The UN’s central drug policy body voted to strip cannabis from its most restrictive schedule, ending a 59‑year ban that limited medical use.
With 27 votes in favour, 25 against and one abstention, the commission opened the door to recognizing cannabis’s therapeutic potential while keeping non‑medical use illegal, a move that could spur new scientific research.
WHO proposes rescheduling cannabis
In January 2019 the World Health Organization issued six recommendations to reshape cannabis controls in international treaties, but member states asked for more time to review the proposals. The commission postponed the decision to allow thorough analysis of the scientific and policy implications.
The WHO suggested that CBD containing less than 2 % THC should be exempt from international controls, yet nations rejected that specific recommendation, citing existing legal frameworks and concerns about efficacy. They argued that current scheduling already addresses perceived risks.
Today more than 50 countries run medicinal cannabis programmes, while Canada, Uruguay and 15 U.S. states have legalized recreational use; Mexico and Luxembourg are debating similar reforms. The global shift reflects mounting evidence of health benefits and economic opportunity.
Member states weigh in
Ecuador endorsed all WHO recommendations and called for a regulatory framework that ensures quality, innovation and research. Its stance signals support for a controlled, science‑driven market.
United States voted to move cannabis out of Schedule IV into Schedule I, saying scientific evidence supports a safe therapeutic product while the plant itself still poses public‑health risks. The decision reflects a nuanced approach to balancing medical access with regulatory control.
Chile opposed the change, claiming cannabis use increases depression, anxiety, cognitive deficits and psychosis. The country warns that broader legalization could exacerbate mental‑health challenges.
Japan warned that non‑medical use might generate negative health and social impacts, especially among youth. Officials cite potential societal costs as a reason to maintain strict controls.
Details of each member’s full statements are available online.
