Ukraine Eyeing International Cannabis Market While Fighting Off Russians Ukraine is pushing ahead to develop a domestic cannabis industry as the country’s confidence surges in the wake of the push-back against the Russian invaders. Jeremy Santora, Leafwire 22/09/25, 07:00 Ukraine is developing a cannabis strategy in the shadow of the war it is fighting against invading Russian troops. The country is looking to capitalize on the health benefits of cannabis in a post-traumatic stress environment, and is also positioning itself as a potential major supplier of hemp seed. Leafwire reports that cannabis activist group Freedom March has received a sympathetic ear from the Ukrainian government, with Healthcare Minister Viktor Liashko writing on Facebook on 7 June 2022 that the Cabinet of Ministers had approved a bill to regulate “the circulation of cannabis plants for medical, industrial purposes, scientific and scientific-technical activities to create the conditions for expanding the access of patients to the necessary treatment of cancer and post-traumatic stress disorder resulting from war.” Liashko said this bill would ensure a “full cycle of cannabis-based drug production in Ukraine,” leading to the development of a domestic cannabis industry in Ukraine, rather than depending on imports. This would be a major change within the global market. In the status quo, Ukraine’s role in the cannabis market is very limited. Ukraine does not supply any cannabis for the medical market, but rather exports hemp seeds for cultivation across Europe. If this bill were to pass, Ukraine would have “a leading position among hemp suppliers” and “would lead to the revival and development of Ukraine’s processing industry.” Prior to the outbreak of the war, Ukraine’s government was pursuing cannabis legalization. In the fall of 2020, the Zelensky administration issued a study finding that two million Ukrainian cancer patients could benefit from medical cannabis since it provides a safe alternative to addictive painkillers. In July 2021, the Ukrainian parliament voted on bill 5596 which would legalize cannabis for medical use. However, the bill failed to reach enough votes to be passed. Only 184 members voted in favor, with 33 voting against and 61 abstaining. As a result, the bill was sent back to be revised. The Zelensky administration followed up in October 2021, holding a nation-wide poll in which over sixty percent of respondents supported cannabis legalization. In the following December, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, the governing body of the UN Office on Drugs & Crime, struck cannabis from Schedule IV of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, the international treaty which regulates drug control policy. In January 2022, the international rescheduling of cannabis in conjunction with popular support, led the Zelensky’s Cabinet of Ministers to introduce a bill to the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine’s parliament, with the intent of legalizing cannabis for medical use. The bill intends to legalize herbaceous cannabis flower for use, but place the importation and distribution of cannabis under the jurisdiction of the national police. However, with the outbreak of the invasion, legalization efforts were put on the backburner. This would begin to change on 7 April 2022 when Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers issued a decree legalizing certain cannabis products for medical use. This includes THC analogues such as dronabinol, which treats weight loss in AIDS patients and chemotherapy-induced vomiting and nausea; nabilone, which also treats nausea caused by chemotherapy; and nabiximols, a THC-CBD extract used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. This decree builds on years of progressive activism within Ukraine. Since 2005, Freedom March, a progressive drug policy advocacy group, has led demonstrations throughout Ukraine in support of legalization and to defend the rights of medical cannabis patients. Since the outbreak of the invasion, a majority of Freedom March members have engaged in resistance to the Russia invasion. Some have taken up arms to fight on the front lines, while others have provided humanitarian aid in cities under attack by Russian forces. As part of its humanitarian mission, Freedom March launched Cannabis Stands with Ukraine, a fundraising campaign to secure donations from the global cannabis community. Freedom March has outlined two key causes to support with the money they fundraise: first, to provide shelter, food, and physical and mental recovery to children who were injured or lost their parents in the war; second, Ukraine’s medical cannabis patients who’ve experienced medication shortages due to the conflict. “Together with our friends from the local community, we are working to find a way of providing CBD-based medication to those who need it urgently: epileptic patients and wounded soldiers above all,” says Nazarii Sovsun, a member of Freedom March. “Hopefully, this war makes it obvious to our politicians that people should have access to medical cannabis, so we are active on the legal front, as well.” Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty READ Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains READ Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least READ Nigerian Journalists Fined for Conspiracy and Defamation After Investigation into Cannabis Use at Rice Factory READ UK Parliament Debates Medical Cannabis for the First Time READ INTERNATIONAL BREAKING NEWS PREVIOUS NEXT

Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty Explore More Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains Explore More Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least Explore More PREVIOUS NEXT Hershel Maasdorp/Cannabiz Africa 23/02/01, 15:00 Writing in The Mail and Guardian, the Labat director says the cannabis industry is touted as a potential saviour of South Africa’s ailing economy. He says unless Government urgently puts in place enabling laws, “we will run the risk of becoming the backyard of the global pharmaceutical cannabis industry.” Labat Healthcare CEO Herschel Maasdorp wrote in the Mail and Guardian on 30 January 2023 that the “legal cogs are grinding achingly slow” in getting a framework for the local cannabis industry off the ground and this could cost the country dearly. “The absence of a sophisticated policy framework is an absolute indictment on government and state agencies” he said. “In South Africa, we should have, by now, a recommended price per gram of different profiles of cannabis, for different markets and purposes. And from the specific price