李岚林:西北政法大学哲学与社会发展学院讲师,北京师范大学刑科院博士后,法学博士。研究方向:刑法学、禁毒法。
D914/D93
本文受教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“法治社会背景下刑事禁止令在社区矫正中的应用研究”(项目编号:17YJC820022)、陕西省高校青年创新团队项目“ 大数据时代社会治理创新中的刑事法治”、中国国家留学基金(项目编号:201808765008 )的资助。
仅仅通过将毒品非法化的禁止性立法来遏制毒品产业和控制毒品消费并非是唯一有效的方法,如果消费市场对毒品的需求足够高,地下黑市就会繁荣起来。大麻立法的“禁止性模式”不仅无法减少大麻市场的泛滥,反而可能会导致严重的社会和公共卫生问题的出现,甚至给刑事司法系统带来沉重负担。自本世纪初以来,国际上大麻合法化运动迅速蔓延。大麻零售合法化的“咖啡馆制度”和大麻种植合法化的“大麻社交俱乐部”成为欧洲大麻产业合法化的模式。欧洲各国自下而上推动的大麻合法化的改革,引导了欧洲国家层面乃至欧盟层面在不断博弈中寻求平衡:欧洲各国当局不断修订大麻立法整体呈现出刑罚轻缓化走向;欧盟层面也制定了统一的最低限度标准,在辅助性原则下实现大麻管控的多层次治理。
It is not the most effective way to resist the drug industry and control drug consumption simplythrough prohibitive legislation that illegalizes drugs. If the demand for drugs in the consumer market is highenough, the underground black market will flourish. The prohibition model" of cannabis legislation not onlycannot reduce the proliferation of the cannabis market, but it can also lead to serious social and public healthproblems. This model will even bring heavy burden to the criminal justice system. Since the beginning of thiscentury, the international cannabis legalization movement has spread rapidly. The "Coffee shops" of legalizationof cannabis retail and the "Cannabis Social Clubs" of legalization of cannabis cultivation have become thespecial models of legalization of the cannabis industry in Europe. The bottom-up reform of cannabis legalizationin European countries has also led European countries and even the European Union to seek a balance incontinuous game. European countries continue to revise cannabis legislation, and the final penalty shows a trendof mitigation. Uniform minimum standards have also been established at the EU level, and achieving multi-levelgovernance of cannabis control under the "principle of subsidiarity".
李岚林.大麻合法化的欧洲逻辑:价值博弈与法律平衡*[J].上海对外经贸大学学报,2020,(4):66-76.
复制