Crimes concerning drugs in Poland Drugs – definition

„Narcotics/drugs ” is a colloquial term used for certain psychoactive substances.

Psychoactive substances are those that affect the central nervous system, causing changes in mood, perception, consciousness, and behavior.

According to the Act of 29 July 2005 on Counteracting Drug Addiction:

Psychotropic substance – substances which are:

1. a) covered by the scope of the United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971 (Journal of Laws [Dz. U.] of 1976, item 180),
2. b) listed in the annex to Council Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA of 25 October 2004 laying down minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking (Official Journal of the EU L 335 of 11.11.2004, p. 8, as amended), subject to control measures and criminal sanctions equivalent to those applied to substances referred to in point a,
3. c) of natural or synthetic origin, in pure form or as part of a preparation, acting on the central nervous system, other than those specified in points a and b, but having similar chemical structure or effects, which — according to the recommendation of the Team for the Assessment of Risks to Human Health or Life Related to the Use of New Psychoactive Substances, referred to in Article 18b(1)(3) — pose similar public health or social threats as the substances mentioned above,
4. d) other than those listed in points a–c, which — under the provisions of the Act in force before the entry into force of the Act of 20 July 2018 amending the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction and the Act on the State Sanitary Inspection (Journal of Laws, item 1490) — were included in the list of psychotropic substances,

– as specified in the regulations issued pursuant to Article 44f(1);

Narcotic drug – substances which are:

1. a) covered by the scope of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 (Journal of Laws of 1966, item 277), as amended by the 1972 Protocol (Journal of Laws of 1996, item 149),
2. b) listed in the annex to Council Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA of 25 October 2004 laying down minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking, subject to control measures and criminal sanctions equivalent to those applied to substances referred to in point a,

1. c) of natural or synthetic origin, in pure form or as part of a preparation, acting on the central nervous system, other than those specified in points a and b, but having similar chemical structure or effects, which — according to the recommendation of the Team for the Assessment of Risks to Human Health or Life Related to the Use of New Psychoactive Substances, referred to in Article 18b(1)(3) — pose similar public health or social threats as the substances mentioned above,
2. d) other than those listed in points a–c, which — under the provisions of the Act in force before the entry into force of the Act of 20 July 2018 amending the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction and the Act on the State Sanitary Inspection — were included in the list of narcotic drugs

SMALL AMOUNT OF DRUGS

Article 62a of the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction (u.p.nark.):

If the object of the act referred to in Article 62(1) or (3) (possession) involves narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances in a small quantity, intended for the perpetrator’s personal use, the proceedings may be discontinued, even prior to the issuance of a decision to initiate an investigation or inquiry, if imposing a penalty on the perpetrator would be unwarranted in light of the circumstances of the act and the degree of its social harmfulness.

The legislator has not defined the notion of “small quantity” of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. Therefore, one must refer to the linguistic meaning — “minor, small.” The amount should not exceed a few grams, with consideration also given to qualitative and proportional criteria.

• The qualitative criterion relates to the concentration of the substance, which allows an assessment of how many single doses can be derived from it.
• The proportional criterion refers to the ratio between the quantity of the seized substances and the needs of the perpetrator.
  [Court of Appeal in Poznań, judgment of 23 February 2017, case no. II AKa 247/16]

In assessing whether, within the meaning of Article 62a u.p.nark., the detected quantity of drugs is minor, consideration must be given not only to their weight, but also to the factors listed in Article 115 § 2 of the Criminal Code (k.k.).

The legal mechanism provided in this provision is discretionary in nature and thus constitutes a power, not an obligation, to discontinue proceedings. This provision is addressed to one-time offenders who had minimal, sporadic contact with a narcotic drug, essentially for a single instance of intoxication.
[Court of Appeal in Warsaw, judgment of 18 December 2023, case no. VIII AKa 39/23]

The factors referred to in Article 115 § 2 of the Criminal Code include:

• the type and nature of the legal interest infringed or threatened,
• the extent of the harm caused or threatened,
• the manner and circumstances of the commission of the act,
• the gravity of the breached duties,
• the form of intent,
• the motivation of the perpetrator,
• the type of safety rules breached, and
• the degree of their violation.