point each constituent in the value chain gets their share.” He said there was R107 billion of value in the local industry waiting to be unlocked, but unless the regulatory environment was “urgently addressed”, cannabis would not contribute as a “potential saviour of the country’s ailing economy”. ‘All levels of government are saying how much money can be made out of cannabis. But they will not make that money if the legislation is not changed” he said. “The country is poised to become a leader in this dynamic space. South Africa enjoys a strong head start compared to others, a good reputation internationally for the quality of its product, and is rated as number one in Africa for technical competence and cost of production. “But it remains in the very early stages of ironing out the various legal, political, economic, regulatory and social obstacles standing in the way of its potential. Its favourable climate, loosening laws, arable land and pre-existing experience in farming and hemp production makes it a formidable force to reckon with. “Some advanced economies and sophisticated markets have not been shy to bestow their faith in South Africa’s medicinal cannabis industry as it grows around the world. Germany, for example, has recently become the most developed market to allow the use of cannabis to treat medical conditions, with recreational cannabis (adult-use) to be ratified within the next 12 months. A number of European countries have also relied on South African producers to source medical cannabis products” he wrote. “An enabling framework needs to be developed as soon as possible so that growers can be involved in every part of the value chain. South African businesses can obtain a licence to grow, cultivate and export cannabis. “The sluggish regulatory process is due to cannabis’s stigma as a narcotic tied to illicit trading. Development banks and potential financiers are reluctant to invest in cannabis because of its legacy reputation which is not yet dealt with as a new and emerging economic sector. They do not yet have a clear picture of what the commodity can bring to the economy. Changing legislation means amending a number of laws, for best regulatory reform. Cannabis can be regulated through the Drugs Control Amendment Act or decriminalised through safety and security legislation, among others. All of these different regulations were amended and can be reissued specifically for the cannabis sector to inform the commodity’s commercial trajectory. The warned that new auditing metrics for cannabis could potentially land the industry in the same dilemma as the wine industry whereby high-quality products were under-priced for the international market. “South African companies should not allow the international market to dictate the price of our commodity. We should not booby trap ourselves by compromising on an abject price point to suit their needs. “We will run the risk of becoming the backyard of the global pharmaceutical cannabis industry. If we can get the laws right, market enablers and the regulations aligned, we can attract the ideal investors. When that happens, cannabis can begin to navigate its way out of the dark alleyways of the illicit trade and into the formal economy, as a legitimate economic category. The country needs to get serious about the industry. Fostering enabling legislation across the value chain should fuel the cannabis sector to new highs, and in doing so, boost the economy and assist with economic recovery. South Africa needs to urgently address the constraints standing in the way for the country to begin reaping the fruits of the local industry’s potential. .# SOUTH AFRICAN CANNABIS INDUSTRY BREAKING NEWS Brought to you by: Labat’s Maasdorp: The Lack of a Cannabis Framework “An Absolute Indictment on Government” as R107 Billion of Value Waits to be Unlocked Home African News South African News International News All News Marketplace Business News More All South African News Are Sponsored by: CHEEBA AFRICA Hydrobiz Support Locals Networking for your business Meet like minded people Advertise with us today Connecting People Opportunity for all Supporting Business Growth

CANNABIS INDUSTRY BREAKING NEWS Phakisa: Presidency Muscles Up, Hauls Justice Dept into Line and Shows It's Serious About Unlocking the Potential of the Plant Folks, this is potentially the game changer we have all been waiting for, South African cannabis legalization is set to enter a new era following a ground-breaking meeting between the Presidency, private sector and community organizations. Key agreements include scrapping THC limits for industrial cannabis, recognizing the rights of traditional growers, reigning in SAPS and creating a mechanism to facilitate full adult-use consumption. Sounds like we are getting somewhere at last. Brett Hilton-Barber 30 June 2023 at 14:00:00 “Phakisa” Means “Quick” and the project name was designed to show the urgency of President Ramaphosa’s cannabis reform intentions. This stands in stark contrast to the Justice Department’s “Stalingrad” tactics whereby state lawyers have missed deadline after deadline in drawing up meaningful cannabis legislation. Essentially, the National Cannabis Master Plan is back on track after a breakthrough series of meetings between the Presidency and cannabis stakeholders. Five days of intense meetings with over 100 stakeholders in the industry have laid the foundation for a more coherent approach to cannabis legalization, and yielded the following in-principle agreements to “unlock the potential of cannabis in African traditional medicine; pharmaceutical and complementary medicines; human and animal ingestion; and multiple industrial applications”. The urgent removal of cannabis from the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act and a review of the Medicines Act which will essentially legalize the cultivation of non-medicinal cannabis under the Plant Protection Act, which is under the Department of Agriculture’s (DALRRD) watch. Scaling up support for the projects put in place by the CSIR and the Department of Science and Innovation (DSI) to “support and enable private sector investment in product aggregation, processing, and manufacturing technology for end-user demand”. Setting up public and private financial support structures for “Black farmers and SME entrants in the emerging market”, and where appropriate Government will assist “to de-risk private sector investment”. Develop practical ways of investment promotion, export support and ensuring standards were complied with Working with all provinces to align cannabis strategy across the various levels of Government. For the first time, the South