Corrections

We will get things wrong. Drug law is a moving target, the research on kratom is thin and contested, and we are a small operation. When we make a substantive error we correct the article, mark it as updated, and record it here, including what the error was, not just that there was one.

Spotted something? Write to editorial@wikikratom.com with the article and the specific claim.

Log

1. 10 October 2026. Kratom in Romania: a controlled drug, and possessing it for your own use is a crime

   Error: The page said that a referral asking whether bringing drugs into Romania for your own use is article 3 of Law 143/2000 together with article 4, or article 4 alone, was rejected as inadmissible in December 2018, "so that question is unresolved". The rejection is real (High Court of Cassation and Justice decision 18 of 5 December 2018, Monitorul Oficial 73 of 30 January 2019), but the page gave no source for it and misstated its effect. The court rejected the referral because it considered the question already answered by its decision 15/2017, and said the 2017 solution, under which the two offences coexist, remains valid where drugs cross the border and are then held for own consumption. Article 3 carries five to fifteen years in prison; article 4 carries three months to two years or a fine. Calling the question open understated the exposure of a reader importing kratom for personal use.
   Fix: The paragraph now reports what decision 18/2018 says and why it was inadmissible, states that it is a ruling on admissibility rather than on the merits, and keeps the conclusion that a two-year maximum is the wrong provision to reason from for a parcel from abroad. Decisions 15/2017 and 18/2018 are now both cited in the sources.

2. 12 September 2026. Kratom in Estonia: a List I narcotic, and handling it is prohibited outside four narrow purposes

   Error: The page rested on the annex to ministerial regulation 73 of 18 May 2005 in the wording given by regulation number 2 of 13 February 2026, and it told readers that the annex prints mitragynine in its English column as "Mytragynine", a typographical error in the official document. Both statements were true when the page was written and neither was true by the time of this check. Regulation number 33 of 6 August 2026 replaced the annex wholesale, published on 11 August and in force from 14 August 2026, and the replacement spells the entry "Mitragynine". A reader following our citation would have opened a superseded annex, and a reader checking the current one would have found our description of its English column wrong.
   Fix: The page now cites the annex in force, in the wording of regulation number 33 of 6 August 2026, and the superseded February annex is kept in the sources so the earlier reading can still be checked. The spelling note is rewritten to say which annex carried the error and that the current one does not. The substance of Estonian law is unchanged and was re-verified against the new annex: all three entries, the plant as "Eriline abuurapuu" and both alkaloids, remain in List I. The annex was confirmed to have rendered by finding cocaine and cannabis in it, and confirmed to be current by finding clonazolam, brorphine, bromazolam and eight nitazene entries.

3. 5 September 2026. Kratom in Malaysia: banned under the Poisons Act, and its export is prohibited too

   Error: The page said an offence involving mitragynine as a psychotropic substance under the Poisons Act 1952 carries a fine of up to ten thousand ringgit, or up to four years in prison, or both. Those are not the figures in the Act. Section 30(5) of the reprint in force, which incorporates the Poisons (Amendment) Act 2025, sets the maximum at a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both. The published figures understated the fine tenfold and the prison term by a year, in the direction that understates a reader's criminal exposure.
   Fix: The penalty is corrected to one hundred thousand ringgit and five years, and both the figure and its section number are now on the page. The prohibition is also restated from the Act rather than from a minister's description of it: section 30(3) is the provision that bars importing, exporting, manufacturing, supplying, selling, possessing and using a psychotropic substance, and section 30(4) carries a presumption of knowing possession against anyone found with one. The Act reprint, the First Schedule as updated by P.U.(A) 460/2025 and the Third Schedule as updated by P.U.(A) 248/2026 are added to the sources as documents rather than as a link to the page that lists them.

4. 2 September 2026. Six states have a Kratom Consumer Protection Act, and no two of them are the same law

   Error: The piece counted five states with a statute called a Kratom Consumer Protection Act. Arizona is a sixth, and its is the oldest of them: section 2 of Arizona Laws 2019, chapter 156 says the act "may be cited and known as the 'Kratom Consumer Protection Act'", approved on 30 April 2019. It was missed because the short title sits in uncodified session law rather than in the Arizona Revised Statutes, so a search of the code finds nothing. The table graded Arizona "No" in the "Named a KCPA" column.
   Fix: The headline, the opening sentence and the Arizona row are corrected, and the page now explains that Oklahoma has the oldest short title sitting in a state codified statute while Arizona has the oldest act of that name. The Arizona session law is added to the sources. Found by an independent fact-check of the Oklahoma legal page, which had repeated the error in a stronger form.