In conclusion, possession of a minor quantity of a narcotic drug does not automatically justify applying the preferential legal classification of the perpetrator’s conduct.

Importantly, Article 62a u.p.nark. is addressed to so-called first-time offenders, who have had only sporadic contact with a narcotic drug, essentially for a single episode of intoxication.
[Court of Appeal in Kraków, judgment of 14 August 2017, case no. II AKa 42/18]

The discontinuation of proceedings under this provision is discretionary.
[Court of Appeal in Gdańsk, judgment of 28 December 2016, case no. II AKa 388/16]

However, if the perpetrator possesses some substances for personal use and some intended for another person, discontinuation of proceedings is not possible.
[Court of Appeal in Gdańsk, judgment of 24 May 2018, case no. II AKa 270/18]

“Undoubtedly, the quantity of the narcotic drug, i.e., 0.45 g, belonging to the category of so-called ‘soft drugs’, and thus not causing strong physical addiction, possessed by the accused, was minor. Therefore, it must be concluded that the breach of the legal order was not gross, which supports the lower court’s determination that the degree of social harmfulness of the act was not significant.”

In this excerpt from the judgment, the District Court, guided by life experience, refers to the minor degree of social harmfulness in the specific case, taking into account that:

„Adolescents are not yet fully developed in terms of personality, their value systems are still forming. They do not control their emotions and behaviors, which are often characterized by impulsiveness.”

Discontinuation of the proceedings subject to a one-year probationary period was motivated by educational considerations, particularly the assumption that the convicted person, despite the discontinuation, would abide by the legal order, and, in particular, not reoffend.
[District Court in Siedlce, judgment of 28 February 2023, case no. II Ka 879/22]

A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DRUGS

Article 62 – [Possession of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances]

1. Whoever, in violation of the provisions of this Act, possesses narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances shall be subject to a penalty of imprisonment of up to 3 years.
2. If the object of the act referred to in paragraph 1 involves a significant quantity of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, the perpetrator shall be subject to a penalty of imprisonment from 1 to 10 years.

Interpretation of „significant quantity” (znaczna ilość)

The term „significant quantity” has no legal definition, and its meaning may raise interpretive doubts. However, Polish legal doctrine and jurisprudence have developed criteria for determining whether the amount of drugs possessed by an individual qualifies as significant.
[Supreme Court, decision of 9 November 2023, case no. III KK 177/23]

➤ General Guidelines:

• A „significant quantity” of a narcotic drug is an amount sufficient to intoxicate at least several dozen individuals.
  • According to the Court of Appeal in Warsaw (judgment of 25 February 2022, case no. II AKa 353/19), this means at least 20 people.
  • This view is consistent across several rulings:
    • Court of Appeal in Gdańsk, 19 December 2012, case no. II AKa 430/12
    • Court of Appeal in Wrocław, 27 November 2019, case no. II AKa 97/19
    • Court of Appeal in Łódź, 7 July 2020, case no. II AKa 353/20
• For marijuana, the so-called „consumption dose” that enables intoxication is estimated to be 0.5 to 1 gram.
• A quantity that can simultaneously satisfy the needs of at least several dozen addicted individuals may be regarded as “significant.”

➤ Judicial Approach:

Because of the imprecision of the term „significant quantity,” courts must assess it on a case-by-case basis (in concreto). However, this is not a discretionary assessment, as the main criterion is the number of potential consumption doses derivable from the seized substance.
[Supreme Court, decision of 23 February 2017, case no. IV KK 19/17]

Moreover, Article 62(2) of the Act enables graduated penalties based on the actual scale of the “significant quantity.” For example, a perpetrator found in possession of 23.67 grams of cannabis resin (not derived from fibrous hemp) fulfilled the criteria of „significant quantity.”
[Court of Appeal in Wrocław, judgment of 30 April 2015, case no. II AKa 79/15]

➤ Qualitative vs. Quantitative Criteria:

In its judgment of 19 December 2012 (case no. II AKa 430/12), the Court of Appeal in Gdańsk proposed a more precise and coherent interpretation of “significant quantity,” which should include both:

• Quantitative factors (e.g., weight)
• Qualitative factors (e.g., toxicity or potency of the drug)

Thus, the starting point should be the dose required to intoxicate one person. If the quantity seized is sufficient to intoxicate at least several dozen people, it meets the statutory threshold of a “significant quantity.”

