A year and a half after the introduction of legislation to introduce the so-called responsible use of cannabis, we are now experiencing the consequences of this law and the implications of effectively legalising cannabis in our country.
It seems clear that, even though this legislation still prohibits the smoking of cannabis in public, it has effectively led to the widespread use of cannabis in public spaces with the police helpless to enforce the law. Parents are genuinely concerned about the prevalence of cannabis in most commercial parties organised locally and the sprouting of cannabis shops that sell cannabis growing setups and cannabis products with very low THC.
Furthermore, increased evidence indicates that the smoking of cannabis in the home in the presence of minors, something also prohibited by this same law, is also on the rapid increase. The impact on the most vulnerable should also not be overlooked. Persons recovering from addictions are finding it increasingly difficult to frequent social places without having to inhale cannabis passively.
The possibility to have four plants at home with no form of registration has also resulted in persons selling the extra yield from their plants, effectively creating trafficking. Today, the results of this gung-ho attitude to the introduction of such sensitive legislation are evident. A veritable Pandora’s box has been opened, sending forth a message that the use of cannabis has been normalised.
To add to our concern, the authority set up to enforce the law, the Authority for the Responsible Use of Cannabis (ARUC), may now be proposing further tinkering with the law. For example, ARUC has stated publicly that it is considering allowing the smoking of cannabis within the premises of the associations licensed to sell cannabis, something which the law presently does not allow.
While one could make a rational argument that it would make sense to limit the smoking of cannabis within these premises, such an argument would hold water only if the other provisions of the law are effectively enforced. This would mean that strong action would be taken to stop cannabis smoking in public and that the provisions which prohibits such smoking in the presence of minors in the home would be enforced.
None of this is effectively being done. We have ended up with a ‘free-for-all mentality’ regarding the consumption of cannabis. Within such a context, allowing the smoking of cannabis within the premises of associations is opening another public space for cannabis use. This creates additional risks, particularly since such associations could be opening a mere 250 metres from educational institutions such as the University of Malta, MCAST and schools.
Given that ARUC will be issuing guidelines to associations, Caritas, OASI Foundation, the Church Schools’ Association and the Secretariat for Catholic Education are appealing to ARUC to also consider other guidelines which would strengthen safeguards to protect the most vulnerable.
The smoking of cannabis in the home in the presence of minors is also on the rapid increase
We are therefore inviting ARUC to reconsider the feedback our associations had given to the government when the law was being debated. Unfortunately, at the time, the government completely ignored all this feedback, which was supported by 57 NGOs and associations while nearly 10,000 persons signed a parliamentary petition supporting our proposals.
These proposals had included: increasing the age when consuming cannabis would be made legal from 18 to 25; increasing the distance of cannabis associations from schools, youth centres and post-secondary institutions from a mere 250 metres to one kilometre; doubling the fines for smoking cannabis in front of children and in public; and removing the possibility allowed in the law for cannabis to be grown in residences adjacent to schools.
They had also included: regulating the amount of THC allowed in cannabis; having the four plants allowed to be grown at home registered with the authority; reducing the amounts that are allowed on the person and amounts that would trigger the intervention of the tribunal that would act, not to punish but to see that people are assessed for substance dependence and assisted accordingly; and removing the reference to campaigns on the ‘responsible use of cannabis’.
Furthermore, since there is a proposal to now include smoking cannabis on the associations’ premises, we also recommend that cultivation and smoking in homes is abolished, thereby: assuring the health and safety of minors and removing the disturbance that cannabis smoking is creating to neighbours; reducing the trafficking that is already taking place; and assuring that cannabis users are better supervised and assisted to mitigate health risks.
Finally, we highly recommend that adequate referral and support systems are in place in the establishment of cannabis associations to promptly assist those who are dependent on cannabis or developing a dependence on it.
We believe our feedback remains valid and should also be taken on board with the aim to further protect the interests of our communities, especially young people and the most vulnerable members of society.
Anthony Gatt, Marica Cassar, Josef Pace and Joshua Aquilina – Caritas Malta; Noel Xerri – OASI Foundation; Fr Jimmy Bartolo SJ, Stephen Cachia and Fr Jeremy Vella SDB – Church Schools’ Association (CSA); Rev Dr Charles Mallia, Dr Ian Mifsud and Marjoe Abela – Secretariat for Catholic Education.