African Government has taken the issue of adult-use, or “recreational” cannabis head-on and has given the clearest indication to date that full legalization is just a matter of time: “A science-based and human rights approach to how and when to do this, especially concerning the need to include Indigenous farmers, will be the subject of a further exploratory process involving all stakeholders. This will determine an optimal regulated adult-use market, based on a set of foundational policy principles, taking into full consideration the imperative to respect rights and lower societal and industry harms occurring in the existing illicit cannabis market. This process will ultimately inform government’s approach to encouraging the successful migration of existing participants from the illicit to the licit cannabis economy.” Phakisa also envisages the reigning in of SAPS on cannabis arrests by resolving to “reinforce previous instructions to all South African Police Services (SAPS) members to respect the privacy rights of cannabis cultivators and users, and to ensure the least intrusive measures are used when securing an accused’s court attendance. Further measures will be taken to ensure that SAPS treats cultivators, users and dealers of cannabis with respect for their constitutional rights.” In their response to Phakisa, Fields of Green for All (FGFA), advised cannabis users to remain wary of SAPS: “It is necessary to pause and focus here. Social media is already running rampant with assertions that arrests will cease because of this. However, until we have a clear directive handed to the SAPS, which is properly understood by all officers, we remain at risk of unlawful arrest. We caution you all to act as you always have – with good sense and understanding that your constitutional rights may not be recognised by the police.” Nedlac, the organization which rejected the last version of the National Cannabis Master Plan presented to it by DALRDD, expressed its satisfaction with the outcomes. Community representative Nhlanhla Ndlovu said “The Phakisa has started the process of liberating the cannabis plant. This freeing of the plant will go a long way in improving the relationship of the state with communities. In particular, the traditional communities, the Rastafari communities, the responsible adult users, the traditional healers and their patients.” Business representative, Ayanda Bam, who was also involved in the Nedlac process from a Business Unity South Africa perspective, sang Phakisa’s praises but said accountability was essential: “The Phakisa created a platform for the collaboration and co-ordination that has long been missing from the hemp and cannabis sector development and is evidence that when commitments are backed by action, it is possible to progress. What we need now is accountability to ensure that that progress translates to tangible outcomes. Business is committed to being a trusted partner and contributor to prosperity, innovation, and resilient livelihoods.” CDCSA chair Gareth Prince agreed that the success of Phakisa going forward would be accountability on the part of Government: “The Phakisa showed what we can accomplish if we work together in a spirit of recognition and reconciliation. We remain committed to restoring the dignity and economic culture of our community and the rest of society in a renewable and reliable manner. We trust that the government will work with us more progressively and we will hold them to the resolutions of the Phakisa.” Phakisa’s success is in no short part due to the behind-the-scenes work that Presidential cannabis advisor, Garth Strachan, has been doing. He’s ensured that the Presidency has found the energy to drive cannabis legalization and has built the trust of the private sector and community organizations in the process. The postcard version of Phakisa: The Presidency has taken the “whip hand” away from the Justice Department and has given the clearest signal yet that full adult-use legalization is but a matter of time, and this, as we all know, is the key to unlocking South Africa’s potentially super-lucrative cannabis economy. It's also putting in place finance and support structures for traditional growers and new small-scale entrants into the market # Don’t Panic About What Version of the Cannabis Bill Has Been Circulated: It Still Fundamentally Allows Private Cultivation Even Though the Wording is Dodge. Don't Panic About Clumsy Text in Cannabis Bill, the Rights of Home-Growers Are Assured Read Eish! Legislative Crisis Looms As Wrong Version of Cannabis Bill Circulated for Stakeholders Comment Stakeholders Call For An Extension for Public Comment on the Bill Once the Right Version is Circulated Read NCOP Calls For More Public Input on Cannabis Bill: New Deadline is 19 January 2024 Government hopes the Bill will be finally passed into law by September 2024. Read NEXT PREVIOUS Cannabis in South Africa: The People’s Plant We are a civil society organisation with the interests of the existing Cannabis industry and the Human Rights of ALL citizens at heart. WE’RE BRINGING A NEW STANDARD We are more than just a cannabis retail company. We are about a lifestyle that promotes vitality, balance & good health. Resources & Equipment Explore cannabis growing equipment for growing weed at home. Whether you’re just starting out, or you’re looking to enhance your outdoor or indoor weed grow setup – we have the perfect range of cannabis growing equipment to match your marijuana growing ambitions. ​ Find everything from LED grow lights, grow tents, fans, and hydroponic setups, to environmental equipment and controls, harvesting accessories, extraction equipment and plenty more. Design your ideal cannabis growing setup with high quality growing equipment available in South Africa. Explore cannabis growing equipment we’ve curated from reliable online suppliers in South Africa Explore More