➤ Intended Use as a Factor:

Some courts have also emphasized that the intended use of the narcotic should be considered.

• There is a distinction between:
  • Drugs intended for distribution, and
  • Drugs intended solely for personal consumption.
    [Court of Appeal in Białystok, judgment of 9 August 2012, case no. II AKa 140/12]

It is indicated that the assessment of whether a narcotic drug or psychotropic substance constitutes a “significant quantity” takes into account: the weight of the substance (in grams or kilograms, or the number of potential consumption doses), the type of substance (with a distinction between so-called “hard” and “soft” drugs, based on their addictive and intoxicating properties), and the intended use (whether for trafficking or personal consumption) – as reflected in the judgment of the District Court in Gdańsk-Południe of 21 June 2018 (case no. II K 594/18).

Nevertheless, the intended use of the narcotic drug is not uniformly taken into consideration by courts across jurisdictions.

Possession of a drug in a “significant quantity,” within the meaning of the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction, refers to possessing a substantial amount at one time, rather than to repeated possession of minor amounts. This view was expressed by the Court of Appeal in Lublin in its judgment of 2 March 2017 (case no. II AKa 279/16).

Judicial decisions, however, reveal a degree of inconsistency in the interpretation of the concept of “significant quantity,” deviating at times from the standard dose-based calculation. For example, in a judgment dated 6 November 2003 (case no. II AKa 56/03), the Court of Appeal in Katowice held that, given that drug trafficking often involves dozens of kilograms or even tons (e.g., on ships), which are indisputably significant amounts, it would be unjustified to consider amounts measured in grams (such as 144 grams) as significant within the meaning of the statute.

Similarly, in its judgment of 5 April 2013 (case no. II AKa 47/13), the Court of Appeal in Kraków clarified that the notion of “significant quantity” should apply to wholesale amounts, which are above average in the ordinary drug market. In earlier rulings – judgments of 31 August 2005 (II AKa 167/05) and 30 May 2007 (II AKa 85/07) – the same court held that a significant quantity must be sufficient to intoxicate tens of thousands of people at once. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeal in Kraków has also, in other decisions, accepted that a quantity sufficient to intoxicate several dozen people (e.g., 200 grams of amphetamine) may also meet the statutory threshold.

Despite such diverging views, the dominant and prevailing interpretation in judicial practice is that a “significant quantity” of a drug is one that can intoxicate at least several dozen people. This consensus does not eliminate interpretive challenges, especially in borderline cases.

The subjective needs of an addicted individual who consumes large amounts of drugs do not influence the assessment of what constitutes a “significant quantity,” since this is an objective and standardized criterion. This was reaffirmed in the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw on 9 December 2022 (case no. II AKa 154/22).

The social harmfulness of the act of possessing drugs increases proportionally to the risk of making such substances available to others, especially when they are harmful to health. It also increases with the number of people who may potentially consume those substances. This was emphasized by the Court of Appeal in Warsaw in its judgment of 24 April 2017 (case no. II AKa 90/17).

POSSESSION

Article 34. [Possession of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, new psychoactive substances or their preparations, and category 1 precursors]

Narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, new psychoactive substances, their preparations, and category 1 precursors may be possessed exclusively by an entrepreneur, organizational unit, or natural person authorized to possess them under the provisions of this Act, Regulation (EC) No. 273/2004, or Regulation (EC) No. 111/2005.

Narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, new psychoactive substances, their preparations, and category 1 precursors possessed without legal authorization are subject to seizure by law enforcement or customs authorities in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

If criminal proceedings are not initiated, the court shall order the forfeiture of the narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, new psychoactive substances, category 1 precursors, or their preparations to the State Treasury upon the request of the voivodeship pharmaceutical inspector, the Chief Pharmaceutical Inspector of the Polish Armed Forces, or the state voivodeship sanitary inspector.

