The 28th of March marked the third anniversary of the Movement for Peace with Justice and Dignity (MPJD), a movement which emerged with the death of Juan Francisco Sicilia and six of his friends in 2011. Although more than 40,000 people had already been killed due to drug war related violence, this single incident in Cuernavaca, Morelos rocked the country. Unbeknownst to those who had killed him, Juan Francisco was the son of Javier Sicilia, a noted Mexican poet and intellectual.

Upon learning of the death of his son, rather than staying silent as many before him, he chose to speak out. On March 28, the Movement for Peace emerged as a political force of victims, family members, activists, academics and artists. Over the course of three years, they held dialogues with then President Calderon, the primary presidential candidates, held protests throughout Mexico City and completed three caravans, crossing all of Mexico and the United States.

Through it all, the victims and their families have stayed at the center. The stories of those who have been killed or disappeared as a result of the failed war on drugs continue to be told. Mothers, fathers, sisters and others continue to cry out in search for their loved ones. The pain has not diminished, but rather grows with each passing day in which justice is not served.

To commemorate three years of walking side by side, of protesting, of supporting and of building a community, the MPJD decided to take action. Rather than focusing on policy recommendations or trying to move some government institution to take action (although that is always a goal), the Movement took charge of reappropriating public spaces as a means of creating memory within the consciousness of our society.

On March 27, 2014, we met at the Estela de Luz (although we call it the Estela de Paz) to install 30 plaques with the stories and names of those who have been killed in disappeared. Drilling through the granite was hard. The police came by to stop it. They were dissuaded. The museum below the Estela complained. They too were eventually turned away. Who in their right mind can deny a mother with four sons who have been disappeared the right to create a space where there memory lives on. No one. We drilled away until all the plaques had been placed. That space will never be the same.

On March 28, 2014, the Movement traveled to Cuernavaca, Morelos to engage in additional civil disobedience. This time, we went to the Gustavo Díaz Ordáz Boulevard. For those who don’t know, Díaz was the president responsible for the October 2, 1968 Tlatelolco massacre of students in Mexico City. It would be comparable to having a Pinochet Avenue in Chile or an Idi Amin Street in Uganda. Unthinkable.

Upon arrival at the Boulevard, we began taking down the street signs, one by one, replacing them with the exact same sign except it now read: 28 de Marzo, commemorating the anniversary of the Movement for Peace. Slowly walking up and down the street, individuals would climb the ladder to screw in the new name. As we walked the street, most of the cars passing by shouted expressions of support, but there were a few who called out that we were committing vandalism. (see the update). These actions might mean little when thinking about the injustice and corruption that exists in Mexico, but through these acts, we become closer. We grow together and we affirm that we are on the right side of history.

UPDATE: Since the actions on the 27th and 28th of March, the plaques are still at the Estela de Paz and have been left untouched. The new street signs on the other hand have been taken down and are back to having the name of someone responsible for the massacre of students in 1968. This signals to the Movement that we must continue to build consciousness. It was never about making someone’s life harder because the street name had been changed, but rather as a way of honoring the memory and history that we are currently living, as well as letting go of the violations we experienced in the past. We will continue building that memory and calling out the names of our loved ones. Vivos se los llevaron! Vivos los queremos!

The Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) convenes once a year in March in Vienna at the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). In the recent past, the most exciting event was when Evo Morales, President of Bolivia, would show up and discuss the many uses of the coca leaf. However, this year was different with a heated debate occurring on the use of the death penalty for drug trafficking (condemning the death penalty didn’t happen, but the coalition continues to grow), a clear  fracture between member states and preparations for the 2016 United Nations General Assembly Special Session on drugs (UNGASS).

Much of the discussion focused on minutiae such as controlling food poppy seeds and using the Olympics as a means to live a drug-free life, but within these distractions, there were hints that change is both on the horizon and already occurring. Uruguay was clearly the strongest reform voice, defending their newly passed law to regulate and control the production, distribution, sale and consumption of cannabis. But there were also surprises. Ecuador took a strong stance on the need for an open debate, a willingness to review the conventions and strong civil society presence at the upcoming UNGASS meeting.