5. 2 September 2026. Six states have a Kratom Consumer Protection Act, and no two of them are the same law

   Error: The table recorded Florida as having no labelling requirement, no adulteration provision, no ceiling on 7-hydroxymitragynine and no registration. That is true of section 500.92 and false of Florida law. Rule 5K-4.030 of the Florida Administrative Code has required a food establishment permit, labelling and misbranding compliance since 10 January 2024, and an Attorney General emergency rule has placed 7-hydroxymitragynine and four related compounds in Schedule I since 18 August 2026, capped at 1 milligram per gram or millilitre. The table was built from statutes, but the piece presented it as what twelve state laws say, and it treated Oregon's administrative rules as in scope while leaving Florida's out.
   Fix: The table is left as a table of statutes and is now described as one. A new paragraph above it sets out what Florida regulates by rule and states that on the five components the piece measures, Florida's statute scores one and Florida's law scores five. The two Florida rules are added to the sources.

6. 31 August 2026. DEA moves to put concentrated 7-OH in Schedule I, but kratom leaf is not banned

   Error: The closing section said that "US scheduling decisions have historically shaped how European regulators frame the substances that follow them." Nothing supports that, and it appears to run backwards. No US federal scheduling of kratom, mitragynine or 7-hydroxymitragynine has ever taken effect, so there has been no US decision for a European regulator to follow. Denmark listed kratom in 2009, Finland removed it from the consumer market in 2016 and Sweden made the plant a narcotic in 2025, each under its own national instrument, and none of them after a US federal action. The sentence was caught by an independent fact-check of a later article that had repeated it.
   Fix: The sentence is removed and the correction is stated on the page itself. The section now says only that the pharmacological concerns do not stop at a border, and that a US federal position on concentration thresholds is the kind of thing European authorities read. No legal claim on the page changes.

7. 31 August 2026. Kratom in the European Union: no EU-wide ban, but no legal route to sell it as food either

   Error: The page said the European Commission's Novel Food Catalogue lists "Mitragyna speciosa". It does not, and it never did in the version we cited. We read all 970 published catalogue entries on 31 August 2026 and there is no entry for Mitragyna, speciosa, kratom, mitragynine or 7-hydroxymitragynine under any name. Under M the list runs from "Mineral enriched fungal biomass" to "Momordica charantia" with nothing between them. The page had flagged the sentence as provisional since 14 July because we had not read the catalogue ourselves, which was the right instinct and the wrong resolution: a claim we cannot reproduce should come off the page, not carry a warning label. A second error sat one paragraph below. The page described the data endpoint it had searched as the Commission's "register of novel food authorisations" holding 970 entries. That endpoint is the Novel Food status Catalogue, not the register of authorisations, and the tell was in the page's own control check: Ginkgo, stevia and Cannabis sativa are not authorised novel foods, they are catalogue entries recording that those plants are not novel.
   Fix: The section now separates the two lists. The catalogue is described as what the Commission says it is, a "non-binding" and "non-exhaustive" tool that "serves as orientation", and its own notice is quoted on where the burden falls: it is for the food business operator "to be able to prove a history of consumption as foodstuff before 15 May 1997". Its silence on kratom is therefore not a permission, and kava, khat and iboga are absent from it in the same way. The binding list is now cited separately and was read separately: the Union list of authorised novel foods, the annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470, in the consolidated text in force from 10 August 2026, which incorporates every amendment through Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/1749 of 20 July 2026. Kratom is not in it. Both lists were checked the way this site checks a negative: astaxanthin-rich oleoresin, bovine lactoferrin and Schizochytrium sp. oil prove the annex rendered, and pasteurised Akkermansia muciniphila, defatted rapeseed powder, inulin-propionate ester and Rhizomucor pusillus mycelium prove the text is current rather than an old copy. The page's status is unchanged at "legal-sale-restricted", and the finding it rests on, that no novel food authorisation for kratom has ever been granted, survived the correction on better evidence than it had before.

8. 31 August 2026. Kratom in the Netherlands: not a controlled drug, not a legal food

   Error: The page repeated the European Union page's claim that the European Commission's Novel Food Catalogue lists "Mitragyna speciosa as such". The catalogue does not list it. This is the same error, in the same words, on a second page.
   Fix: The paragraph now states the test rather than the missing entry: kratom has no record of significant food use in the Union before 15 May 1997, and the burden of showing otherwise falls on the seller, in the Commission's own words. The claim that no authorisation has been granted stands and is now sourced to the Union list itself, the annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 as consolidated to 10 August 2026. The status is unchanged.