In the event of a court order of forfeiture to the State Treasury, the aforementioned substances and preparations are subject to destruction. However, the court may, upon request of the entities referred to in Article 24(2) and (4), order their forfeiture through full or partial transfer to those entities.

Doctrinal and Jurisprudential Interpretation:

Possession is understood as the state of actual control over a given object. It may be exercised directly or through another person. The concept of possession is interpreted broadly in the context of drug law, encompassing any form of actual control, even if temporary or limited in scope. This view is supported by the District Court in Słupsk in its judgment of case no. XIV K 550/16.

The criminal conduct referenced in this context involves the unauthorized possession of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances listed in the annexes to the Act. Where the possession involves a significant quantity, it constitutes an aggravated offence, punishable with increased severity under Article 62(2) of the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction.

The offence under Article 62(2) is committed by anyone who, contrary to the provisions of the Act, possesses a significant quantity of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. The objective element of the offence involves unauthorized possession of such substances in significant quantity. The legal interest protected by this provision is the individual right to health and life of persons who may consume such substances. Possession is defined as any form of actual control, however brief. The offence may be committed with either direct or eventual intent, as stated in the judgment of the District Court for Warsaw-Mokotów, case no. VIII K 428/18, dated 9 October 2018.

Legal doctrine and jurisprudence widely accept that the notion of possession should be interpreted more broadly than under civil law. It includes both independent and dependent possession, as well as any actual control over an item exercised on behalf of or in the interest of another, provided there is intent to control the item, even if for another person’s benefit. Thus, possession extends beyond mere ownership or use—it also encompasses storage or transportation for third parties. Any person with physical control over the substance is deemed a possessor. Transporting such substances, combined with knowledge of their nature, constitutes possession regardless of how or by whom the substances are to be used.

The accused’s awareness of the nature of the contents in the transported bag, combined with the willingness to transport it, is sufficient to establish possession. Whether the accused physically touched the bag or packed the narcotics is irrelevant. The logical link between possession of hundreds of zip-lock bags and a scale, along with the transportation of a significant quantity of narcotics, supports the court’s finding regarding the intended use of these items. The accused did not present evidence that the contents were, for instance, amber or culinary herbs; hence, the trial court’s conclusion regarding the intended purpose of the scale and the bags was not flawed. This reasoning was affirmed by the District Court in Świdnica in its judgment of 8 June 2018, case no. IV Ka 185/18.

INTRODUCTION INTO CIRCULATION

Article 56 – [Introducing into circulation of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, new psychoactive substances, or poppy straw. Participation in circulation]

1. Whoever, contrary to the provisions of Articles 33–35, 37, 40, and 40a, introduces into circulation narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, poppy straw, or new psychoactive substances, or participates in such circulation,
   – shall be subject to a fine and imprisonment from 6 months to 8 years.
2. In the case of lesser gravity,
   – the perpetrator shall be subject to a fine, restriction of liberty, or imprisonment for up to 1 year.
3. If the object of the act referred to in paragraph 1 involves a significant quantity of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, new psychoactive substances, or poppy straw,
   – the perpetrator shall be subject to a fine and imprisonment from 2 to 12 years.

Article 57 – [Punishability of preparation]

1. Whoever prepares to commit an offence defined in Article 55(1) or Article 56(1),
   – shall be subject to a fine, restriction of liberty, or imprisonment for up to 2 years.
2. Whoever prepares to commit an offence defined in Article 55(3) or Article 56(3),
   – shall be subject to imprisonment for up to 3 years.

The concept of “introducing into circulation” refers to the initial illegal transfer of a specific quantity of narcotics or psychotropic substances to another person, whether for payment or not. The person transferring the substances performs the act of introduction, while the recipient may be considered a participant in circulation if they intend to subsequently distribute the substances to someone else who is not a consumer. Subsequent transactions involving the same batch of drugs, provided that the recipient is not the end user, fall under “participation in circulation,” as confirmed by the Appellate Court in Kraków in its judgment of 13 December 2021 (II AKa 130/21).