The Abramovich Files: How Russian Money Funded the American Cannabis Revolution Much of the start-up capital for America’s legal cannabis industry came from Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, newly revealed records show. Here’s a deep dive from 420 Intel as to how billions of dollars of Russian money provided the catalyst for US cannabis businesses to gain market share and the awkwardness that is subsequently arising. 420 Intel 23/01/30, 09:00 420 Intel reports the 56-year-old Roman Abramovich is perhaps the best-known of the oligarchs who ended up controlling large parts of the Russian economy after the Soviet Union collapsed in the 1990s. He became a supporter of Russian President Vladimir Putin and assumed government positions after Putin took charge. READ: How Abramovitch secretly funded the world's biggest cannabis company After Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Abramovich was sanctioned in Europe, the U.K., and Canada, forcing him to sell his best-known asset, the Premier League’s Chelsea Football Club. A more detailed picture of some of his other assets is now emerging from leaked records of a Cyprus-based firm that provided Abramovich with shell companies for his holdings and officers and directors for those companies. The records detail billions of dollars that Abramovich invested in U.S. blue-chip stocks, films, oil and gas assets, art, venture capital—and the nascent cannabis industry. He funded marijuana media like Toke.TV, sales software, and the drug’s state-licensed producers. Most of his cannabis bets came through a British Virgin Islands company called Cetus Investments, the records show. Cetus is Latin for whale, and Abramovich was truly the whale of legal weed. The uncloaking of aspects of the oligarch’s finances began in December, when 30,000 files from Cyprus-based accounting and trust company Meritservus Secretaries appeared at Distributed Denial of Secrets, a nonprofit website. Those files were scanned by the journalism consortium the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, allowing Barron’s and other news organizations to examine thousands of records. READ: The Guardian reports UBS and Barclays face questions over Abramovitch's billion dollar trusts The leaked files show that Abramovich was a longtime Meritservus customer. His undisclosed funding of American cannabis was earlier reported by the news site Forensic News. Abramovich placed a big bet on Curaleaf Holdings CURA –1.84% (ticker: CURLF), a Massachusetts-based cannabis producer whose 146 shops in 21 states make it the world’s largest licensed pot company. The Russian billionaire’s business records show he was one of Curaleaf’s founding shareholders, and he anchored Curaleaf’s syndicated debt with some $186 million in loans. When the Ukraine war began, he transferred his cannabis investments to family members. His funding of American cannabis was hidden behind layers of trusts and offshore companies. Abramovich’s name appeared in no U.S. cannabis company’s securities filings or publicly disclosed state license applications, according to a computer search of filings in the U.S. and Canada. When Curaleaf went public in 2018, Barron’s asked why an executive from Abramovich’s family office—Millhouse—appeared on Curaleaf’s board. Curaleaf said at the time that Abramovich wasn’t connected with its business. Massachusetts regulators said last Thursday, 26 January 2023, they had opened an inquiry into Abramovich’s backing of Curaleaf and its principals and whether it had been, or needed to be, disclosed. “The Cannabis Control Commission is aware of these allegations,” said a spokesperson for the commission. “As they pertain to an open inquiry, the agency has no further comment at this time.” Curaleaf said it is unaware of the inquiry. In addition to Abramovich’s direct funding of Curaleaf, the records show he lent about $84 million to Curaleaf’s largest shareholder, Andrey Blokh, and its chairman, Boris Jordan, with the stipulation that they spend the money on Curaleaf stock. When Jordan started a cannabis venture fund, Abramovich supplied two-thirds of the initial capital. Abramovich separately backed Blokh with $12 million to seek marijuana business opportunities in the western U.S. Jordan says that his cannabis loans from Abramovich were repaid in 2020 and 2021. Blokh didn’t respond to requests for comment. “The failure of corporate transparency requirements under existing U.S. laws and regulations makes the United States a haven for dirty money and undeclared foreign investment,” says Alex Zerden, a former anti-money-laundering official at the Treasury Department, now a compliance advisor—speaking about current disclosure rules. Curaleaf says it has complied with disclosure obligations under securities laws and state cannabis licensing requirements. The company said it sufficed to cite Cetus Investment in its securities filings, without disclosing that Abramovich was behind the entity. One or two state cannabis commissions learned during the application process that Abramovich had bankrolled Jordan and Blokh, because they asked about the financing, says Curaleaf. Other states didn’t ask, according to Curaleaf. “We disclose everything we have to disclose,” Jordan told Barron’s in a recent interview. Jordan says the Abramovich family office Millhouse was a “blue chip” investor sought by institutions the world over. And if the billionaire’s name didn’t appear in public filings, his identity was known to Curaleaf’s underwriters and the institutions that joined Cetus in Curaleaf’s loan consortia. “Having him as an anchor made it easier for our bankers to then go out and raise money from other investors,” says Jordan. “The presence in the debt transaction of Abramovich’s Millhouse was seen as a positive to the market. And frankly, up until recently with the war, [it] has always been very positive.” The funding of American cannabis by a Russian oligarch troubles Steve Rolles, who heads policy analysis at a U.K. advocacy group called Transform Drug Policy Foundation. Rolles says the Russian government has been a relentless critic of cannabis legalization. He noted “the extraordinary hypocrisy of a Russian actor such as Abramovich with close political associations to Putin, investing in and profiting from cannabis industries—given the Russian state’s hawkish Drug War posturing on cannabis legalization.” Abramovich didn’t respond to queries from Barron’s , but he has previously denied allegations that he is close to Putin or that he has done anything to merit sanction. When the U.K. sanctioned Abramovich last year, it accused him of having “clear connections” to Putin’s regime and cited Abramovich’s role in a secret deal that enriched a top Putin aide by $119 million (a deal previously reported by Barron’s ). Abramovich didn’t comment then, while the Putin aide said that the transaction had been properly disclosed. Cetus was formed as an investment vehicle by trustees of Abramovich in 2010. In internal communications, Meritservus employees referred to the owner of multiple shell companies like Cetus as “Mr. Blue.” Blue is the Chelsea team’s primary color. But in anti-money-laundering disclosures required by Cetus’ bankers, letters from Meritservus confirm that behind two layers of trusts, the “ultimate beneficial owner” of Cetus was Abramovich. The oligarch had a long acquaintance with Jordan and Blokh. The U.S.