Brussels stalls on evaluation of Italian restrictions on hemp and CBD

Brussels – The case of the alleged incompatibility of Italian restrictions on industrial hemp and CBD with EU legislation remains open, but the European Commission is stalling. This is the result of the confrontation that took place today (March 17) between MEPs of the Petitions Committee (PETI), the Directorate General for Agriculture of the EU executive and the president of Canapa Sativa Italiana (CSI), Mattia Cusani, the first signatory of the petition. The Italian hemp supply chain can only half smile: the assessment remains ongoing, and in the meantime, the EU Parliament will send a letter of complaint to Rome.

The petition, presented by Cusani last September and signed by several national and European associations, including Confagricoltura, Cia, Copagri, Cna Agroalimentare and the European Industrial Hemp Association (EIHA), was accepted by the European Parliament in February and urgently debated today, thanks to the support of the majority of groups (Left, Greens, Socialists and Democrats, Renew and Populars). In the petition, Italian agricultural associations asked MEPs to “verify the compliance of Italian regulations” with EU law and to “urge the European Commission to intervene.”

The measures in question are an amendment to the Security Bill (still under consideration in the Senate after approval in the House), which would ban the production and trade of hemp inflorescences and derivatives, even with a THC content of less than 0.2 per cent, and a decree that went into effect last August 5—and suspended a month later by the Lazio Regional Administrative Court—by which the government equated oral CBD compositions with narcotic drugs, restricting their sale only to pharmacies with a non-repeatable prescription.

In his remarks at the PETI Committee meeting, Cusani pointed out that these rules “violate the principle of free movement of goods enshrined in Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU” and “undermine the principle of fair competition provided for in Article 101.” Not only that; the Meloni government’s clampdown on the industrial hemp supply chain would also be incompatible with the “well-established case law” of the European Court of Justice: most recently the Biohemp ruling of October 4, 2024, in which the EU General Court confirmed that member states may not impose restrictions on the cultivation of industrial hemp, including indoor cultivation and cultivation exclusively for the production of inflorescences unless such restrictions are supported by concrete scientific evidence relating to the protection of public health.

“The courageous hemp traders, who abide by the rules every day and ensure a transparent and safe market, should not fear the state but receive its support. Hitting them with a senseless ban means betraying the trust of thousands of honest workers,” said the jurist and president of Canapa Sativa Italia. At risk of closure are more than 2,000 agricultural and commercial businesses and young small and medium-sized enterprises that generate about 20,000 jobs. Not only small CBD retailers but also excellent agro-industrial sectors such as cosmetics, floriculture, food supplements, and herbal medicine.

Oliver Sitar, unit head at the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, stressed the importance of hemp “for construction, textiles, paper.” But on the use of CBD—hemp sativa L with low THC content that does not produce psychotropic effects—he remained rather vague: the key, according to Sitar, is the possible use of public health grounds, which is the responsibility of member states, to regulate CBD as an exception to single market rules. “The assessment is still ongoing,” the EU official cut short, further stressing that both measures are not in force at this time. Therefore, the European Commission cannot currently launch formal investigations. Again, on oral cannabidiol, Sitar recalled that the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) has not yet included it in the novel food regime because “the science is not unanimous.” The point, however, is that the Italian measure equates CBD with psychotropic substances such as benzodiazepines.

In short, Brussels does not take a position and, for now, chooses not to speak out against the Italian government.  However, it is not enough to scale back the momentum of the MEPs, with Italian Cristina Guarda (AVS) and Valentina Palmisano (M5S) at the forefront. The majority of those present (Greens, Left and Liberals—given the absence in the chamber of Populars, Socialists, ECR conservatives and ESN sovereignists) decided to keep the petition open and approved sending a letter of complaint to the Italian authorities. “We are pleased to announce this important step forward in the EU, in contrast to the ideological and obscurantist initiatives of the right-wing that governs our country and will now have to answer in the European forum,” Guarda said. According to Palmisano, Italy’s are “unjust and unreasonable regulations,” which “ignore European jurisprudence.” A “short-sighted choice that ignores the potential of this supply chain in economic, environmental, and employment terms.”

Confagricoltura said it was “delighted with the debate in the European forum,” stressing the importance of the EU Parliament “requesting clarification from the Italian government.” When it receives the letter, Rome will have 90 days to respond to the PETI committee’s findings. It may ignore the complaint—no consequences are expected—but the decision to keep the petition open testifies to the European Parliament’s commitment not to make life easy for the Meloni government, pending a final assessment by the European Commission.