The Federal Constitutional Court in Germany ruled that several judges’ arguments against the ban of cannabis products were unconstitutional. The constitutionality of the criminal sections of the Narcotics Act (BtMG) that apply to cannabis products was contested in the district courts in Bernau, which is close to Berlin, Münster, and Pasewalk.
Inadmissible submissions details
First of all, the submissions, which the court determined, lacked the essential justification for how the laws applied to the particular situations. Additionally, they failed to provide legally significant changes in the factual and legal circumstances. They failed to meet the standards for a fresh submission.
The judges argued that the criminal cannabis prohibition violates the rights of the individuals. German Basic Law should guarantee this freedom. They argued that the ban breaches the ideas of equality and legal certainty and excessively limits people’s freedom.
The court determined that there was insufficient evidence from the judges to call into doubt the legality of the criminal cannabis prohibition. They did not offer any fresh facts or new legal reasons to refute the Federal Constitutional Court’s 1994 ruling’s justification.
Moreover, according to the court, the criminal law on narcotics is intended to safeguard public health. Particularly that of young people, and to stop societal harm caused by drug-related activities. The arguments made by the judges did not offer strong justifications for reevaluating the necessity of the criminal cannabis prohibition.
The court also rejected suggestions that both cannabis and alcohol should be treated differently. It was saying that the various laws exist for good reasons. The Senate noted, among other things, that the legislature was unable to effectively prohibit it. That was due to the wide use of alcohol in Germany and the rest of the European cultural region. Additionally, the court rejected accusations regarding illegal manner of specific sections. It highlighted the fact that unconstitutional acts must originate from the statutes themselves.
Future of the cannabis laws in Germany?
The court determined that the judges’ arguments did not address the accepted interpretation and application of the law in relation to cannabis quantity thresholds in connection to the legality and certainty principle.
In conclusion, the Federal Constitutional Court determined that the judges’ arguments on the criminal cannabis ban were inadmissible. It is because they lacked relevance, adequate support, and did not point to material modifications in the law or the state of the evidence. The Narcotics Act’s criminal penalties for cannabis products were present according to the the court as being constitutional.