-born Jordan was one of the go-to bankers in Russia’s transition to capitalism and during the subsequent battles for prize corporate assets. Blokh, also a U.S. citizen, ran Abramovich’s oil company, Sibneft, then used the billionaire’s backing to consolidate Russia’s dairy industry and sell the resulting company to Danone BN –0.46% (DANOY) in 2010. Jordan first invested in the vaping company that would become Curaleaf in 2011, according to a Jordan investment presentation. Four years later, he took control of the company and, in 2016, brought in Abramovich, Cetus records show. Through Cetus, Abramovich extended Curaleaf a bridge loan and bought 21% of its stock, according to a deal in which representatives of Jordan and Abramovich agreed to add a director of Abramovich’s choosing. December 2016 agreements gave Abramovich’s Cetus veto power over Curaleaf deals and acquisitions, then transferred that power to Blokh. Curaleaf says that Abramovich never had any influence or decision-making role and has cut ties. “Mr. Abramovich is no longer a creditor to, or investor in, Curaleaf,” said the company in a statement, “and the loans he provided to its founding shareholders to invest in the company have been repaid for several years.” “Curaleaf was one of thousands of companies globally and in the U.S. that were beneficiaries of Mr. Abramovich’s financing,” Curaleaf’s statement continued, At the time he was a much sought-after investor and a well-recognized businessman around the world. He remains unsanctioned in the United States.” In December 2016, Cetus records show that it lent Blokh $50 million to buy stock in Curaleaf. Blokh’s borrowings for Curaleaf shares grew to $60 million the next year, and Cetus also lent $24 million to Boris Jordan to buy stock in the cannabis company. Curaleaf shares secured another $95 million that Jordan borrowed from Cetus. By the time Curaleaf came public in October 2018, its main source of funding was an $85 million loan from Cetus. Blokh didn’t respond to questions from Barron’s . Curaleaf didn’t mention Abramovich’s name in filings for its October 2018 initial public offering, or the securities filings that followed. Well before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the oligarch was controversial because of his alleged connections to Putin, says Justyna Gudzowska, a former attorney with the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, who now works at The Sentry—a nonprofit that uncovers funds derived from war crimes. In 2018—she notes—his U.K. visa wasn’t renewed and the billionaire settled a case over unpaid debt filed in Switzerland by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development on confidential terms. Abramovich publicly denied wrongdoing at the time. Switzerland refused him a residence visa, citing risks of money laundering and public safety, which Abramovich disputed. “If you did a quick Google search there was plenty of so-called negative news,” says Gudzowska, “How did they get comfortable with his money?” Abramovich didn’t confine his funding of American cannabis to Curaleaf. Cetus records show when Jordan started a cannabis venture fund called Measure 8 in 2017, Abramovich supplied the majority of its $54 million in initial capital. A year later, an investment presentation by Jordan boasted that Measure 8 partners had reaped a 483% return. Cetus financials show that Abramovich also committed $10 million to be an early partner in Tuatara Capital, a New York-based fund that backed more than a dozen cannabis companies and sponsored a cannabis-focused special-purpose acquisition company, during the 2021 SPAC bubble. The SPAC merged last year into the marijuana marketing company SpringBig Holdings (SBIG). SpringBig said it wasn’t aware of an Abramovich investment in Tuatara, and Tuatara didn’t respond to requests for comment. By the end of 2018, the Cetus balance sheet showed it had invested $130 million across the industry, with another $194 million in loans. Among its shareholdings: California weed delivery service Eaze Solutions; Toke.TV webcast producer Greenrush Media; a dispensary software vendor, Flowhub; CBD brand Green Gorilla; and publicly held vape maker Tilt Holdings (TLLTF). Legal agreements at MeritServus show that all these investments were directly negotiated private placements. Tilt says executives who brought in the Abramovich investment are no longer working there. Eaze says it wasn’t aware that Abramovich owned Cetus. Until Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the oligarch remained the anchor lender in Curaleaf’s debt deals. Records from MeritServus show the oligarch was owner of a British Virgin Islands company called Meliastove that lent Curaleaf $60 million in December 2021. Curaleaf says it is still indebted to Meliastove, but that it has been assured that Abramovich no longer owns it. In the time leading up to the war, MeritServus files show that Cetus sold $8 million of its Curaleaf shares to the wife of a top official of the state-owned Russian Railways. Then on Feb. 25, 2022—the day after Russia invaded Ukraine—Abramovich told his UBS bankers that he was making his children beneficiaries of the trust that owned Cetus, according to a UBS document. # Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty READ Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains READ Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least READ Nigerian Journalists Fined for Conspiracy and Defamation After Investigation into Cannabis Use at Rice Factory READ UK Parliament Debates Medical Cannabis for the First Time READ INTERNATIONAL BREAKING NEWS PREVIOUS NEXT

Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty Explore More Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains Explore More Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least Explore More PREVIOUS NEXT Hemp Today 23/12/29, 08:00 Verulam-based Opulance Pharmaceuticals’ CEO Duran Govender is entering the cannabis value chain in a big way with a public-private partnership with the KZN provincial government. This report first appeared in Hemp Today on 27 December 2023. Several hundred farmers have received licenses to produce hemp in the South African province of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), and officials say the growers will get training in the crop. A total of 664 licenses were recently granted by the KZN Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD). The permits authorize the farmers to grow, store and transport cannabis with less than 0.2% THC – the dividing line between hemp and marijuana in South Africa. Public-private pact A public-private partnership between the provincial government and Opulence