Within the Mexican delegation, there was a clear division of interests: whether to join the progressive group of like-minded countries or to maintain a firm grip on the status quo. Based on hearing the country statements and their interventions on the UNGASS resolution, as well as meeting with several of the delegation members, it is clear that the fracture will not be quickly resolved. While there was agreement on treating the drugs issue as a health problem, there is still no consensus on the means by which that will occur, nor whether regulation is part of that agreement. Mexico affirmed that they were against legalization, yet spoke about the need for alternatives and new ways of addressing the problem, joining forces with other countries who are already moving towards models of regulation.

Since Mexico was one of three countries, along with Colombia and Guatemala to request the Special Session on drugs, there is a responsibility to bring something new to the table. If we are going to continue with the same strategy of militarization, prohibition and criminalization, there is no need to broaden the debate. Perhaps the changes will not be global–because with friends like Russia, China and Pakistan, who needs enemies–but rather we will see regional shifts that provide for a stronger platform from which to advocate alternatives.

The Organization of American States (OAS) has already begun to lead this process, Last year they released the Scenarios Report, which explored possible routes to decreasing violence levels in the region, including a possible regulatory model. At the CND this year, the OAS, along with Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia and Uruguay, hosted a side event on the report and ways that member states have used it to begin a national discussion on drug policy.

Uruguay, along with many civil society organizations focused on the need to give precedence to human rights obligations over drug control strategies. That will be a key point of convergence as member states begin designing their strategy for 2016. Human rights violations can no longer be justified under the umbrella of the war on drugs. The discussion regarding reforming or reviewing the drug conventions becomes less relevant when we prioritize human rights.

At the end of the day, it is clear that drug policy reform will happen on a national (Uruguay) or local (Colorado, Washington State) level, however there are many countries that are unwilling to act alone. Regional and international discussions allow us to take a break from the status quo and see the perspectives of others. We can begin to learn from each other. And often, the conversations that happen on the other side of the world begin to plant a seed of change in our own drug policies.

I spent the last 10 days in the West Bank and in Amman, Jordan as part of a solidarity visit.  I had been to Israel, Ihad visited the Middle East before, but what made this different was that I had the opportunity to hear directly from young people throughout the region. And because of this direct contact, my perspective has been completely changed.  This is in no way to say that I am even close to understanding the complexities of the issue, but at the very least, my view is broadening.

Wassam, from Iraq, spoke about how the invasion by the United States had only brought destruction and violence to his country. From his point of view, as a young Christian Iraqi dentist, living under the regime of Saddam Hussein was preferable to the current situation. He spoke about the bombing of buildings and the fractured state of his country. And there was no doubt that without the US intervention, this would not have happened. Although life might not have been great under the Hussein government, he felt safer. At the very least, he knew what to expect and the Christian population was more protected. Now there is only chaos and confusion. He doesn’t know who will be in power and how they will react to this religious minority. He worries about persecution by extremists. But most of all, he wants his country back. He wants to feel proud of who they are, he wants to have the buildings be beautiful again.

Wassam is on the far right.

Because my perspective is almost completely shaped by the New York Times and other western media, I was surprised to hear from so many people that they would prefer regimes that we have been told are “evil.” I consider myself a critical thinker, but when you are a religious minority, the authoritarian regime might be better because they protect you. It is the unknown that is most frightening.

I was invited by a friend to partake in chain email with uplifting passages that help us get through tough times. I wanted to share some of the pieces that have been sent to me.

“The artist, and particularly the poet, is always an anarchist in the best sense of the word. He must heed only the call that arises within him from three strong voices: the voice of death, with all its foreboding, the voice of love and the voice of art.”

