Eficacia jurídica de las políticas sobre el consumo recreativo de cannabis en espacios públicos en Colombia
Fecha
2025
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad de Manizales
Referencia bibliográfica
Resumen
En Colombia, el consumo recreativo de cannabis se encuentra en el epicentro de un debate jurídico y político que enfrenta derechos fundamentales, políticas prohibicionistas y control estatal del espacio público. Desde la Sentencia C-221 de 1994, la Corte Constitucional establece que el porte y consumo de la dosis mínima hacen parte del libre desarrollo de la personalidad. Sin embargo, el legislador y la administración han tejido un entramado normativo que, aunque admite el autocultivo, prohíbe de manera tajante el consumo en espacios públicos, generando una paradoja: se reconoce el derecho, pero se impide su ejercicio en los escenarios de ciudadanía democrática. Esta investigación analiza la eficacia jurídica de dichas políticas desde un enfoque socio-jurídico y crítico.
Se recurre a la doctrina de autores como García Villegas (eficacia simbólica y diferencial), Bernal Pulido (dimensiones de la eficacia) y Ferrajoli (garantismo), así como a la jurisprudencia constitucional (C-221/1994, C-253/2019, SU-360/2022) y a estudios empíricos del Observatorio de Drogas de Colombia y la Fundación Ideas para la Paz. Los hallazgos demuestran que las regulaciones actuales poseen una ineficacia de éxito: fracasan en sus fines declarados (salud, convivencia) pero triunfan en sus fines implícitos (control social selectivo).
El espacio público, concebido por la Constitución de 1991 como escenario democrático de inclusión, se ha transformado en un ámbito de exclusión y estigmatización del consumidor. En conclusión, la política pública colombiana reproduce una eficacia más simbólica que material, legitimando prácticas de control territorial que vulneran sistemáticamente los derechos al libre desarrollo de la personalidad, a la igualdad y a la salud. Frente a ello, el artículo propone avanzar hacia un modelo de regulación inteligente que, en consonancia con estándares internacionales, supere la prohibición y garantice el ejercicio real de las libertades.
In Colombia, recreational cannabis use is at the center of a legal and political debate that pits fundamental rights against prohibitionist policies and state control of public spaces. Since Ruling C-221 of 1994, the Constitutional Court has established that the possession and consumption of minimal doses are part of the free development of personality. However, the legislature and the administration have woven a regulatory framework that, while allowing for personal cultivation, strictly prohibits consumption in public spaces, creating a paradox: the right to personal cultivation is recognized, but the right to consume in public spaces is prohibited. The debate is further complicated by the fact that the law does not define what constitutes a “minimal dose.” The Constitutional Court has ruled that the consumption of cannabis is a matter of personal freedom, but it has not defined what constitutes a “minimal dose.”However, legislators and the administration have woven a regulatory framework that, while allowing personal cultivation, strictly prohibits consumption in public spaces, creating a paradox: the right is recognized, but its exercise is prevented in the context of democratic citizenship. This research analyzes the legal effectiveness of these policies from asocio-legal and critical perspective. It draws on the doctrine of authors such as García Villegas (symbolic and differential effectiveness), Bernal Pulido (dimensions ofeffectiveness), and Ferrajoli (guarantees), as well as constitutional jurisprudence (C-221/1994, C-253/2019, SU-360/2022) and empirical studies by theColombian Drug Observatory and the Ideas for Peace Foundation. The findings show that current regulations are ineffective in terms of success: they fail in their stated aims (health,coexistence) but succeed in their implicit aims (selective social control). Public space, conceived by the 1991 Constitution as a democratic arena for inclusion, has been transformed into a space of exclusion and stigmatization of the consumer. In conclusion, Colombian public policyreproduces an efficacy that is more symbolic than material, legitimizing practices ofterritorial control that systematically violate the rights to free development of personality, equality, and health. In response to this, thearticle proposes moving toward a model of intelligent regulation that, in line with international standards, goes beyond prohibition and guarantees the real exercise of freedoms.
In Colombia, recreational cannabis use is at the center of a legal and political debate that pits fundamental rights against prohibitionist policies and state control of public spaces. Since Ruling C-221 of 1994, the Constitutional Court has established that the possession and consumption of minimal doses are part of the free development of personality. However, the legislature and the administration have woven a regulatory framework that, while allowing for personal cultivation, strictly prohibits consumption in public spaces, creating a paradox: the right to personal cultivation is recognized, but the right to consume in public spaces is prohibited. The debate is further complicated by the fact that the law does not define what constitutes a “minimal dose.” The Constitutional Court has ruled that the consumption of cannabis is a matter of personal freedom, but it has not defined what constitutes a “minimal dose.”However, legislators and the administration have woven a regulatory framework that, while allowing personal cultivation, strictly prohibits consumption in public spaces, creating a paradox: the right is recognized, but its exercise is prevented in the context of democratic citizenship. This research analyzes the legal effectiveness of these policies from asocio-legal and critical perspective. It draws on the doctrine of authors such as García Villegas (symbolic and differential effectiveness), Bernal Pulido (dimensions ofeffectiveness), and Ferrajoli (guarantees), as well as constitutional jurisprudence (C-221/1994, C-253/2019, SU-360/2022) and empirical studies by theColombian Drug Observatory and the Ideas for Peace Foundation. The findings show that current regulations are ineffective in terms of success: they fail in their stated aims (health,coexistence) but succeed in their implicit aims (selective social control). Public space, conceived by the 1991 Constitution as a democratic arena for inclusion, has been transformed into a space of exclusion and stigmatization of the consumer. In conclusion, Colombian public policyreproduces an efficacy that is more symbolic than material, legitimizing practices ofterritorial control that systematically violate the rights to free development of personality, equality, and health. In response to this, thearticle proposes moving toward a model of intelligent regulation that, in line with international standards, goes beyond prohibition and guarantees the real exercise of freedoms.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Derecho Constitucional, Espacio Público, Derechos Fundamentales, Control Social, Garantismo Penal, Biopolítica