Pharmaceuticals was announced to facilitate the growth of the cannabis industry in the province, and to explore export potential. Little is known about Opulence Pharmaceuticals, which was established in 2018 to operate in the medical marijuana and CBD sectors. The company is located in Verulam, KZN. Duran Govender, the company’s CEO, said his vision is to create sustainable jobs and control the value chain in industrial hemp and medicinal cannabis. DALRD and the Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs will work with the company in a skills and knowledge transfer program. Technical support The cannabis licenses will allow farmers access to technology through the Analytical Lab at the Cedara Agricultural Training Institute. Local businesses that will be providing services to permit recipients were also granted R300,000 (South African rands) (~$15,000) each. Services include processing, setting up growing tunnels and providing lab equipment, packaging, testing, and marketing. Officials said they have plans to establish at least six hemp processing plants. DARD has also set aside R47 million ($2.5 million) for cannabis research, and has allocated R10 million ($500,000) for direct farmer assistance. “In the past Africans were being punished severely for cannabis and our parents could not trade,” said Siboniso Duma, a member of the KwaZulu-Natal Executive Council for Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs. “People were killed defending the sovereignty of this herb but now our people are receiving licences and permits.” ‘Food basket’ of SA KwaZulu-Natal is considered to be “the food basket province” of South Africa, with reliable rainfall and fertile soils; 17% of the province’s land is arable, with 7.5% classified as high potential. The province produces 90% of South Africa’s total output of sugarcane; KZN farmers also grow fruits & vegetables, maize, peanuts and soybeans, and raise livestock. # SOUTH AFRICAN CANNABIS INDUSTRY BREAKING NEWS Brought to you by: KZN Solidifies Partnership with Opulance Pharmaceuticals in Granting 664 Industrial Cannabis Licenses to Legacy Growers Home African News South African News International News All News Marketplace Business News More All South African News Are Sponsored by: CHEEBA AFRICA Hydrobiz Support Locals Networking for your business Meet like minded people Advertise with us today Connecting People Opportunity for all Supporting Business Growth

Is Musk Using Cannabis to Prop Up Twitter's Falling Revenue Or Is the Social Media Prohibition on Cannabis Advertising Starting to Fold? Twitter has become the first major social media platform to openly allow the advertisement of cannabis brands in Canada and the US. Is this a sign of desperation on the part of Elon Musk in the face of falling revenue, or is this a shrewd move that will spark a realignment of advertising spend that will force other social media companies to follow suit. Ben Stevens, BusinessCann 23/03/15, 09:00 BusinessCann reports that since the new policy was announced last month, US brands have scrambled to be among the first to promote themselves on the platform, with many already planning to spend tens of thousands of dollars of their advertising budgets, and spending expected to increase in the coming months. While the policy is currently limited to US and Canadian companies, a similar move from Google to relax advertising restrictions on CBD brands in January, 2023, has encouraged many to speculate that these could represent the first dominoes to fall in the near-blanket-embargo on social media advertising. Despite the move being welcomed as a positive and hopeful step forward for the cannabis industry on both sides of the Atlantic, concerns have been raised that an underbaked ‘cash grab’ strategy will do little to deter bad actors, and could cause more problems than it solves. Twitter’s changes Twitter has long been an essential online meeting ground for cannabis advocates with A dCann , which first reported the news of Twitter’s changes, suggesting that the site had confirmed there were over 20 million tweets about cannabis topics last year, more than coffee, golf and the NHL. Prior to the ‘relaxation’ of advertising restrictions last month, Twitter only allowed certain CBD and hemp products to be advertised in the US, as long as they made no medical claims and targeted users over the age of 21. It has also allowed the advertisement of cannabis brands in Canada, which federally legalised cannabis for adult use in 2018, for some time. On 15 February 2023, it announced that it would now allow advertisers in the US to ‘promote brand preference and informational cannabis-related content for CBD, THC, and cannabis-related products and services.’ In order to gain access to Twitter’s full suite of advertising options, cannabis brands will need to pass ‘pre-authorisation’ to ensure they are licensed to sell cannabis products in at least one US state and that they are a legitimate business. Once passed brands will still be relatively restricted in what they can include in their adverts. They will not be able to directly ‘promote or offer the sale of cannabis’, advertise in any jurisdictions in which they are not licensed, advertise to anyone under the age of 21, depict cannabis use or those under the influence of cannabis, or encourage transport across state lines. They will however, be allowed to promote brand preference, informational content and provide a link to their website where sales can be made. Real world impact While many have celebrated the move as a major step forward for the mainstream acceptance of the cannabis industry, the real world impact of these new guidelines is expected to be muted. Clark Wu, Attorney at US cannabis-focused law firm Bianchi & Brandt, said that many brands were already posting adverts in the formats now officially allowed in efforts to bypass the platform’s algorithms. He explained that as cannabis is legal in some US states but still a federally considered a Schedule 1 substance, an ‘interesting conflict’ has emerged where companies ‘exist, function, advertise and sell’, but are not technically allowed to advertise by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). “How the US government has handled this on a federal level is by lack of enforcement. So even though it’s technically illegal, the federal agencies haven’t taken much affirmative action against companies that violate these advertising laws.” Despite this, larger advertising platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and Google have taken a ‘more cautious approach’ and have prohibited advertising on their platforms, moving to take it down wherever