9. 31 August 2026. Kratom in the United Kingdom: legal to possess, an offence to supply or import

   Error: The page argued that kratom is an unauthorised novel food in Great Britain partly because "the European Union had already classified Mitragyna speciosa as a novel food". No such classification exists: kratom is absent from the Commission's Novel Food status Catalogue entirely. The page also asserted the Northern Ireland position on the same missing premise.
   Fix: The inherited-classification argument is removed. The Great Britain conclusion did not depend on it and is unchanged: kratom has no history of significant food use in Britain before 15 May 1997, the burden of proving otherwise falls on the seller, and no authorisation for kratom appears on the FSA's Register of Novel Foods Authorisations. The Northern Ireland sentence now cites the Union list of authorised novel foods directly, read in the consolidated text in force from 10 August 2026. The status is unchanged at "supply-banned", which rests on the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 and never rested on food law.

10. 27 August 2026. Kratom in Belgium: we cannot find the ban everyone reports

    Error: The page said that we could find no Belgian instrument controlling kratom, and it carried the status "unclear". Kratom has been controlled in Belgium since 1 June 2024. It is listed by name in annex IVB to the royal decree of 6 September 2017, inserted by article 19 of the royal decree of 24 April 2024 and published in the Belgisch Staatsblad of 22 May 2024 at page 64420. Isolated mitragynine is separately listed in the same annex by article 18 of the same decree, at page 64417 of the same gazette. The error ran in the permissive direction: possession without a licence is an offence under article 6 section 1 of the 2017 decree, and the page told readers the question was open. Two supporting statements were also wrong. The page counted seven decrees amending the substance annexes when there are nine, and it named the decree of 19 December 2025 as the most recent when two later ones already existed.
    Fix: The page now reports kratom as controlled, with status "banned", and cites the 24 April 2024 decree, the gazette page carrying its annex V, and the Law of 24 February 1921 under which the penalties are set. The annex was read the same way the 2017 annexes were: the consolidated text prints "Beeld niet opgenomen om technische redenen", and the gazette page has a text layer that extracts as mojibake, so page 64420 was rendered at 450 dpi, rotated, and read with optical character recognition, with three page-segmentation settings returning the same line. The surrounding annex pages return 2-methyl-AP-237, etazene, protonitazene, ADB-BUTINACA, alpha-PiHP, adinazolam and 3-methylmethcathinone, so the lists were read and were current. The page now also says why the EU Drugs Agency profile and the FAGG page, both of which are silent on kratom, were treated as evidence of an absence when they are not.

11. 12 August 2026. Kratom in Belgium: we cannot find the ban everyone reports

    Error: The page said we had read the consolidated text of the Belgian royal decree of 6 September 2017 and found no kratom entry in it. We had not, and could not have. The substance lists are in annexes I to VII, and the consolidated version on Justel does not reproduce them: it prints "Beeld niet opgenomen om technische redenen" and refers the reader to the printed gazette. Separately, the decree was cited with the dossier number 2017-09-06/04, which is a French Community decree on secondary school reorganisation. The narcotics decree is dossier 2017-09-06/03. The finding was reported more confidently than the sources behind it supported.
    Fix: The citation now points at dossier 2017-09-06/03. The annexes were read for the first time, from the Belgisch Staatsblad of 26 September 2017, pages 88167 to 88201, which print them sideways in a font no text search reaches; they were rendered as images and read with optical character recognition. Morphine, cocaine, heroin, cannabis and amfetamine appear, and so do mephedrone, MDPV, etizolam and U-47700, so the lists were read and are of their period. Kratom and its alkaloids are absent from them. The page now also records that five of the seven decrees amending those annexes publish their lists as unread images, and that two, including the most recent, are text and name no kratom. The status remains unclear.

12. 27 July 2026. Kratom in Poland: a controlled narcotic drug, illegal to possess, sell or import

    Error: The page classified kratom in Poland as a "new psychoactive substance" and gave the penalty for possession as a fine under Article 62b of the Act on Counteracting Drug Addiction. Both were wrong. Mitragyna speciosa (item 132) and mitragynine (item 133) are listed in Annex 2, group I-N, of Dz.U. 2024 poz. 1139, which is the narcotic-drugs schedule, not Annex 3. The error understated a reader’s criminal exposure: the operative offence is Article 62, which carries imprisonment of up to three years.
    Fix: The page was rewritten against the annex and the statute. It now states the group I-N listing, the Article 62 possession penalty, the aggravated import tier under Article 55(3), and the sale and supply penalties under Article 56. The instrument is now cited as amended by Dz.U. 2025 poz. 598 and Dz.U. 2026 poz. 934, neither of which alters the kratom entries.