Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing a sort of grace period here as we are watching the adjustment of Cannabis Law here in Thailand. I am going to preface this video by sort of getting to the bottom line first. Long story short is until the end of the year, it looks like effectively as a practical matter, nothing is going to change with regard to Cannabis. In fact, I think it's probably going to take that long before we see any sort of promulgated rule changes come into effect, as we will get into here in a moment. If they do, there would be a further sort of statutory presumably a further statutory for lack of a better term grace period, between the time that any newly promulgated rules would come into effect. So if we get to the end of the year as we'll get into the analysis, it is kind of safe to presume quarter one of 2025 will look the same as 2024 in the sense of legality. So anybody who is like sort of planning vacations or worried about whether or not Thailand's going to just wildly change this law between now and then, I don't think that that's overly warranted. In fact I think as we will get into it, I think consensus here now it seems to be hey we are not trying to be hyperbolic about this and we are not trying to pull the rug out from under people, we're trying to sort of just get this right. That seems to be the implied message that I'm reading when I'm reading the statements and things from various officials talking about this issue. 

Another thing, in a prior video I brought up the notion of whether or not the Constitutional Court should weigh in on whether or not this should be a promulgated Law as opposed to a change in Ministerial Regulations which my personal opinion is without emergency power I don't understand how they can utilize that mechanism. But leaving that aside I was talking to a Thai colleague who is way more versed in this than I am, very smart, and that person was telling me well you know you may be wrong about the practicalities associated with this issue in the Court System just sort of generally, and I'm not trying to speak as anything akin to a practitioner, this is sort of second hand anecdotal information, but this person said "hey, at the end of the day people were issued actual permits, actual licenses associated with these so-called “controlled herbs”, so-called to this point thus far, and those licenses have a validity period; I believe currently it's for 3 years from issuance date. If the terms of those licenses are substantially abrogated if you will, there may be causes of action to be brought in the Administrative Courts in Thailand. Again, and that's second hand anecdotal information from a Thai colleague who is well versed in Thai Law, not from me personally. Again, not to sound like broken record here, I'm not a Thai Attorney, I'm an American Attorney of Thai nationality. I do sort of engage in Comparative Law on a frequent basis but again you have to understand sort of where I am coming from; I look at this sort of observationally. That said, let's dig into it here. 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: Cannabis Permit System in Pipeline. Quoting directly: "Health Minister Somsak reiterates determination to ban all recreational use." Yeah I don't know why we are going on and on with this recreational use stuff and I don't know why everybody cares. Can we just stay out of people's business? One thing I would say is, I have said this before and I will say it again, perhaps future licensing should be based on a gradient system and perhaps the foundation of that gradient system should be that those permits already issued to these controlled herb licenses, those are like the basis. Whatever you can do with those today, you can do with them. You know, the sort of 0.2% THC content or lower, you can have a shop that sells that kind of stuff but then anything higher if you will - no pun intended - than that, would need to have further licensing. Things like extracts, highly potent in terms of THC content substances and things of that nature, higher levels if you will or more gradiated levels of licensure with that 0.2% being at the bottom and just leave out the whole notion of recreational use; just leave it. What people are using it for - as long as they're over 20 - they're consenting adults, they can make their own decisions. Again I hate the notion of calling this a narcotic, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. As we talked about another videos, if you can just unilaterally say a plant overnight is a narcotic it's pretty nonsensical if you really get down to it and think about it and also it's nonsensical from the standpoint this stuff doesn't kill anybody. The way I look at narcotics is it has the ability to kill you. I don't know how much cannabis you would have to ingest to die but I mean I think it's basically to the point of statistical impossibility to do that. That said, quoting further: "Permits will be required to grow and use Cannabis for medical purposes and research and recreational use will be banned under new legislation." We've already discussed that. Again I love how the Bangkok Post puts this like, and the media generally like, 'this is going to happen!' That's not what's going on here. We are in the legislative process and the media going out and stating things as foregone conclusions or as absolutes is not helping anything. Report on it, don't inject the opinion in there! Don't inject the bias in there, just report on what's happening. Quoting further: "Public Health Minister Somsak Thepsuthin said on Thursday." Quoting further: "His comments followed the surprising policy reversal earlier this month by Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin," no that's his policy, it's not the whole Government's policy. And bear in mind, he and his Party only make up a fraction of the overall Parliament. So again, to say that, just okay! Quoting further: "Who pledged to re-criminalize Cannabis by the end of the year after it was decriminalized in 2022." Not decriminalized! Legalized! Stop using these nonsensical words. The whole 'decriminalization' as a word, I don't really like it, it doesn't make any sense because something is either legal or it is not, when you have a Law System. Especially in the Civil Law with the Doctrine of Codification - again this is the Comparative Law sort of observer coming out in me - in a Civil Law System you