‘Unlicensed does not mean unlawful’
One of the most critical clarifications in the guidance addresses a common source of confusion, namely the distinction between licensed and unlicensed medicines.
Only a fraction of the medical cannabis prescribed in the UK (around five patients) is classified as licenced medicine, including epilepsy treatments like Epidyolex.
As the guidance clarified, ‘almost exclusively, the CBPMs that police encounter are private prescriptions which are unlicensed.’
It defines unlicensed medicine as one that ‘has not received what is known as “market authorisation”. It is not officially approved for treating a patient’s particular condition, but a doctor can prescribe it if they feel it will provide a safe and effective treatment. This is a relatively common medical practice.’
Critically, it states: ‘The key point to note as far as this guidance is concerned, is that unlicensed does not mean unlawful.’
Cancards and patient ID
Cancards were launched in 2020 as a scheme to help medical cannabis patients avoid confrontation with police. For an annual fee of £30, cardholders receive a plastic card indicating they have a qualifying medical condition that could be treated with cannabis, verified through medical records.
The cards were endorsed by several senior police officers and positioned as a way to give patients confidence when carrying cannabis, particularly relevant given that many patients were using illicit cannabis before private medical prescriptions became more accessible.
A 2020 Cancard fact sheet distributed to police officers explained that the scheme was meant to help identify people who ‘legally qualify for a private prescription, but are unable to afford to purchase one.’ It stated there were ‘approximately 30 thousand Cancard registered medicinal cannabis patients in the UK’ at launch.
It instructed officers to ‘use this information as part of your National Decision Model’ and noted that ‘Cancard exists to assist front-line police officers when dealing with medicinal possession cases which do not fit into the scope for diversion or arrest, and where the officer may be considering the use of discretion.’
In other words, Cancard was asking police to exercise discretion for people in possession of cannabis sourced from the black market, based on verified medical need rather than a legal prescription. Crucially, Cancard does not indicate that the holder has a legal prescription for medical cannabis. It simply confirms they have a medical condition.
The new APCDLO guidance states that this six-year-old scheme is a ‘controversial and misunderstood area’ for law enforcement.
List raised concerns about whether the scheme was ‘appropriate’, and suggested that while it may have been a useful tool during the early transition period, before prescription medical cannabis was readily available in the UK, it may now have outlived it’s purpose, especially when asking holders to pay £30 a year.
“My view is, I don’t know if it’s appropriate for the police to be saying if you’ve actually got a medical condition that’s been supposedly authorized or vetted by someone at Cancard, then we’re almost allowing you to go off and buy street drugs to deal with your condition. I’m not really sure if the police should be actually endorsing that,” he told Business of Cannabis.
He went on to raise concerns that the existence of Cancard has created confusion on the ground, sharing an example of a patient who produced a Releaf Medical Cannabis Card, which provides proof of a current legal prescription, and officers have rejected its legitimacy believing a Cancard was needed.
Regarding cards similar to Releaf’s offering, List suggests this is a ‘much better idea’.
“You’ve got all the patient details, it’s all contained within this Releaf card, which has a QR code, which is downloadable. It obviously is authorised medicinal cannabis… I think now we should just really be moving away from Cancard into cards that are produced by legitimate, private suppliers.”
