The Belgian Cannabis Paradox: Political Inaction and the Unintended Strengthening of Violent Organized Crime
Cannabis-related issues frequently resurface in Belgium. According to several criminologists and the Federal Police, about 70% of drug trafficking cases involve cannabis alone. Despite this overrepresentation, there is notable political inertia: judicial resources focus heavily on cannabis repression, to the detriment of targeting more dangerous offenses (weapons, cocaine, crack).
Basing my perspective on the booklet Le cannabis sous contrôle – Comment ? (Tom Decorte et al.) and other reports, here are some points that might foster reflection:
- An Overburdened Justice System with “Minor” Cannabis Trafficking
About 70% of drug trafficking cases allegedly concern cannabis, according to various experts and Federal Police data.
This judicial focus hinders a more effective clampdown on arms and hard-drug networks such as cocaine or crack, which pose far greater risks to public safety.
- The Paradox of Prohibition
Completely banning cannabis essentially grants a near-monopoly to criminal organizations. The considerable revenue generated by this illegal market enables mafias to invest in arms, expand corruption, and broaden their scope to include harder drugs.
- Pressures from the Alcohol Lobby
Many observers note that the alcohol lobby opposes cannabis legalization to safeguard its market share.
However, numerous studies indicate that some alcohol consumers reduce their intake when regulated cannabis is accessible.
- Proposals for Responsible Regulation
In Le cannabis sous contrôle – Comment ?, the authors call for a structured regulatory approach involving:
Social cannabis clubs (small-scale, controlled production).
Distribution through licensed outlets, with dedicated taxation.
Quality control of the product (avoiding adulterated or improperly dosed substances).
This framework aims to shift the issue from a purely repressive approach to a health and fiscal perspective, cutting off a lucrative source of mafia funding.
- Public Health and Prevention
Regulation does not mean trivializing or promoting consumption, but rather providing controlled products and accurate risk information.
In countries that have legalized cannabis (Canada, some U.S. states, Uruguay), there is often better monitoring of users, less criminalization, and sometimes even a drop in alcohol consumption among certain populations.
- Fiscal and Political Stakes
Maintaining the status quo does not benefit the public. Funds spent on cannabis repression do little to prevent the proliferation of criminal networks.
Conversely, taxing legalized cannabis could generate revenue (as observed in several U.S. states) that might be reinvested in prevention, education, or the fight against harder drugs.
It is also noted that already disadvantaged populations are often the first to suffer the consequences of repressive drug policies (arrests, criminal records, integration difficulties).
- Why Urgent Political Action Is Needed
Maintaining strict prohibitions on cannabis without constructive debate effectively fuels organized crime.
Federal Police data and academic research are unequivocal: the majority of cases tried could be addressed more effectively, allowing for a greater focus on genuine threats (arms trafficking, dangerous narcotics, money laundering).
Finally, as Le cannabis sous contrôle – Comment ? emphasizes, the current system overburdens our judiciary and fails to address the underlying problem.
Conclusion
In Belgium, the vast majority of resources allocated to fighting drug trafficking primarily target cannabis. This strategic choice has a double effect: it overwhelms the justice system and diverts attention from more severe threats, while allowing mafias to monopolize a highly profitable market.
As several countries have already moved toward regulation (with results that should be analyzed objectively), the question remains: can we truly continue in this status quo and keep indirectly strengthening criminal networks? Or should we consider a supervised reform that deprives mafias of a significant revenue source, protects public health, and frees up our judicial apparatus to tackle the most critical cases?
Your opinions, experiences, and additional references are, of course, most welcome to further inform the discussion.
Full References
Tom Decorte et al. Le cannabis sous contrôle – Comment ? The foundations for a new regulatory system. Étopia / VUB Press, 2017. Available for purchase (FNAC): https://www.fr.fnac.be/a10280889/Tom-Decorte-Le-cannabis-sous-controle-Comment
Federal Police (Belgium) “Statistiques policières de criminalité,” available on www.police.be. Press releases and internal reports referencing the share of cannabis in drug-related cases (latest data 2021–2022).
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) European Drug Report (2022 edition) Official website: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu
Data on Cannabis Legalization Abroad
Colorado Department of Revenue, “Annual Marijuana Tax Reports,” 2020–2023 (https://cdor.colorado.gov).
Government of Canada, “Official Statistics on Cannabis Legalization,” 2018 (https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada.html).
Uruguay, legislation and official overviews at the Instituto de Regulación y Control del Cannabis (IRCCA): https://www.ircca.gub.uy
(If you have other sources or official reports, feel free to share them to enrich the discussion.)