
• CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
• Fortify Rights 
• Human Rights Watch
• International Coalition Against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED)
• International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
• Odhikar
• Omega Research Foundation
• Robert & Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center
• World Organisation against Torture (OMCT)