Natie’s feedback on the draft cannabis regulations

My name is Natie Ferreira, and I am a plant enthusiast who also manages a family-run cannabis nursery. The draft Regulations to the Cannabis for Private Purposes Act affect me and our business in several ways. I’m sure that the obvious unconstitutionalities will be addressed by my colleagues from the legal fraternity. I understand that these regulations only deal with the private use of Cannabis and are not for commercial purposes, and I will therefore refrain from commenting on how these Regulations impact our business model, which is based on our interpretation of current and proposed legislation.

I do want to comment from my point of view as a Cannabis enthusiast. The genetic development of the Cannabis plant in the past 30 years has largely been left in the hands of backyard breeders, due to the worldwide prohibition of the plant. With seeds being exempt from the UN Conventions, a worldwide trade between seed breeders has been established, with top genetics being shared between home growers across borders. The average enthusiast will host a mother plant collection of, often, hundreds of plants, of which he will select a manageable number of plants to flower out and pollinate to create new hybrid crosses. The flower from these plants will be of a very low quality because of the focus on seed production. These seeds as well as other new varieties sourced by the collector will then be planted in large batches to be selected for the qualities the breeder desired. This process requires the flowering of large quantities of small plants to acquire the data to make informed decisions for future selections. The small amount of flower harvested from each plant will be analysed, photographed and shared with friends and fellow enthusiast for their input. Never is any of this Cannabis sold. Some enthusiasts fund their hobby by selling non-flowering plantlets on an informal basis.

My comment is therefore focused on sections 2 and 3 of the Regulations. Having fixed amounts for both the amount of (what is classified as) Cannabis, as well as the number of flowering plants a person may possess, criminalises a harmless hobby. My suggestion is that the assumption of innocence until proven guilty must apply here, and that enforcement of any number can only be done if reasonable proof of dealing in Cannabis exists. This assumption and burden of proof on the state must be clarified in the Regulations.