The Special Court of the Superior Court of Justice ruled that a writ of injunction is not the appropriate procedural instrument to obtain authorization for domestic cannabis cultivation, even when the request is related to medicinal purposes.
The Court’s understanding reinforces the institutional limits of judicial action in sensitive regulatory matters. According to the STJ, even in the face of potential regulatory gaps, a writ of injunction does not authorize the Judiciary to replace the Legislative or Executive Branch in creating a specific legal framework for individual cultivation.
The decision is based on the premise that the regulation of cannabis cultivation involves complex public policy choices, with health, administrative, regulatory, and enforcement impacts. For this reason, the definition of authorization, control, and supervision requirements must occur through the competent legislative and administrative channels, and not through judicial construction in a writ of injunction.
Another relevant point of the ruling was the statement that the Brazilian legal system does not recognize, at the constitutional level, a right to domestic cultivation of the plant. The STJ also noted that administrative rules already exist governing the medicinal and scientific uses of cannabis in a regulated context, under state control.
For companies, investors, and economic agents interested in regulated sectors, the decision offers important reflections. Projects involving highly regulated markets require careful analysis of the appropriate legal path, assessment of the limits of judicial intervention, and structuring compatible with existing administrative rules.
The adoption of exclusively judicial strategies, especially those aimed at creating permissions not provided for under the current regulatory framework, may increase the risk of denial and legal uncertainty. In these cases, it tends to be more appropriate to prioritize administrative pathways, regulatory monitoring, institutional engagement, and the structuring of operations in accordance with rules issued by the competent authorities.
It is also recommended that companies review their business models, internal policies, contracts, and operational structures to ensure adherence to applicable rules. In sensitive markets, regulatory governance should be treated as a strategic factor to reduce risks, preserve predictability, and enable legally sustainable operations.
The decision reinforces that innovation, health, research, and new markets must move forward together with legal certainty, regulatory compliance, and respect for the institutional competencies of each branch of government.
