The planned amendment to the Medical Cannabis Act aims to ban online initial prescriptions and shipment of cannabis flowers. A legal expert opinion holds both provisions vulnerable to EU law challenges—and the reasoning is comprehensible even to non-lawyers.
📑 Inhaltsverzeichnis
The bill to amend the Medical Cannabis Act is currently under review by the Bundestag’s Health Committee (Bundestag document 21/3061). The core of the proposal consists of two prohibitions: initial prescriptions for cannabis flowers should only be issued after an in-person doctor consultation, and mail-order sales of flowers are to be banned. Delivery services from local pharmacies would remain permitted.
In a legal expert opinion, Franziska Katterbach, partner at Fieldfisher Germany, argues that both prohibitions would likely fail a proportionality assessment under EU law. We present her reasoning here without endorsing it. Nothing has been decided.
The Coherence Argument
The first objection concerns the in-person consultation requirement. According to the expert opinion, German law cannot prevent patients from seeking treatment from physicians in other EU member states. As a legal matter, the rule has no reach there.
This leads to an accusation of incoherence. The European Court of Justice requires restrictions to pursue stated objectives in a coherent and systematic manner. A rule that bans the same activity domestically while being unable to enforce it abroad does not meet this standard. It redirects behavior rather than preventing it.
The Shipping Ban Argument
The second objection concerns mail-order sales. A blanket prohibition affects free movement of goods and must therefore be justified. The expert opinion finds the stated justification unconvincing, using a comparison from German law itself: while shipping of a prescription pharmacy product would be prohibited, private cultivation of up to three cannabis plants remains legal and is practically uncontrolled.
Anyone arguing that shipping must be banned due to abuse risk must explain why the same legislature permits uncontrolled private cultivation. This contradiction is the core of the objection.
Current Status of the Process
The bill was introduced on December 3, 2025, and referred to the Health Committee on first reading on December 18, 2025. A public hearing took place on January 14, 2026. Since then the proposal remains in committee, with no committee recommendation issued and no date set for further readings. Current law therefore remains unchanged—telemedicine prescriptions and pharmacy mail-order remain available without restriction.
We have described the political pressure behind the bill multiple times, such as when import figures were used to justify stricter rules. How the industry itself views this, Can Ansay told us in an interview, and we have analyzed separately the role of free pharmacy choice. For details on what private payers should expect, see our article on private prescriptions.
An expert opinion decides nothing. But it identifies the points where a law may later be challenged, and both arguments mentioned here will play a role in further proceedings.
Sources: Government bill, Bundestag document 21/3061; expert opinion by Franziska Katterbach, Fieldfisher Germany; Cannabiswirtschaft industry association newsletter, October 21, 2026; procedural status per German Bundestag information. Status: October 21, 2026. This article presents a third-party legal interpretation and does not constitute legal advice.
Sollten Online-Erstverordnungen für Cannabis weiterhin möglich sein?
Branchen-Update
News, Analysen und Reportagen — mehrmals im Monat direkt in dein Postfach.
Folge uns
