Commentary on Judgment no. 28501 of 2024: Hemp Cultivation and Police Checks
Judgment no. 28501 of 2024 represents a significant step forward in understanding the regulations concerning hemp cultivation in Italy. The Court addressed the issue of checks carried out under Article 4 of Law no. 242 of 2016, highlighting the distinction between judicial police checks and those aimed at verifying the lawfulness of cultivating "cannabis sativa L".
The Legal Context of the Judgment
Law no. 242 of 2016 governs the cultivation of hemp for industrial and therapeutic purposes, establishing specific requirements for its lawfulness. The checks entrusted to the State Forestry Corps, now the Carabinieri Forestali, have the primary objective of ascertaining compliance with these requirements. The Court clarified that this type of check is different in nature from ordinary judicial police checks, which are aimed at collecting evidence for the ascertainment of crimes.
Hemp cultivation - Procedure prescribed by Article 4 of Law no. 242 of 2016 - Checks entrusted to the State Forestry Corps - Judicial police check - Distinction - Consequences. In the context of narcotics, the check entrusted, pursuant to Article 4, paragraph 1, of Law no. 242 of December 2, 2016, to the State Forestry Corps (currently the Carabinieri Forestali), in relation to the cultivation of "cannabis sativa L", as it is aimed at ascertaining compliance with the conditions under which the aforementioned law establishes the lawfulness of such activity, is different in nature from ordinary police checks, which are aimed at acquiring evidence for the ascertainment of crimes. Therefore, the failure by the operating judicial police to comply with the procedure contemplated by the aforementioned Article 4 is not relevant for the purpose of the lawfulness of the evidentiary seizure carried out in relation to the crime of illicit cultivation of plant organisms from which narcotic substances can be derived.
Implications of the Judgment
The consequences of this judgment are significant for operators in the sector and for citizens engaged in hemp cultivation. In particular, the Court has established that failure to comply with the procedures prescribed by Article 4 cannot in itself justify evidentiary seizure in cases of illicit cultivation. This implies that, for the validity of a police action, it is essential that the check is carried out in accordance with the methods established by law, in order to guarantee the lawfulness of the agricultural activity.
- Distinction between checks for lawfulness and police checks.
- Implications for evidentiary seizure.
- Strengthening of protection for hemp growers.
Conclusions
Ultimately, judgment no. 28501 of 2024 offers an important clarification on the methods of control in hemp cultivation, highlighting the importance of following the procedures established by law to avoid unjustified sanctions. This ruling not only provides greater legal certainty for operators in the sector but also represents a step towards a fairer and more informed management of regulations concerning hemp in Italy.