Judicial rulings emphasize that it is insufficient to rely solely on the literal interpretation of the statutory definitions. Article 4(34) of the Act provides a legal definition of “introduction into circulation,” which means making narcotics or psychotropic substances or their precursors available to third parties, either for payment or free of charge. “Participation in circulation” is defined as receiving such substances from another person, not for personal use, but with the intention of transferring them to yet another individual. The key legal distinction between circulation and personal possession lies in the purpose of acquisition—whether it is for consumption or further distribution. This interpretation is reinforced in the judgment of the Appellate Court in Białystok from 28 June 2013 (II AKa 106/13), which held that the intended use by the recipient is decisive for legal classification.

Participation in drug circulation does not only encompass physical acts of transferring substances but also includes facilitating such processes, for instance, storing drugs, making premises available for transactions, or assisting in logistics. A person may be found guilty under Article 56 even if their role was passive—such as storing drugs or receiving them with the intent to distribute, regardless of who the final recipient is. This approach is confirmed in the Supreme Court decision of 18 November 2015 (V KK 341/15) and the judgment of the Appellate Court in Wrocław of 30 November 2017 (II AKa 299/17), as well as by scholarly commentary (e.g., “Drug Offenses and Legal Highs,” ed. W. Górowski & D. Zając, Kraków 2019, pp. 138–141).

When an individual is found in possession of both drugs and tools used for packaging or measuring them (such as digital scales and zip-lock bags), it is legally sufficient to infer that the person was preparing these substances for distribution. Such conduct may constitute preparation for drug trafficking under Article 57(2). This was the conclusion reached by the Supreme Court in its decision of 21 September 2022 (V KK 531/21).

In the context of offenses under Article 56(3) involving significant quantities, the amount of the substance is merely one of many relevant factors in sentencing—it is not necessarily the most decisive one. The Appellate Court in Katowice emphasized in its ruling from 16 February 2018 (II AKa 588/17) that while the statutory element of a “significant quantity” can be graded, sentencing decisions must consider the totality of the circumstances.

It is also important to distinguish trafficking from actions such as intra-EU transportation or acquisition. Bringing narcotics from another EU country, such as the Netherlands, into Poland does not automatically qualify as introduction into circulation if the substances were not yet distributed or sold domestically. Such behavior may qualify as preparatory

Providing a narcotic drug to another person

Article 58 – [Providing a narcotic drug to another person. Persuading to use a substance]

1. Whoever, contrary to the provisions of the Act:
   • provides another person with a narcotic drug, psychotropic substance, or new psychoactive substance,
   • facilitates or enables their use,
   • or persuades another person to use such a substance,
     – shall be subject to imprisonment of up to 3 years.
2. If the perpetrator:
   • provides a narcotic drug, psychotropic substance, or new psychoactive substance to a minor,
   • or persuades a minor to use such a substance,
   • or provides significant quantities to another person,
     – they shall be subject to imprisonment from 6 months to 8 years.

Article 59 – [Providing a narcotic drug for financial or personal gain]

1. Whoever, for the purpose of gaining material or personal benefit:
   • provides another person with a narcotic drug, psychotropic substance, or new psychoactive substance,
   • facilitates its use,
   • or persuades to use such a substance,
     – shall be subject to imprisonment from 1 year to 10 years.
2. If the perpetrator:
   • provides such a substance to a minor,
   • facilitates its use by a minor,
   • or persuades a minor to use it,
     – they shall be subject to imprisonment from 3 to 20 years.
3. In cases of lesser gravity,
   – the perpetrator shall be subject to a fine, restriction of liberty, or imprisonment of up to 2 years.