― Federico García Lorca

——————————————–

“We know only too well that what we are doing is nothing more than a drop in the ocean. But

if the drop were not there, the ocean would be missing something.”
― Mother Teresa

———————————————-
The first is a quote of “Le Petit Prince” written by a French Writer, St Exupéry

“What makes the desert beautiful,” says the little prince, “is that somewhere it hides a well.”

———————————————–
The second one, is a part of Trotsky’s testament:

“Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full.”

——————————————–

Netzahualcoyotl said Nobody needs to say who he/she is since his/her actions will tell.

——————————————-

“Either we have hope within us or we don’t; it is a dimension of the soul, and it’s not essentially dependent on some particular observation of the world or estimate of the situation. Hope is not prognostication. It is an orientation of the spirit, and orientation of the heart; it transcends the world that is immediately experienced, and is anchored somewhere beyond it’s horizons…

Hope, in this deep and powerful sense, is not the same as joy that things are going well, or willingness to invest in enterprises that are obviously heading for success, but, rather, an ability to work for something because it is good, not just because it’s a chance to succeed. The more propitious the situation in which we demonstrate hope, the deeper the hope is. Hope is definitely not the same thing as optimism. It is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out.”

– Vaclav Havel

——————————

On making changes in life. On the new year. For inspiration.

The Journey

One day you finally knew
what you had to do, and began,
though the voices around you
kept shouting
their bad advice–
though the whole house
began to tremble
and you felt the old tug
at your ankles.
‘Mend my life!’

each voice cried.
But you didn’t stop.
You knew what you had to do,
though the wind pried
with its stiff fingers
at the very foundations,
though their melancholy
was terrible.
It was already late
enough, and a wild night,
and the road full of fallen
branches and stones.
But little by little,
as you left their voices behind,
the stars began to burn
through the sheets of clouds,
and there was a new voice
which you slowly
recognized as your own,
that kept you company
as you strode deeper and deeper
into the world,
determined to do
the only thing you could do–
determined to save
the only life you could save.

Mary Oliver

“>

Los afectados

Investigadora en políticas de drogas evalúa posibles cambios a nivel internacional a partir de experiencias de despenalización.

Zara Snapp es mexicana, pero vivió en el estado de Colorado, Estados Unidos, desde los nueve hasta los 25 años. Hizo la licenciatura en Políticas Públicas en Colorado y más adelante la maestría en Harvard, y se ha especializado en investigación en políticas de drogas, además de trabajar en el Movimiento por la Paz con Justicia y Dignidad de México, que nuclea a familiares de víctimas de la guerra contra las drogas. Desde México, evaluó los cambios que implica la propuesta de regulación de la marihuana aprobada en Uruguay y la recién estrenada legalización de la marihuana recreacional en Colorado. Asegura que los cambios en materia de

política de drogas deben surgir desde América Latina.

Last week, I did some interviews with the uruguayan media on drug policy reform, the implementation of legal marijuana in Colorado and the current situation in Mexico. For posterity’s sake, I decided to post them below. You can find a direct link here. Thanks to Paula Barquet for providing the opportunity.

“Creo que hay una ola legalizadora de la marihuana”, dijo Zara Snapp, experta en política en drogas

For many people, today is a historic day. Beyond being International Human Rights Day, this is also the  day that the Uruguayan Senate votes on a comprehensive bill which regulates the production, cultivation, sale and consumption of cannabis.

The objectives of the law are to reduce the illegal drug market by exerting state control and separating markets, reduce the age of initiation among young people and provide a quality, accessible product to marijuana users. The law also provides for both personal cultivation, medicinal and recreational access, thus becoming the first country in the world to recognize that there are various uses for the plant. President Pepe Mujica promoted the initiative, although there was concerted international pressure from organizations such as the International Narcotics Control Board of the UN and neighbor countries such as Brazil. But Mujica has stayed strong, understanding that this law will radically transform their drug policy strategy and that it is a first step in ending the prohibitionist paradigm.

