Introduction
The debate surrounding the legalization of medical marijuana in the Philippines has been a contentious issue at the intersection of public health, criminal law, and human rights. Under the Philippine legal framework, marijuana (cannabis) remains classified as a dangerous drug, subject to stringent prohibitions. However, evolving global perspectives on cannabis for therapeutic purposes have spurred legislative efforts to reform existing laws. This article examines the current legal status of medical marijuana bills in the Philippines as of early 2026, contextualized within the nation's constitutional, statutory, and regulatory landscape. It explores the historical backdrop, key legislative proposals, judicial interpretations, enforcement practices, and ongoing challenges, providing a comprehensive overview of the topic.
Historical and Legal Background
The foundation of Philippine drug policy is rooted in Republic Act No. 9165, known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. This law categorizes marijuana as a Schedule I drug, deeming it to have high potential for abuse and no accepted medical use. Possession, cultivation, distribution, or use of marijuana is punishable by severe penalties, including life imprisonment and fines ranging from PHP 500,000 to PHP 10 million, depending on the quantity involved. The Act was enacted amid the government's aggressive anti-drug campaign, emphasizing prohibition over harm reduction.
Prior to RA 9165, the Philippines adhered to international conventions such as the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs and the 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, which the country ratified. These treaties obligate the Philippines to control cannabis strictly, allowing exceptions only for scientific and medical purposes under tightly regulated conditions. Domestically, the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) and the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) oversee implementation, with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulating any potential pharmaceutical applications.
Efforts to introduce medical marijuana began gaining traction in the mid-2010s, influenced by successful models in countries like Canada, certain U.S. states, and Uruguay. Proponents argue that cannabis derivatives, such as cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), offer therapeutic benefits for conditions like epilepsy, chronic pain, multiple sclerosis, and chemotherapy-induced nausea, supported by emerging medical research. Opponents, including conservative lawmakers and religious groups, cite risks of abuse, gateway drug theories, and cultural stigmas.
Key Legislative Proposals and Their Evolution
Several bills have been introduced in the Philippine Congress to legalize medical marijuana, reflecting a gradual shift in policy discourse. The most prominent initiatives include:
House Bill No. 6517 (2019): The Philippine Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act
Filed during the 18th Congress by Representative Rodolfo Albano III, this bill sought to establish a framework for the regulated use of medical cannabis. It proposed creating a Medical Cannabis Compassionate Use Office under the Department of Health (DOH) to oversee patient registries, physician certifications, and licensed dispensaries. The bill allowed cannabis for treating debilitating conditions but prohibited recreational use. It passed the House Committee on Health but stalled in the Senate amid opposition from then-President Rodrigo Duterte's administration, which prioritized a zero-tolerance drug war.
Senate Bill No. 153 (2019): Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Act
Introduced by Senator Vicente Sotto III, this Senate counterpart emphasized strict controls, including FDA approval for cannabis-based medications. It aimed to decriminalize possession for qualified patients but faced criticism for being overly restrictive, limiting access to imported products only. The bill did not advance beyond committee hearings.
Revival in the 19th Congress (2022-2025)
With the election of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in 2022, there was renewed optimism for reform. House Bill No. 180 (2022), filed by Representative Luis Raymund Villafuerte Jr., built on previous proposals by incorporating safeguards like age restrictions (patients must be at least 18 or have parental consent) and prohibiting smoking as a delivery method, favoring oils, tinctures, and edibles. The bill proposed integrating medical cannabis into the Universal Health Care Act (RA 11223), potentially covering costs through PhilHealth for low-income patients.
In the Senate, Bill No. 990 (2022) by Senator Robin Padilla advocated for a more progressive approach, including local cultivation under PDEA licenses to reduce import dependency and boost agricultural revenue. Padilla, a vocal supporter, highlighted economic benefits, estimating a potential PHP 8 billion industry. Committee hearings in 2023-2024 involved testimonies from medical experts, patient advocates, and international organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO), which reclassified cannabis in 2019 to acknowledge its medical value.
