Like other organisations and associations, the Department of Public Policy within the Faculty of Economics, Management and Accountancy at the University of Malta has been following with great interest the public consultation exercise and the Parliamentary debate on the bill that would legalise cannabis for recreational use. As an academic body that studies Maltese politics, government and policy-making, the Department values 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.

For its part, the Department considers that the bill being discussed in Parliament is a significant effort to address certain lacunas in this domain that needs to be regulated. 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. 

This statement, drawing on our understanding of public policy processes, presents four specific issues.

First, the issue of law enforcement needs to be clearly addressed. A delineation of responsibilities across the various regulatory and enforcing authorities, including the proposed Authority on the Responsible Use of Cannabis in varied contexts is required. While the bill does impose restrictions and limitations, it 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 neutralized 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 in regard 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. In this context, there needs to be a more detailed exposition of the functions of the new regulatory authority to be set up in order to regulate this activity.

Second, the need for more evidence to inform public policy formulation cannot be ignored. Besides the immediate effects of recreational cannabis use on health, studies have shown an impact on the markets for illicit narcotics (for example, Meinhoffer & Rubli, 2021), as well as on policing and police morale (Ayeni, 2020). We are not aware of any local studies on the public health impacts of legalizing 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. The questions and dilemmas posed by the legal recreational use of cannabis cannot be left to personal opinions and emotions, nor to the lobbying of interested parties, nor to party discipline that puts our 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. 

Third, this law, just as any other policy, will have an effect on other policy fields and may even be in conflict with other policies. It is therefore essential that prior to such law being enacted, one assesses the implications on other policy fields and is prepared to 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 (as in Wartenberg et al, 2021), amongst others.

Fourth, the nature and content of the proposed bill 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 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 knowledge shared by medical experts.

The Department of Public Policy believes that the foregoing four issues ought to be taken into account in the ongoing parliamentary debate on the legalisation of cannabis for recreational purposes.

Anderson, D. Mark ; Rees, Daniel I. 2014. ‘The legalization of marijuana: how likely is the worst-case scenario?’ Journal of policy analysis and management, Vol.33 (1), p.221-232

Ayeni, Z. 2020. A phenomenological qualitative study to discover the attitudes and perceptions of police officers to the legalization of cannabis and crime, Irvine, California: Brandman University School of Education, Doctoral thesis. 

Hall, Wayne ; Lynskey, Michael. 2016. ‘Evaluating the public health impacts of legalizing recreational cannabis use in the United States’, Addiction, Vol.111 (10), p.1764-1773

Meinhofer, Angélica; Rubli, Adrian. 2021. ‘Illegal drug market responses to state recreational cannabis laws’, Addiction,  Vol.116 (12), p.3433-3443

Wartenberg, A. C.; Holden, P. A.; Bodwitch, H.; Parker-Shames, P.; Novotny, T.; Harmon, T. C.; Hart, S. C.; Beutel, M.; Gilmore, M.; Hoh, E.; Butsic, V. Cannabis and the Environment: What Science Tells Us and What We Still Need to Know. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2021, 8, 98,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00844