Share:
The two faces of the CSU on cannabis
Does the Bavarian CSU state government fear the vote of the citizens on "cannabis"? The Interior Ministry rejects the referendum because of the interference in a federal law, in the Bavarian state parliament, the CSU parliamentary group feels called to make an emergency request against the legalization: "The cat bites its own tail," said Wenzel Cerveny (54), Chairman of the Cannabis Association of Bavaria and initiator of the Bavarian referendum "Yes to the legalization of cannabis as a raw material, medicine and stimulants" on Tuesday in Munich. The Bavarian State Parliament debates on Wednesday, 28.10.15, from 13 clock on the subject of legalization.
Image: Eskymaks - fotolia As a rough draft for the Constitutional Court, the cannabis referendum really leave the people to decide, Wenzel Cerveny sees the action of the CSU parliamentary group. "While the Minister of the Interior pushes the responsibility far from himself, the CSU parliamentary group even makes an emergency request." Under agenda item 8, the CSU delegates Thomas Kreuzer, Josef Zellmeier, Kerstin Schrey-Stäblein u. a. made a request to the government to "continue to oppose the legalization of cannabis as a stimulant" (Drs 17/5653, 17/8354 (G)), chaired by the Landtag Health and Nursing Committee with CSU Member of Parliament Bernhard Seidenath as rapporteur on the legalization of cannabis.
"If Landtag and CSU parliamentary group are competent to vote on the cannabis legalization, then it is the Bavarian people always," stresses the people's initiative initiator Wenzel Cerveny. He and his team from the Cannabis Federation of Bavaria submitted more than 27,000 valid signatures to the Ministry of the Interior on September 11, 2015. Whether the Bavarians may vote on the referendum, must decide according to decision of the Ministry of Interior on 23 October 2015, the Bavarian Constitutional Court within three months.
The motion of the CSU is called together with agenda item 7. The Bündnis / Die Grünen faction has made the request that in Bavaria the penalty for cannabis possession must be bindingly implemented. 17/5609 and 17/8322 (A).
According to the Ministry of the Interior, the Free State of Bavaria lacks the necessary legislative competence to issue a Bavarian hemp law (BayHanfG), which is incompatible with the Narcotics Act (BtMG) at the federal level. In the view of the Cannabis Association, however, it is not clear which legal character the BtMG has, whether in accordance with the competency or unlawful.
By its very nature, the BtMG is an "enabling act" authorizing the Federal Government or the Federal Ministry of Health to classify substances more or less arbitrarily in Appendices 1 to 3 of the BtMG without the Bundestag as the actual legislator having to agree to this (§1 (§1)). 2) BtMG).
Legislative competence of the Länder
Interestingly, according to Wenzel Cerveny, the entire Narcotics Act does not explicitly set out whether and how substances should ever be removed from one of the plants. In principle, a decree of the Federal Ministry of Health could suffice, which is simply repeated once a year. However, a permanent "classification" of a substance in the annexes of the Narcotics Act requires the approval of the Bundesrat and thus the Cannabis Association assesses the legislative competence of the Bundeländer (Federal Council) more than that of the Bundestag.
Wenzel Cerveny sees the country competence in the previous attitude of the Bavarian state parliament in terms of "cannabis" confirmed. The topic will be discussed both in plenary and in committees. So far, all petitions for legalization (including the petition of the Cannabis Association from 03.02.2014, Az .: VF.0075.17) accepted by the state parliament and duly processed. The state parliament has not dismissed the petitions with reference to "lack of competence". (Pm)