By 2025, a consolidated version, House Bill No. 10439 (the Philippine Medical Cannabis Act), passed the House of Representatives on third reading. It established a Medical Cannabis Authority to regulate production, distribution, and research, with provisions for clinical trials at institutions like the University of the Philippines. However, the bill languished in the Senate due to filibusters and amendments demanding stricter penalties for diversion to recreational use.
Current Status as of 2026
As of January 2026, medical marijuana remains illegal in the Philippines, with no comprehensive national law authorizing its use. The consolidated House Bill No. 10439 from the previous Congress has been refiled in the 20th Congress as House Bill No. 123 (2025) by a coalition of lawmakers, including Representatives from progressive parties. It is currently under review by the House Committee on Health, with public consultations ongoing. In the Senate, a parallel measure, Senate Bill No. 456 (2025), sponsored by Senators Padilla and Imee Marcos, incorporates feedback from prior debates, emphasizing evidence-based medicine and international compliance.
President Marcos Jr.'s administration has adopted a more nuanced stance, focusing on "human rights-based" drug policies. In 2024, the DOH issued guidelines allowing compassionate special permits for imported CBD-based drugs like Epidiolex for epilepsy treatment, under FDA oversight. This marks a limited de facto recognition, but it applies only to specific pharmaceuticals, not raw cannabis or homegrown products. Approximately 200 patients have benefited from these permits, primarily children with rare seizure disorders.
Judicially, the Supreme Court has not directly ruled on medical marijuana, but related cases provide insight. In People v. Dela Cruz (2020), the Court upheld RA 9165's constitutionality but noted the need for legislative updates to address medical exceptions. Human rights petitions, such as those from the Philippine Medical Association, argue that blanket prohibition violates the right to health under Article II, Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution.
Enforcement remains rigorous. PDEA raids on illegal cultivation sites continue, with over 1,000 arrests in 2025 related to marijuana. However, there is a noticeable shift: courts increasingly consider medical intent as a mitigating factor, leading to lighter sentences in some cases involving terminally ill individuals.
Challenges and Arguments
Pro-Legalization Perspectives
Advocates, including groups like the Philippine Cannabis Compassionate Society and medical professionals, emphasize scientific evidence. Studies from the National Institutes of Health (U.S.) and local research at the Philippine General Hospital demonstrate cannabis's efficacy for palliative care. Economically, legalization could generate tax revenue and create jobs in agriculture, particularly in rural areas like the Cordilleras, where cannabis grows naturally. It aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) and could reduce prison overcrowding by decriminalizing medical users.
Anti-Legalization Concerns
Opposition stems from fears of increased youth access, as highlighted by the DDB's 2024 survey showing rising marijuana use among teens. Religious organizations, such as the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines, view it as morally hazardous. Law enforcement agencies warn of enforcement difficulties, potential for black market expansion, and conflicts with international treaties. Critics also point to limited local research infrastructure, risking substandard products.
Regulatory Hurdles
Even if passed, implementation faces obstacles: establishing a secure supply chain, training healthcare providers, and monitoring for abuse. Federalism issues arise, as some local government units (LGUs) like Quezon City have passed resolutions supporting medical cannabis, creating potential conflicts with national law.
International Comparisons and Influences
The Philippines lags behind regional neighbors. Thailand legalized medical cannabis in 2018, followed by full decriminalization in 2022, boosting its medical tourism. Malaysia allows certain cannabis-based treatments, while Indonesia maintains strict bans. Globally, the UN's 2020 decision to remove cannabis from Schedule IV of the 1961 Convention provides leeway for member states like the Philippines to reform without violating treaties.
Future Prospects
The trajectory depends on political will. With midterm elections approaching in 2028, medical marijuana could become a campaign issue. Public opinion polls from 2025 show 65% support for medical use, up from 40% in 2018, driven by awareness campaigns. If enacted, the law would likely include phased rollout: starting with imports, then local production, and ongoing evaluation.
In conclusion, while medical marijuana bills have progressed through legislative channels, full legalization remains elusive. The current framework offers narrow exceptions via special permits, but comprehensive reform is needed to balance public health needs with drug control imperatives. Ongoing debates underscore the Philippines' evolving approach to drug policy in a changing global context.