The cannabis reform bill is a "significant effort" at addressing lacunas in the sector, however, several issues still need to be discussed, the Department of Public Policy within the Faculty of Economics said on Wednesday. 

The department said in a statement it valued the participation of medical experts, criminologists, social workers, the police force and community organisations, together with politicians as representatives of the people, in deliberating grounded realities and observations to make the best choices.

"The proposed bill is intended to address the regulatory void but, at the same time, raises several pertinent questions and issues that need to be addressed in public fora, and most importantly in Parliament," it said.

Its argument hinges on four issues:

Addressing law enforcement

There needs to be a delineation of responsibilities across the various regulatory and enforcing authorities, including the proposed Authority on the Responsible Use of Cannabis in varied contexts, the department argued.

The bill, it says, does not specify the measures to be taken by the police and other authorities to ensure that all the provisions of the law are respected.

"In other policy domains, parliament has enacted robust legislation, but the safeguards provided in the laws are weakened or neutralised in the implementation and enforcement stages: the country’s record on law enforcement is poor, especially when commercial considerations come to the fore; and it must be recognised that the legalisation of cannabis for whatever use will create a market in the commodity.

"In the case of cannabis, the state cannot afford to go wrong when it comes to the recreational use of cannabis, because, like any narcotic, it can have a corrosive effect on the health of individual users and, in the long term, on the collective health of our communities."

More evidence needed

Besides the immediate effects of recreational cannabis use on health, studies have shown an impact on the markets for illicit narcotics, as well as on policing and police morale, the department said.

"We are not aware of any local studies on the public health impacts of legalising recreational cannabis use, nor on the potential effects of the diversion of Malta’s scarce agricultural land for cultivating cannabis.

"A complex policy such as this calls for evidence produced by sober scientific research both prior to law-making, as well as afterwards."

It said dilemmas posed by recreational use of cannabis could not be left to personal opinions and emotions, to the lobbying of interested parties, or party discipline that puts MPs in a straightjacket when taking a vote in parliament.

"The public outcry by constituted bodies and NGOs for more research on the implications of cannabis use on individuals, families, the economy and society should be respected and acted upon.

"As of now and even more so, if and when the law is enacted, it is imperative to monitor the use of cannabis for recreational use and the resulting effects."

Law might be in conflict with other policies

Before the law is enacted, it is important to assess the implications on other policy fields and monitor and manage any effects on these other areas, such as education, public health, family and young people but also environment and ecosystems, land use, soil, agriculture and water use.

Bill content is profoundly controversial

In such situations, governments have a duty to respect the plurality of interests and opinions and must practise the virtue of prudence to avoid exacerbating social tensions that will inevitably surface, with even greater force, in other policy domains, the department said.

"The virtue of prudence similarly obliges governments to avoid creating policies that violate the consciences of individuals who are associated with the making and implementation of policy; this includes a broad spectrum of public officials, ranging from MPs to police officers and social workers.

"In the situation prevailing in Malta, strict party discipline should not be imposed on any parliamentary grouping, so as to allow each member of parliament the freedom to debate and take a vote in accordance with his/her conscience, informed by the knowledge shared by medical experts."

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.