The Uruguayan Congress (or lower house) voted on this measure in June of this year and that was an uncertain vote as it was unclear whether the ruling party, the Frente Amplio, would succeed in getting the 50 votes needed to pass the bill to the Senate. But it did pass and today the Senate will debate the merits and drawbacks of this bill. It is expected to easily pass as the Frente Amplio has a clear majority. If you are interested in watching the vote live, please click here (in Spanish).

A group of civil society organizations, Regulación Responsable, has produced a series of videos that explain the law and that have English subtitles (just click on cc at the bottom).

While many people believe that marijuana has been legalized in other countries, such as the Netherlands, it is important to note that these countries have not actually regulated the full supply chain, but rather have decided to make enforcement of marijuana laws a low priority. By not fully legalizing and regulating, these countries continue to be aligned with the international drug treaties of the UN. Drug policy reformers around the world have celebrated the marijuana regulation initiatives in the Colorado and Washington State, but these measures fail to transform federal law. For this reason, the proposed law in Uruguay goes one step further—openly breaking the UN consensus and clearly stating that prohibition has not worked for their country.

As Mexico and other parts of Latin America (and the world) continue to suffer the consequences of the war on drugs, witnessing high levels of violence, criminalization, homicides, disappearances and full militarization, civil society raises its voice to insist on a change in strategy. Social movements such as the Movement for Peace with Justice and Dignity in Mexico have come out in favor of the regulation of drugs to move away from war, towards peace and justice. When those most affected by the war on drugs demand respect for human rights, harm reduction and a focus on health, governments need to listen. Today, Uruguay provides us with hope and a first step towards change. Today is a historic day and is the beginning of the end of the war on drugs.

For the next three weeks, I will be on the road with the Movement for Peace with Justice and Dignity. We began in Denver at the International Drug Policy Reform Conference and we will end on November 15^th with a panel with Javier Sicilia and Michelle Alexander.

We began the day at the medical examiners office where they shared about the “undocumented border crossers” whose remains are brought there, the cause of death and how they work to identify the bodies (or in many cases, the remains). On average per year, in the Pima county area, they are brought 175 remains, mainly dead from undetermined causes (but usually exposure to the elements) and they are able to identify 65% of the remains. As you can imagine, this presentation was difficult to hear.

In the afternoon, we were taken to the federal courthouse to bear witness to Operation Streamline. Operation Streamline began in 2005 and was implemented in 2008 in the Tucson region. It is a program that ultimately seeks to criminalize migrants and punish them for crossing the border. Rather than simply deporting these folks, the government has chosen to turn them into criminals. Each day, 70 migrants are brought before a judge and are essentially given the option: either plead guilty, get a misdemeanor offense and serve from 1-5 months in prison, or take your chances at the higher

level court, plead your case and probably receive a much higher sentence. Clearly, most people choose the former “option.”

Today I watched 70 people, mainly from Mexico and mainly young men be criminalized for simply seeking better economic opportunities. These young men (and some women) will serve time in prison, have a criminal record and will be charged with a felony and a longer prison sentence if they attempt to re-enter the United States. Today I watched people shackled at the wrists, waist and feet. They will enter a private prison system where they will work for free and ensure that these private prisons are at capacity. This is called modern slavery. This is state-sanctioned slavery.

When I saw so many of my fellow human beings deprived of liberty and treated so badly, tears welled in my eyes and my heart hurt. As Javier said in his speech tonight, this is an example of people not being protected by the state, but rather being completely criminalized for doing something that does not hurt anyone else. Every day at 1.30pm, I will be thinking of those 70 unique human beings who are being sentenced to a prison sentence simply for crossing an arbitrary line in search of an economic opportunity.

I encourage you to learn more about this—there is some hope. On October 11, activists shut down Operation Streamline by chaining themselves to the buses and not allowing it to continue. For that one day, they could not “streamline” people. Contact your legislators to let them know how you feel. We cannot continue to treat people this way.