<![CDATA[Introduction to the Problem: The regulation of medical cannabis remains a contentious legal issue in Indonesia due to its strict prohibition under the Narcotics Law, despite increasing scientific evidence supporting its therapeutic benefits. This legal rigidity contrasts sharply with Thailand’s progressive regulatory framework, which permits medical cannabis under state-controlled mechanisms. The urgency of this research lies in Indonesia’s normative vacuum in accommodating medical cannabis for health purposes, resulting in legal uncertainty for patients, medical professionals, and policymakers. Purpose/Study’s Objectives: This paper aims to illustrate the factors that lead to policy differences on the use of medical cannabis in Indonesia and Thailand. Therefore, the objective of this research is to uncover this phenomenon and find the fundamental differences in the cannabis legalization policies between Indonesia and Thailand. Design/Methodology/Approach: This study analyzes the legal differences in medical cannabis regulations between Indonesia and Thailand and formulate regulatory recommendations for Indonesia based on a comparative legal perspective. The research employs a normative juridical method with a comparative law approach, examining statutory regulations, court decisions, and policy frameworks in both countries. Findings: The findings reveal that Indonesia adopts a punitive, prohibition-oriented model centered on drug control, whereas Thailand implements a health-oriented regulatory model that integrates public health, state supervision, and patient access. This divergence reflects differing legal paradigms: criminal justice dominance in Indonesia versus public health governance in Thailand. The study argues that Indonesia’s current legal framework is incompatible with the evolving needs of medical treatment and human rights to health. Paper Type: Research Article]]>
Copyrights © 2026
