Italian Justice Questions Constitutionality of Hemp Flower Ban

For the first time since its implementation, the validity of Article 18 of Decree-Law 48/2025 will be analyzed by the Italian Constitutional Court. The legislation imposes severe restrictions on the sector, including the prohibition of hemp flower trade in the country.

The unprecedented decision came from a Judge for Preliminary Investigations (GIP) in Brindisi. The magistrate chose to suspend a criminal process involving the importation of inflorescences and refer the issue to the higher instance for evaluation.

The case originated after the seizure and order to destroy a shipment of plant material destined for an Italian company. Authorities justified that the merchandise violated the new security provisions in force.

The defense appealed, arguing that the total ban on hemp flowers — even those without psychotropic effects — violates constitutional and community principles. In accepting the request, the judge recognized the need to clarify the legitimacy of the norm before any judgment.

The measure questions the "heart" of the decree. Currently, the text criminally prohibits the import, trade, and sale of products consisting of inflorescences, except for seed production.

Pillars of Unconstitutionality in the Hemp Sector

The Brindisi court's ruling points to the "not manifestly unfounded" nature of three main profiles of unconstitutionality. These points justify the review of the law restricting hemp flowers:

Formal Defect (Art. 77 of the Constitution): The judge questions the use of a decree-law to legislate on the subject, pointing out the lack of adequate motivation regarding "necessity and urgency." Additionally, he highlights the measure's lack of homogeneity, as the ban was inserted in an "omnibus" public security package, mixing distinct themes.

Substantial Defect and Principle of Offensiveness: The legislation turns conduct related to industrial hemp into a crime based on a "presumption," without verifying the actual drug-like effectiveness. Italian case law had already clarified that, without psychotropic effects, punishing the conduct is not constitutionally admissible.

Conflict with European Law: The national ban may be inconsistent with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which guarantees the free movement of goods. Industrial hemp is recognized as a legitimate agricultural crop in the European bloc.

Legal Impact on Hemp Flowers

The decision is seen as a technical milestone in sector defense. It shifts the debate from ideological issues to the field of law and science.

Lorenzo Simonetti, the lawyer responsible for the defense strategy, emphasized the importance of returning the discussion to constitutional legality. He believes the measure halts recent government repression.

"The issue of constitutional legitimacy puts a brake on the recent criminally relevant ban imposed by the Italian Government. The goal now is to have other judges of merit and legitimacy recognize how the criminally relevant ban is unconstitutional," Simonetti stated.

In parallel to this process, the Italian Council of State had already referred questions about tables and the ban on hemp flowers to the Court of Justice of the European Union. This creates a scenario of "double control" — constitutional and supranational — over Italian legislation.

Sector associations, including Canapa Sativa Italia (CSI), Sardinia Cannabis, Imprenditori Canapa Italia (ICI), and Resilienza Italia Onlus, jointly expressed their views. The entities request an operational moratorium on seizures while the judgment is pending.

The group advocates for the creation of an interministerial technical working group. The aim is to define clear traceability and labeling parameters for hemp flowers, instead of generic prohibitions.

With information from Imprenditori Canapa Italia