[WATCH] Joey Reno Vella: ‘Malta’s harm-reduction approach to cannabis is working’

Almost three years after Malta became the first European country to regularise the sale and possession of cannabis, regulatory chief Joey Reno Vella feels the reform is working. 

“The country’s harm reduction approach is working,” Vella tells me. He chairs the Authority for the Responsible Use of Cannabis set up when cannabis was regularised. 

He says that while “the safest way to consume cannabis is not to consume it at all”, policy makers cannot ignore today’s realities.  

“Before 2021, before the reform was enacted, you had a reality where studies showed a large section of the population used cannabis, but they had no regulated market from where they could buy it. The cannabis they bought was not cultivated in a safe manner, and so posed more risks. They had to turn to the black market where they did not know what they were buying,” he says. 

The situation is different today, he notes. “They now know from where the product came from, what it contains and know that it does not contain harmful substances like bacteria, heavy metals and mould. The product will cause less harm and expose people to less risks.” 

Vella says Malta now has eight associations spread across the island, with around 2,000 members registered. Six also have an in-principal licence and are expected to start operating soon. 

He also says that no major breaches were registered during regulatory checks, and associations were quick to comply with any infringements, highlighting their commitment to the principles on which the law is based.  

Questioned on whether Malta is looking to go further in commercialising cannabis, he says the authority is comfortable with the non-profit harm-reduction model and does not feel commercialisation makes sense. 

I ask Vella on reports related to increased consumption of cannabis in public areas despite this being illegal. The ARUC chairperson says the authority has no legal power to control such behaviour but is looking at the possibility of providing “safe spaces” where cannabis users can smoke. 

Questioned on whether he believes the harm reduction approach principle should be applied to other banned substances like psychedelics, he says cannabis reform happened in a context where you had a different approach to marijuana. He insists it is the legislator who eventually must make such decisions and not the authority.  

Vella also speaks on data related to hospital emergency admissions linked to cannabis, and how synthetic cannabis, a completely different substance, is leading to misconceptions about the effects of natural cannabis.  

“There is no correlation between drug-related emergencies and cannabis being distributed by the associations. It was for this reason that the reform was enacted, because before 2021, people did not know what they were buying,” he says.  

On synthetic cannabis known as HHC, Vella says ARUC is aware of the problem surrounding the semi-synthetic substance and has been proactive in addressing the issue.  

“The authority regulates the non-profit associations, but HHC is being sold at commercial establishments, and so they are not under ARUC’s remit,” he says. “The problem is two-fold: It could have negative effects on the individual, and packaging seems to target minors, but it also creates discrimination against the ARUC-regulated associations who have very tight regulation preventing them from advertising their products. It also creates a twisted impression about cannabis culture which does not exist.”

The following is an excerpt from the interview.  

The full interview can also be followed on Facebook and Spotify.

Cannabis associations are seeing a lot of people register with them and are slowly reaching maximum capacity set by the law. Do you feel it is time the 500-member limit is increased? 

ARUC is always assessing whether the capping on members can be expanded, and the law allows for this if a legal notice is published. But we must also keep in mind that the number of licenced associations will grow, and the demand will be addressed through this increase.

The ARUC website states that smoking cannabis has its obvious side-effects due to the inhalation of smoke. But the law does not allow associations to sell edible cannabis. Do you feel edible cannabis products should be made available to those who do not want to smoke? 

I do feel that it is a bit premature to start discussing edibles right now, as it is a food, and you have different regulations, even at European level which regulate food products. Edibles are considered as novel food at a European legislative level. Before an edible is put on the market, it needs European Commission authorisation after consultation with the EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). It’s not an easy process.  

If there are considerations to make edibles available, it must be preceded by a rigorous educational campaign, as it does not mean that if you are not smoking, there are no side effects to cannabis. It is a scientific fact that edibles, unlike cannabis smoke, leads to effects being felt after a longer time. We must educate before we roll it out.

Is it time Malta commercialises cannabis?  

There are international and European laws which must be taken into consideration, and that is why the authority is comfortable with the non-profit model being used today. This reform is not intended to benefit the few, but the focus is the citizen.  At this stage we have no intention to move away from the non-profit model towards commercialisation. I insist the main objective of this reform is harm reduction.

Should onsite consumption at cannabis associations be legalised?  

We have discussed the possibility of onsite consumption at cannabis associations. Obviously, these types of discussions demand an in-depth analysis, and it is not something which can be introduced haphazardly.  

Several stakeholders have voiced their agreement with onsite consumption because it could give a safe space for cannabis consumption. When you use cannabis at a private space, […] and you find yourself needing medical assistance, you could create more alarm and panic. If the cannabis is consumed in a safe space, you would have people who would know how to assist you. 

As I said there are a number of considerations, but the authority is analysing and studying the possibility of onsite consumption. If we see the need to propose any amendments, we would be at the fore front of these changes.

Do you smoke cannabis? 

I play football and so the rules bar me from consuming cannabis, as it is one of the banned substances. But I know people, some of them my friends, who consume cannabis, and it is for this reason the reform was carried out. Not because everyone uses cannabis, not because we want to promote its use, but because we cannot ignore the reality surrounding it. We can no longer allow these people to resort to the black market and all the dangers associated with it at a health and legal level.