Open Letter to the Policy Makers of Sri Lanka Reconsidering the cannabis cultivation project for export

Doctors opine that even if the assumptions about market opportunities were sound through the commercial cultivation of Cannabis, the risks and harms far outweigh any promised benefits (picture courtesy Canadian Coalition for Senior Mental Health)  

Dear Policy Makers
I understand that the Government of Sri Lanka is preparing to allow regulated cannabis cultivation within designated export zones, with assurances of stringent security to prevent diversion to domestic use. The justification appears to rest on two assumptions: that global demand for medicinal cannabis will continue to expand, and that Sri Lanka’s favourable climate and agricultural expertise can help us carve out a niche export market.
As a concerned citizen, I respectfully urge you to reconsider this project. While I recognise the urgent need for foreign exchange and new industries, the rationale behind this plan is deeply flawed. Even if the assumptions about market opportunities were sound, the risks and harms far outweigh any promised benefits. Allow me to outline the concerns:
1. Legal and regulatory contradictions
Cannabis remains prohibited under the Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, with only limited licensed use in Ayurveda. By creating an export-only exception, the government risks eroding the credibility of its long-standing drug-control framework. Once this precedent is set, pressure will grow for further relaxations—deliberate or unintended.
2. Security measures are not enough
Even with the strictest safeguards, diversion into domestic markets cannot be ruled out. More importantly, the perception of state-sanctioned cannabis cultivation will itself undermine public trust, strain enforcement capacity, and create complex legal grey areas.
3. Harm despite zero diversion
For decades, Sri Lanka has upheld a clear position: cannabis is harmful and prohibited. Granting official licences—even if all production is exported—sends a contradictory signal that cannabis is acceptable, safe, or even endorsed by the state.
4. Youth perception and health risks Evidence from other countries shows that when governments relax cannabis restrictions, adolescents quickly begin to see the drug as less harmful. This perceptual shift often precedes experimentation and long-term harm. Years of preventive education in schools and communities risk being undone by a single policy change.
5. The false economic promise
Experience in countries like Lesotho, Jamaica, and Uganda shows that cannabis export schemes overwhelmingly benefit foreign investors and consultants, not local farmers or governments. Oversupply from established producers such as Canada has driven down global prices, while stringent certification requirements keep premium markets largely closed. Much like the tobacco industry, multinational corporations will profit while Sri Lanka bears the long-term social costs.
Research has also exposed troubling links between medicinal cannabis campaigns and efforts to normalise recreational cannabis markets. If Sri Lanka embraces this path, it risks playing directly into the hands of powerful global industries with little regard for our people’s health.
Conclusion
In this light, the proposed cannabis export project is not worth the risks it poses to public health, our youth, and our national integrity. The cannabis cultivation initiative will inevitably normalise and popularise cannabis, a process that, once begun, cannot be reversed. I urge you to pause this initiative, commission an independent cost–benefit analysis, and open a transparent dialogue with the public before taking further steps. Our young people look to you not only for jobs and opportunity, but also for protection, guidance, and moral clarity.
Respectfully,
Mahesh Rajasuriya MBBS MD (Psychiatry) RANZCP
A concerned citizen of Sri Lanka