need to codify what is illegal in order to make something which is legal, illegal. There is no decriminalized. It's like in Star Wars where Yoda says "do or do not", there is no 'try'. Quoting further: "Details of the licensing process were still being worked out Mr Somsak said. "The Permit System must not place an unreasonable burden on the public," he said in a post on Facebook, adding that there would be a grace period for the public to adjust." Yeah I have got to say it's a very reasonable position to take and thanks for that. Quoting further: "Pro-cannabis groups have protested against Mr Srettha's move saying it stands to damage business confidence after thousands of Cannabis cafes and dispensaries sprang up after legalisation." Now we are using the right terminology, although they spell it with an "s" instead of a "z" but you know me, I am an uncouth American. Quoting further: "An industry projected to be worth up to 1.2 billion dollars by 2025." Really? We really want to go after something that's going to be worth 1.2 billion dollars to the middle classes of Thailand? Really? That's what we want to do? Quoting further: "The country first legalised Cannabis for research and medical use in 2018 and 2 years ago dropped the plant from the national narcotics list, allowing people to grow, sell and consume it." So allowing people to just be free and operate free enterprise in a free market? What a novel idea!  Quoting further: "In order to curb recreational use," Recreational use! Recreational use! Stop. Let people be. Again, consenting adults in a privacy of their own home. This doesn't kill anybody. What they do, let them just Live and let Live. What I really hate most of all in all of this that I have seen in roughly the last two years, no going back to COVID, is when this Western nanny state "not live and let live" type of attitude started creeping into Thailand. It's what makes Thailand so beautiful; it's what makes Thailand so great; it's what makes Thailand Thai, or to say it in English "Free" is that we do live in let people live. It is what I love about this place; it is what I fell in love with about this place. "In order to curb recreational use Mr Somsak said that Cannabis buds and flowers would be re-classified as Category 5 narcotics." Again, if this isn't done through promulgated legislation, I really question the legitimacy of the thing because what keeps them from saying again any potted plant, overnight they can just vote to say that's a narcotic. What if somebody somewhere down the line decides to monopolize the Aloe Vera industry in Thailand, classify it as a narcotic and then issue themselves the only license for it? I know that sounds hyperbolic but it kind of not when you really think about this. Instead of looking at it from the standpoint "Well this was once illegal. What was once illegal, should be illegal again." No, you should look at it from the standpoint of this just is legal and they are trying to codify it illegal and we should look at whether or not that's a good idea just in general, not at the past, just at the present and the situation for what it is. Look at it objectively. In any event, quoting further: "The leaves, branches, roots, stems and seeds would still be available to use for approved health and medical applications, he said." So you mean all the stuff that nobody wants to buy? I mean what's that going to do to the business? Quoting further: "The previous Government failed to pass a new law to regulate Cannabis," - well who stymied that? Who stymied that? Go back and look at the record. There could have been a law on this; we could have moved down the road with promulgated legislation rather than these fits and starts but who decided that they didn't want to do that back when there was the opportunity to do that in the last Parliament? "The Pheu Thai Government has prepared a Bill that would clearly spell out approved medicinal uses of the plant, as well as what forms of consumption would be banned. It hopes to have a law in effect before the end of the year." Well another question is, are there any alternative drafts? Why is this only being framed as if there's only one draft because it is my understanding there were multiple drafts. And isn't the point of a Parliament, for our Parliamentarians to get in there and debate the drafts and come to compromises on key points so that everybody can just live with it moving forward. I thought that was the point of all your salaries being paid in the Parliament. Isn't that the point of a Parliament? Quoting further: "Mr Somsak who was named Health Minister in a recent Cabinet reshuffle, said earlier that he wanted to listen to people's opinions first before making a final decision on how to proceed." Couple of things. First up. Final decision on how to proceed hasn't been made so I wish the media would stop implying that it has, one. Secondly, what that final decision ultimately is could be different than what they're talking about it being today. That's another thing to bear in mind and again what I'm hoping is this goes through the legislative process; people that are involved in this that have a stake in this, that will be impacted by this, will have a hand in making and promulgating these laws and have a say in what they say. That would be a very good thing; I don't think there would be bad at all. That said, I would like to thank the new Public Health Minister for being reasonable and at least taking the time to listen to people that could be adversely impacted by all these changes.

So in any event, long story short, that's kind of the state of play of things at present here in Thailand. Again I think it's relatively safe to presume that through the remainder of this year will probably not going to see any major changes. I would even go out on a limb and say I think it's reasonably foreseeable to presume that within quarter one of 2025 as well - so the end of the forthcoming high season - we will probably not see any changes within that time period either. So folks that are out there perhaps making their vacation plans in an international context to come to Thailand who have this issue on their mind I hope that this perhaps provide some further clarification and insight and perhaps assuages any concerns you may have regarding whether or not there's going to be a giant rug pull and you will have problems with this if you vacation here in the Kingdom of Thailand.