they see it. “Now, does that mean that it hasn’t been happening? No, it’s still very prevalent in the industry. So what has kind of existed is more of an understanding between cannabis companies and these advertising platforms, that as long as they advertise in a certain way that doesn’t promote the direct sale of cannabis then they’ll let you skate by.” Twitter’s new advertising opportunities for cannabis brands, he says, are ‘not too different from what these cannabis companies are doing now’. “So they just brought this informal understanding out to the front end and said ‘you can do this’, which is a pretty big deal”. With this in mind, others have suggested the move is simply a ‘money grab’ by Twitter’s recently instated owner Elon Musk. Since he took over Twitter, which makes 90% of its revenues from advertising, in late October, 2022, the site has r eportedly lost 500 of its top advertisers and seen ad revenues plummet 40%. Matthew Clifton, CEO of cannabis marketing agency Milk & Amber and former Head of Business Product Marketing at Facebook, told BusinessCann: “ It’s hard not to look at it in a slightly disparaging money grabbing way, to be honest.” A missed opportunity Mr Clifton explained that he believed this policy is not likely to be sufficiently thought through to discourage bad actors. “There’s an opportunity to actually grow an industry up in the right way and say, ‘these are bad business practices, you shouldn’t be doing this, this doesn’t keep people safe, in fact, it exposes people, and we won’t stand for that,” he said. “I personally get a little bit concerned that the policy isn’t actually going to be rich enough to block out some of the bad behaviour that we see.” He argued that the prohibition of advertising, or policies which are not fully thought through, encourage brands to find ways around the algorithms, ‘negative behaviour which does expose people to harm’. Furthermore, concerns remain over how these new policies will be effectively policed. A recent story by the BBC suggested that ‘Twitter insiders’ say the company is no longer able to protect users from ‘trolling, state-coordinated disinformation and child sexual exploitation, following lay-offs’. Mr Clifton said that while he believes Twitter’s verification process could be implemented by other social media platforms, using the Novel Foods public list to determine which CBD brands should be able to advertise, enforcement remained a major issue in preventing harm. “The challenge that people face is you need to speak to a person to explain your case. And that has become harder and harder over time.” Will other social media platforms follow suit? Just like banking and insurance, advertising remains one of the critical parts of building a business to which cannabis companies are uniquely denied access. Prohibition Partners ‘ Co-Founder and CEO Stephen Murphy said: “The recent changes in advertising policy on Twitter don’t really have an impact on cannabis companies. “Despite restrictions on the promotion of cannabis (similar rules apply to other related categories), there are significant ad-tech and direct media platforms that allow brands to connect with their audiences. I would also add that it doesn’t feel like good business to support platforms that don’t support cannabis.” Money grab or not, Mr Clifton says it is a ‘good sign’ that Twitter has moved its own dial towards the mainstream acceptance of cannabis companies, and that it will get companies thinking about how to manage cannabis advertising ‘in a more deliberate way’. As to whether it will help shift the dial elsewhere, he cautions that this is likely ‘not the monumental step we would want it to be’, and that he believes it could be a ‘year or two before these policies really change’. While Mr Wu agreed this could well be nothing more than a money grab by Mr Musk, he said this shouldn’t ‘detract from the message’, and will still go some way to ‘help with industry progression’. “This might also entice some marketing agencies or other groups who previously haven’t thought about these avenues for advertising. Where they’ve taken the safer approach and avoided large social media platforms because they wanted to avoid fines, this might help them get over the edge.” “I think some of these other platforms are going to look and see how the public receives the new Twitter development before determining whether they’ll make similar moves. “And depending on how everything plays out, some of these other larger players should be more willing to join the fray.” Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty READ Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains READ Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least READ Nigerian Journalists Fined for Conspiracy and Defamation After Investigation into Cannabis Use at Rice Factory READ UK Parliament Debates Medical Cannabis for the First Time READ INTERNATIONAL BREAKING NEWS PREVIOUS NEXT

Previous Next Go Africa! Nairobi Finance House Backs Zimbabwean Hempcrete Project Home African News South African News International News All News Marketplace Business News More Hemp Today 29 August 2022 at 14:00:00 National settlements minister says new hemp technology is the solution for Zimbabwe’s massive housing shortage The government of Zimbabwe sees a role for hemp in construction after securing a $63 million line of credit from an African fund to develop eco-friendly buildings. National Housing and Social Amenities Minister Daniel Garwe said the financing will help the country to meet its target of raising 220,000 housing units by 2025, indicating hempcrete, precast concrete slabs, reclaimed steel, and ferrock will be used in the initiative. The financing is from Nairobi, Kenya-based Shelter Afrique, a pan-African financial institution that supports the development of the housing and real estate sector in Africa. Zimbabwe is a shareholder in Shelter Afrique, also known as Company for Habitat and Housing in Africa. New technologies “Government migrated from only use of brick and mortar strategies to the application of new technologies in housing delivery,” Garwe said. “We developed some technologies, consulted countries abroad where these technologies have been applied, among them Dubai and South Africa.” The government is starting the process of building a factory to turn out green building materials with separate funding from Shelter Afrique, according to the minister. In its efforts to mitigate the effects of climate change, Zimbabwe last year upped its commitment to greenhouse gas reduction from 33% to 40%, meaning the country would curb emissions to roughly 45 million tons across all sectors of the