The element of acting for the purpose of obtaining financial gain (Article 59(1) of the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction) may be attributed to the perpetrator regardless of whether the financial benefit was obtained by the accused themselves or by another person, including situations where the accused acted as an intermediary between the buyer and seller of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances and personally did not gain any benefit. [II AKa 258/18 Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Szczecin dated 19.02.2019]

It is not required that the perpetrator have clear and specific knowledge that the persons to whom the drugs are sold are under eighteen years old. The perpetrator’s awareness should be shaped based on all circumstances of the case, and it is sufficient that they accept such a possibility. [IIAKa 41/19 Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Białystok dated 11.04.2019] To assign the offense under Article 59(2) of the 2005 Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction, it is necessary to demonstrate that the perpetrator was aware of the minor status of the person to whom the narcotic was provided, facilitated its use, or persuaded them to use it, i.e., knew this fact or foresaw the possibility and accepted it. [II AKa 107/23 Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Wrocław dated 13.07.2023]

In situations where the seller of narcotic drugs (psychotropic substances) is aware that the drugs handed over will enter further circulation, but part of them will be used for the personal use of the recipient of these substances, there will be a concurrence of provisions of the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction—Articles 56 and 59. However, if the seller lacks such awareness, acting within the limits of their intent, they will only be held liable for the qualified offense under Article 56. [II KK 97/19 Judgment dated 21.01.2020]

MANUFACTURING

Art. 53. [Manufacturing, processing, converting narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, new psychoactive substances or processing poppy straw]

1. Whoever, contrary to the provisions of the Act, manufactures, processes, or converts narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances or processes poppy straw, shall be subject to imprisonment for up to 3 years.
   1a. Whoever, contrary to the provisions of the Act, manufactures, processes, or converts new psychoactive substances, shall be subject to a fine, restriction of liberty, or imprisonment for up to 3 years.
2. If the subject of the act referred to in paragraphs 1 or 1a is a significant quantity of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, poppy straw, or new psychoactive substances, or if the act was committed for the purpose of obtaining material or personal gain, the perpetrator shall be subject to a fine and imprisonment from 3 to 20 years.

II AKa 297/24, Sentence for manufacturing marijuana – Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Wrocław
LEX no. 3840972 – judgment dated 28 November 2024.
TEZA (Thesis):
In recent times, there has been a significant change in social perception of the harmfulness of marijuana use by adults. It has been partially legalized in the Czech Republic, permitted in the Netherlands, and in Germany from 1 April 2024 a law legalizing cannabis came into force, allowing adults to possess up to 25 grams of marijuana for personal use. Additionally, cultivation of up to three cannabis plants and possession of up to 50 grams of marijuana at home is allowed. In these circumstances, it is difficult to uphold the view that the cultivation and personal use of this drug is highly socially harmful. The accused indeed cultivated and produced significant amounts of marijuana, but intended to use it solely for personal purposes. Therefore, by only risking his own health, he did not pose a significant harmful impact on society. This leads to the conviction that the imposed penalty of 3 years imprisonment appears excessively harsh.

II AKa 352/22, Manufacturing narcotic drugs – Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Wrocław
LEX no. 3634583 – judgment dated 28 September 2023.
TEZA (Thesis):
If the manufactured substance belongs to the group of narcotic drugs penalized by the Act, the fact that it is of low quality compared to other substances on the market is irrelevant to the defendant’s liability, although it may influence a lower penalty.

II AKa 20/23, Concurrence of cannabis cultivation with drug manufacturing – Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Wrocław
LEX no. 3651535 – judgment dated 27 April 2023.
TEZA (Thesis):
A person whose conduct is limited to the cultivation of cannabis is liable under Art. 49 para. 1 of the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction of 1997; if they also collect the plant material or resin, liability extends under Art. 49 para. 2 of the same Act, and if they take further steps to obtain a ready-to-use narcotic drug, their conduct must be described with all verbal characteristics and cumulatively qualified, including under Art. 40 of the Act, since through the latter behavior the perpetrator also manufactures a narcotic drug in the form of cannabis preparations.

II AKa 88/22, Penalty for cultivation and manufacturing narcotic drugs – Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw
LEX no. 3431812 – judgment dated 27 September 2022.
TEZA (Thesis):
The degree of social harmfulness of the act of cultivating and manufacturing narcotic drugs for personal use is significantly less than that of a perpetrator who produces and cultivates narcotic drugs for sale. The fact that the crime concerned so-called “soft drugs” is also of significance.