Picking up from part-one, the United Nations and its contracting parties sought to regulate the chemical compound Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). THC is the most dangerous chemical compound that is found in the cannabis plant.

There are hundreds of chemical compounds called cannabinoids within the cannabis plant, such as THC, CBD, CBC, CBG, CBN etc. However the most problematic cannabinoid remains THC, in fact, this is regarded as a psychotropic chemical compound that causes the ‘high’ effect.

Particularly, THC compound, functions and activates the brain’s reward system. It releases the chemical dopamine at levels that are higher than normal and as a result of this abnormal high, the brain would want a repeat of this rewarding behavior.  The effects of THC impair judgment, coordination and reaction time. On the other hand, CBD does not produce any negative effect or variation on the brain. In fact as we shall be seeing, some countries in the EU make a distinction between THC and other cannabinoids such as CBD.

The European Union Perspective

With the 2004 Framework Decision, a new revolution was set to unleash itself when the EU legislators enacted Article 2(2) whereby it was declared that the cultivation of cannabis and other drugs is not prohibited if it is committed by its perpetrators exclusively for their own personal consumption as defined by national law. In fact, this led to some Courts in the European Union, namely Spanish courts to grab the bull by its horns (pun intended) and start adopting this thinking in their judgments. As a result, Spanish courts legalized cultivation for personal use. Nevertheless, the decision to choose the way forward rests solely on each individual Member State. It is the discretion of each Member State to legalise or not or to choose the best route for its citizens.

In fact, the EU in 2016, had declared that:

“The three UN Drug Control Conventions, which provide the international legal framework for addressing the drugs phenomenon, and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights are the cornerstones of the global response to the world drug problem. While recognizing that drug-related issues are of cross-cutting nature and cannot be solved by a single approach or through a predetermined set of policies, the EU and its Member States reiterate that the drug control treaties must be acknowledged and respected in developing and implementing national drug policies and laws, as well as regional and international programs. We maintain a strong and unequivocal commitment to the UN conventions. There is sufficient scope and flexibility within the provisions of the UN Conventions to accommodate a wide range of approaches to drug policy in accordance with national and regional specificities.” [1]

As a result, several EU Member States are undergoing a reform in the cannabis policy. Malta became the first EU Nation to adopt a legislative regime aimed at cultivation for personal use. Luxembourg, Belgium and Spain have similar policies whereby they have decriminalized consumption and cultivation for personal use, whilst prohibiting cultivation for commercial purposes. Netherlands and the non-EU Member State Switzerland sought to adopt experimental schemes for production. On the other extreme end, Germany seems to be looking at the possibility of full legal regulation (including commercial purposes) of its national cannabis adult-use market. The latter approach would definitely lead to a revolution.

Part three of this series will deal with cannabinoids (such as CBD) other than THC. We shall see how these cannabinoids are regulated in the EU and locally.

References:

1. European Union Common Position On Ungass 2016.
2. Obligations and Flexibilities under European & International law: a path towards domestic cannabis adult-use regulation by Augur Associates 2022.

The post Lets Talk Cannabis: Part two – The European Union Perspective appeared first on Arthur Azzopardi & Associates.

The first regulation at international level that included Cannabis was in 1925 during the Second Opium Convention. The first psychoactive substance that was regulated at international level was Alcohol – this was followed by opium (circa 1912 – during the First Opium Convention)

There are three important Conventions at international level which relate to Cannabis. The First Convention was drafted in 1961 (known as the Single Convention on Narcotics) this sought to regulate Cannabis in medical and scientific sectors.

The 1971 Convention sought to put in place measures which ensure the control of psychotropic substances (incl. THC) in medical and scientific purposes. This Convention also sought to implement measures to ensure that these psychotropic substances would not divert into the illicit market.

The 1988 Convention sought to enforce measures which the 1961 and 1971 Convention had failed to do. It was particularly drafted to arm contracting parties in the fight against illicit drug trafficking. Nonetheless, similar to both the 1961 and 1971 conventions, the 1988 Convention did not make any provisions relating to legal possession, production or use of Cannabis.

Notwithstanding the International obligations emanating from these three Conventions, the drafters sought to provide flexibility to its Contracting Parties whereby instead of implementing convictions or punishments, governments could impose other alternatives.

This is one of the arguments that is used by Contracting Parties, such as Uruguay, to carry out reforms in their territory when it comes to non-medical use of cannabis.

The ever-strong argument of respecting individual liberties and freedoms is also being used by Contracting Parties to enact legislative reforms concerning non-medical use of Cannabis. Malta is one of these parties making use of such an argument. In fact, the objective of Bill 241, that was passed last December 2021, specifies:

“The objects and reasons of this Bill consist of the establishment of the Authority on the Responsible Use of Cannabis and of the limited decriminalisation of certain cannabis related activities for the purpose of allowing for a balance between individual freedom in the limited and responsible personal use of cannabis and other social requirements.”

Other arguments in favour of regulating non-medical cannabis use relate to the protection of human health, risk and harm reduction (this is also used in the case of Malta) and the need to carry out experimentation to collect data (such as Netherlands and Switzerland).

Part two of this series will deal with EU policy in the field of Cannabis and we shall look at what EU states are doing in the sector of adult-use of Cannabis.

References:

1. Obligations and Flexibilities under European & International law: a path towards domestic cannabis adult-use regulation by Augur Associates 2022;
2. The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, as amended by the 1972 Protocol;
3. The Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971;
4. The United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988;

The post Let’s talk about Cannabis: Part one: International obligations appeared first on Arthur Azzopardi & Associates.