40% of Executions Are for Drug Crimes: Why Global Drug Policy Needs a Human Rights Overhaul

Geneva, Switzerland, MMN Correspondent: Imagine a world where more than four out of every ten executions are for crimes that didn’t involve violence. That’s not a hypothetical scenario. It’s the reality we’re living in right now. According to independent monitors like Amnesty International and Harm Reduction International, drug related offences now account for over 40% of all recorded executions globally. In 2025 alone, at least five nations China, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Singapore carried out death sentences specifically for drug crimes. The numbers are climbing, and the question is: why isn’t the world paying closer attention?

This isn’t a trend confined to a few countries. Algeria, Kuwait, and the Maldives are actively expanding their capital punishment laws to include drug trafficking and even possession. Jordan recently ended a nine year moratorium on executions, carrying out six death sentences in a single week, with officials signaling plans to extend the death penalty to certain drug charges. What we’re seeing is a quiet but powerful shift toward retributive justice, even as evidence mounts that such approaches don’t reduce drug supply or demand.

Here’s the core tension: international human rights law clearly states that the death penalty should only be used for the most serious crimes involving intentional loss of life. Drug possession and trafficking, by definition, don’t meet that threshold. The United Nations has repeatedly affirmed this position. Yet in practice, many countries apply capital punishment for drug offences without due process, often targeting the most vulnerable people the poor, migrants, and those without access to proper legal representation. Coerced confessions and unfair trials are common. Some individuals sentenced to death were simply couriers, unaware of what they were carrying.

So where do the key global bodies stand? The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) are the two primary UN entities shaping international drug policy. Every year, they release the World Drug Report, a flagship document that tracks trends in drug use, production, and control. But here’s the curious part: despite the growing number of executions for drug crimes, the report has consistently avoided robust condemnation of capital punishment in drug enforcement. It’s a notable silence, and one that many human rights organizations say undermines the UN’s credibility.

On the eve of World Drug Day, June 26, a coalition of 63 human rights and health organizations including Amnesty International and Harm Reduction International issued a joint call for change. They’re asking the UNODC to integrate a dedicated chapter on human rights into the next World Drug Report. This chapter would include updated execution data, an analysis of how these policies disproportionately affect marginalized groups, and explicit recommendations for retentionist states to align their laws with international standards. They’re also urging the UNODC to embed a firm commitment to abolishing the death penalty within its new strategic framework.

Chiara Sangiorgio, Amnesty International’s expert on the death penalty, put it plainly: “The death penalty is an abhorrent practice with no place in today’s world. As executions for drug related offences reach shocking levels, the continued silence and inaction from UNODC and the CND is deplorable and leaves their stated commitment to human rights empty of meaning.” Catherine Cook, Executive Director of Harm Reduction International, added: “Any use of the death penalty is a violation of human rights. But its use for drug related offences is prohibited under international law and standards. It is high time that the UN bodies overseeing international drug policy confronted the harms caused by punitive practices and make the abolition of the death penalty a priority worldwide.”

There’s an irony here that’s hard to ignore. The UN promotes harm reduction, treatment, and rehabilitation as pillars of effective drug policy. Yet it remains silent when governments execute individuals for drug crimes. That inconsistency erodes trust in multilateral institutions and sends a dangerous message that some lives are worth less than others in the eyes of global governance.

Behind every execution statistic is a human story. Many of those sentenced to death for drug offences were convicted based on coerced confessions, lacked proper legal counsel, or were traffickers operating under duress. In several cases, people were arrested after being used as mules by organized crime networks, often unaware of the contents of the packages they carried. Their deaths do nothing to dismantle drug supply chains. Instead, they deepen cycles of fear, trauma, and systemic inequality.

Countries that have moved away from punitive approaches offer a different path. Portugal, for example, decriminalized all drugs in 2000 and saw dramatic reductions in drug related deaths, HIV transmission, and incarceration rates. The Portuguese model shows that compassion and evidence based policy can coexist with public safety and social stability. It’s a reminder that there are alternatives to execution.

The path forward is clear. The UNODC has an opportunity to transform from a passive observer into a proactive advocate. By incorporating human rights safeguards into its flagship reports, supporting national reforms, and publicly condemning capital punishment in drug enforcement, the organization can reclaim its moral authority. The upcoming World Drug Report presents a pivotal moment to turn the tide.

The world is watching. Millions around the globe are calling for accountability, justice, and humanity. The death penalty for drug related offences is not just unlawful. It is morally indefensible. As global citizens, we cannot afford to remain silent any longer. The time to end this practice is now.