Search results

The purpose of this chapter is to explain the concept of right to participation from the viewpoint of development and tries to establish nexus between participation and right to development in context of human rights-based approach and try to establish the co-existence between the two terminologies. The term participation is closely associated with the traditional democratic system; under this system people are entitled to participate in governance system directly or indirectly, which can be dated back from the ancient Greek civilization (Faruque, 2002a). In a democratic system, participation is people central and can be treated as “an valuable module of any system that considers itself a democracy” (Kweit & Kweit, 1981) “corner stone of democracy” (Sherry, 1969) or “instrument of legitimacy of government” (Falk & Strauss, 2000). Participation means a right by which one can exercise his/her function in the society and express his/her view or behavior toward the political system and governance. So the notion of participation is “effective in mobilizing and natural resources and combating inequalities, discrimination, poverty and exclusion” (UN.DOC, E/CN.4/1990/9/Rev. 1, 1990, Ch. 7). However, the concept of participation “should be viewed both as a means to an end and as an end itself” (UN.DOC, E/CN.4/1990/9/Rev. 1, 1990, Ch. 7, para 150). In environmental level, public participation has played a vital role in decision-making for measuring the protection of environment. Public participation in decision-making that affects the environment is recognized in the Aarhus Convention (Convention on Access to Information, 2001).

States in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have historically leaned towards conservative, reactionary models of drugs policy. The combination of authoritarian forms of government, whether dynastic monarchies (Morocco, Jordan and Persian Gulf countries), semi-military republics (Syria, Egypt and Algeria) or religiously sanctioned republics (Iran), with the strong influence of Islamic law and norms, has signified that the region has enforced strict forms of drug prohibitions. For that matter, the region is home to cultural and social norms that are less permissive than in other regions of the world: for instance, with regard to premarital sex, homosexuality, clothing, alcoholic drinks and freedom of expression. This image of the MENA region is often overplayed by media commentators and Western scholars, especially in the field of drugs policy. The almost total absence of studies of drugs policy or drugs history in the MENA, excluding works in epidemiology, speaks well about the oblivion to which the region has been relegated over the last decades. The chapter provides first a background on the main questions regarding MENA drugs policy, looking at the historical developments in drug regulations and drug trends. Then, it discusses the current policies that operate across the region and, if pertinent, the prospects of policy development. When necessary, the argument refers to contextual elements that have influenced the direction in national and transitional drugs policy. Conscious of the fact that the MENA is as vast and diverse as a continent, I have opted to focus on three paradigmatic cases (Iran, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia), which provide an adequate geographical and thematic coverage of the MENA drugs policy. The three cases cover different aspects of today’s MENA drugs policy spectrum, from draconian repressive measures to progressive harm reduction programmes. Taken in their geographical dimension one can appreciate the variety and difference that exists within the MENA region, therefore supporting one of the key objectives of this chapter, which is to provide a nuanced analysis of drugs policy against the grain of homogenising and culturally reductive approaches.