Germany: Cannabis Research & Legal Access – BLE Blocks Model Projects

Wiesbaden’s ambitious plan to test the regulated sale of cannabis through pharmacies has been halted, highlighting the ongoing complexities surrounding Germany’s evolving cannabis laws. The proposed research project, intended to provide a legal access point for consumers beyond home cultivation and cannabis clubs, was rejected by the Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food (BLE), prompting the city to consider legal action. This setback underscores a critical debate: how to ensure safe and accessible legal pathways for cannabis consumers as Germany navigates its new, partially legalized market.

The rejection, announced on February 19, 2026, by Wiesbaden’s Health Officer Milena Löbcke, centers on the BLE’s interpretation of the recently enacted Cannabis Consumption Law (KCanG). Löbcke argued that legalizing cannabis necessitates establishing legal avenues for access, stating, “Whoever legalizes cannabis must also ensure there are legal access routes.” She emphasized that research projects, such as dispensing through pharmacies, are crucial for opening additional access points and preventing the undermining of the law’s objectives. The city intends to pursue legal avenues to revive the project, believing We see essential for a comprehensive and effective cannabis policy.

BLE Cites Legal Limitations for Regional Pilot Programs

The BLE, however, maintains that the KCanG does not explicitly authorize regionally and temporally limited pilot projects. According to a spokesperson, the agency believes that such initiatives require a separate legislative process to establish the necessary legal framework, considering both European and international legal requirements. This decision mirrors a similar rejection last year of a proposed model project in Frankfurt aimed at regulating cannabis sales in specialized shops, as reported by Zeit Online. The agency’s stance suggests a cautious approach to expanding beyond the provisions already outlined in the KCanG.

Germany’s current cannabis regulations, which came into effect in April 2024, allow adults to possess up to 50 grams of cannabis and cultivate up to three plants for personal apply. Non-commercial cultivation in registered clubs is also permitted under specific conditions. These changes represent a significant shift in German drug policy, but the BLE’s decision regarding the Wiesbaden project indicates that the implementation of further access models requires additional legislative action. The Deutsche Apotheker Zeitung reported on the rejection, highlighting the potential impact on pharmacy involvement in the cannabis market.

The Role of the KCanWissZustV

The implementation of the Cannabis Consumption Science Responsibility Ordinance (KCanWissZustV) at the conclude of 2024 further clarifies the BLE’s role in overseeing scientific research related to cannabis. This ordinance designates the BLE as the authority responsible for issuing permits under § 2 paragraph 4 sentence 1 of the KCanG, as well as monitoring and implementing the regulations outlined in § 2 paragraph 4 sentences 3 to 5 of the same law. This means that research proposals, including those focused on pharmacy-based distribution, must be submitted to the BLE for approval. The Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM) remains responsible for research involving medical cannabis and for medical or medical-scientific purposes.

Applicants seeking approval for research projects must meet the requirements stipulated in both the KCanG and the Medicinal Cannabis Act (MedCanG), including demonstrating the necessary expertise and a clear scientific purpose for their research. Eligible applicants include universities, companies, associations, and both natural and legal persons. The intention behind these research projects, as outlined by the BLE, is to potentially curb the illicit market, enhance prevention efforts, and foster a more informed public discourse surrounding cannabis consumption.

Implications for Pharmacy Involvement and Future Access Models

The BLE’s decision raises questions about the future role of pharmacies in the German cannabis market. Even as the current legal framework allows for personal cultivation and cannabis clubs, it does not yet provide a regulated pathway for commercial sales through pharmacies or other retail outlets. The Wiesbaden project aimed to address this gap by providing a controlled environment for studying the feasibility and safety of pharmacy-based cannabis dispensing. The rejection suggests that a more comprehensive legislative framework is needed before such models can be implemented.

The rejection also highlights the challenges of navigating the complex legal landscape surrounding cannabis in Germany. The KCanG represents a significant step towards liberalization, but it also leaves many questions unanswered regarding the implementation of different access models. The BLE’s interpretation of the law underscores the need for clarity and consistency in the application of regulations. As Pharmazeutische Zeitung reported, the city of Wiesbaden is now considering legal options to challenge the BLE’s decision, signaling a potential legal battle over the future of cannabis access in Germany.

The Frankfurt Precedent and Ongoing Debate

This is not the first time the BLE has rejected a proposal for a regulated cannabis sales model. Last year, the agency also denied approval for a similar project in Frankfurt, which aimed to establish regulated cannabis sales in specialized shops. This pattern suggests a consistent approach by the BLE, prioritizing adherence to the existing legal framework and cautioning against expanding beyond the scope of the KCanG without further legislative action. The decisions in both Wiesbaden and Frankfurt underscore the tension between the desire to explore innovative access models and the need to ensure compliance with existing regulations.

The debate over the best approach to cannabis regulation in Germany is ongoing. Proponents of pharmacy-based sales argue that it would provide a safe and controlled environment for consumers, ensuring product quality and offering professional guidance. They also believe that it could generate tax revenue and reduce the burden on law enforcement. Opponents, however, express concerns about the potential for increased cannabis use and the impact on public health. The BLE’s decision reflects these concerns, emphasizing the need for a cautious and evidence-based approach to cannabis policy.

The legal challenge initiated by Wiesbaden could set a precedent for future attempts to implement innovative cannabis access models. The outcome of the case will likely influence the direction of cannabis policy in Germany and could pave the way for a more comprehensive legislative framework that addresses the various challenges and opportunities presented by the evolving cannabis market. The city’s determination to pursue legal action demonstrates the growing demand for alternative access models and the willingness of local authorities to push the boundaries of the current regulations.

As Germany continues to grapple with the complexities of cannabis legalization, the debate over access models will undoubtedly remain a central focus. The BLE’s decision in the Wiesbaden case serves as a reminder that the path towards a fully regulated cannabis market is likely to be long and challenging, requiring ongoing dialogue, legislative action, and a commitment to evidence-based policymaking.

The next step in this unfolding situation will be Wiesbaden’s formal legal challenge to the BLE’s decision. The timeline for this process remains uncertain, but it is expected to be a closely watched case with significant implications for the future of cannabis regulation in Germany. Readers interested in following this development can monitor updates from the Wiesbaden city government and the BLE website.

What are your thoughts on the BLE’s decision? Share your opinions and insights in the comments below. Don’t forget to share this article with your network to keep the conversation going.