The government decree was rejected by the Lazio Regional Administrative Court: "The oral use of light cannabis products is permitted".

The Lazio Regional Administrative Court has put a pause on the Ministry of Health decree that classified oral formulations with cannabidiol (CBD) as drugs. The appeal filed by Imprenditori Canapa Italia (ICI) was accepted by the administrative judges, with a hearing scheduled for December 16. In essence, the decree classified cannabis extract as a narcotic, limiting its sale only to pharmacies with a non-repeatable medical prescription, rather than herbalist's shops and tobacconists. This type of pause had already been applied in October 2023. “The judges recognized the strength of our arguments, underlining the significant economic and social risk that the implementation of the decree would have entailed, and chose to suspend its implementation pending the verdict,” ICI said. “It is a significant triumph for the industrial hemp sector, which could have suffered significant economic losses. The judges considered that the application of the decree could have significant repercussions on entrepreneurs and farmers in the sector, already engaged in investments regarding hemp”. The TAR of Lazio had already blocked the decree in October 2023. “The decree of the Ministry of Health that included CBD in the list of drugs, section B of Presidential Decree 309/90 – the object of the TAR’s action – is not related to the amendment on cannabis, article 18 of the security bill”, reports a statement from the Department of Anti-Drug Policies of Palazzo Chigi.

The amendment in question, as stated yesterday in a communication from the Department of Anti-Drug Policies of the Presidency of the Council, was proposed in response to ruling no. 30475 of 30 May 2019 of the Court of Cassation. This ruling decided that the sale of derivatives from flowers (marijuana) and resin (hashish) still falls under Presidential Decree no. 309 of 1990, and not Law no. 242/2016, which only legalizes the cultivation of cannabis for other purposes specifically indicated by the same law. Therefore, as underlined in the communication, there is no connection between the bill currently under discussion and the decision of the TAR, which granted a suspension without examining the content.