economy. The government has said that if no action is taken to reduce carbon in the atmosphere, emissions could hit about 75 million tons by 2030. Financing Under the housing ministry’s tender program, participating companies bring their own financing to develop designs they submit for approval. Garwe said the Procurement Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe has approved the tenders, and some construction could begin by October 2022. In the project’s first phase, four developers will be assigned to a province and produce a minimum of 100 blocks of flats at a rate of 20 units per month. “We expect that in 12 months we will have produced 1,200 blocks of flats per province of 20 units each,” the minister said. Zimbabwe’s government earlier this year announced a separate $377 million project to deal with a housing shortage by constructing affordable homes. Construction costs The country’s poor find it difficult to build homes because of the high cost of construction in Zimbabwe, which has the highest prices in the region for cement, leaving them to live in dwellings made of plastic, mud or clay. More than 1.5 million Zimbabweans have been on a housing waiting list for homes, many of them for more than a decade. Promises for home building often come ahead of elections, which are set for next year. The Shelter Afrique loan facility has been extended to CBZ Bank Limited, Banc ABC, ZB Financial Holdings, FBC Bank Ltd., and CABS for the construction of houses. Hemp Today ​ Sponsored by

CANNABIS INDUSTRY BREAKING NEWS Cannabis Zimbabwe: Getting to Grips With Dysfunctionality Stakeholder meeting reveals that only 10 of 59 licensed cultivators are producing and selling and that red tape is to blame Obert Chifamba, The Herald, Zimbabwe 1 November 2023 at 15:00:00 This report first published by The Herald on 1 November 2023. Across the breadth and width of Zimbabwe, the situation on production and distribution of cannabis is equally crooked and almost dysfunctional at the moment. In fact, these two situations are directly linked -- starting with the fact that the country is one of the producers of the best cannabis globally, yet the few producers that are managing to produce the crop commercially are either stuck with it or selling it to only God knows where, thanks to a number of challenges ranging from lack of information on markets to policy. Just recently, stakeholders held a meeting in Harare to deliberate on operational issues making their business hellish and the first disappointing piece of news they shared was that out of the 59 licenced producers of the crop, only 10 were producing and selling. Essentially, this meant that the outstanding 49 were either not producing or producing and channelling the product elsewhere other than the formal market where records would be left. It is stirring to note that the Zimbabwean situation is replicated in South Africa where the World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that there are 900 000 producers of cannabis and in the last two years, 300 000 tonnes of the crop were reportedly exported illegally. A paltry 2 500 tonnes is reported to have been the only quantity exported through legal channels, which effectively indicates that there is something probably from the policy side or the regulatory authorities making it difficult for them to use the legal route. In some cases, citizens end up using unorthodox ways of doing business because there is either too much paper work, red tape or expenditure on the legal route, yet they will be expecting to make money and attend to pressing socio-economic issues. Back home, stakeholders in the industry are all in agreement that there are too many challenges to surmount before one can eventually sell produce and enjoy the revenue. When they have harvested the crop and are done preparing it for the market, samples are sent to the Medicines Control Authority of Zimbabwe (MCAZ) for testing to check if it meets the required standards. It takes 20 days for MCAZ to revert with their findings after which South Africa will be the next destination for further testing before it is returned and depending on the outcome, the produce is either exported or rejected. The challenge here is that international markets reportedly do not accept certification from MCAZ hence the need to take the South African option, which adds on to the delays that stakeholders are complaining of. Eventually, the selling process will take close to two months or so to be completed, which does not make business sense for the producers given that they are business people who need to produce, sell and start all over again or invest to expand business. It is critical for the Government to come in and help remove the hurdles that litter the production as well as marketing process. These innumerable challenges have presented middlemen with opportunities to come in and buy the cannabis from farmers and later sell to only God knows where. Some producers end up dumping the official procedures and deal with unscrupulous buyers that do not require certification of produce, which is bleeding the economy. Cannabis production offers plenty of opportunities for economic growth and social development, which many countries, including Zimbabwe, are failing to tap into courtesy of the challenges articulated above. It may also become necessary for the Government to legalise all the cannabis strains -- medicinal, industrial and recreational and make sure they are all traded legally but come up with a way of regulating the goings-on on the side of the recreational category. It is a fact that most governments the world over, consider recreational cannabis illegal because of the way it has been put to use and would therefore not legalise its production and trading. In a way, this creates a corridor for illicit trade for the product that becomes attractive to those authorised to produce and trade in it. This partial legalising of cannabis paves the way for the creation of a separate market from that one used by the legalised. In most cases the illegal markets capture the market at the expense of the licenced because there are no stringent requirements to the activities. The licenced producers in Zimbabwe are currently finding the going very tough, thanks to the punitive costs involved in the crop's production. They are required to pay fees of US$50 000 to enable them to operate for a period of five years. Overall, it is, therefore, not cheap for a budding producer to raise that amount from nothing, which means not many citizens will be able to participate in cannabis production. This shuts the door on potential producers and prejudice the country of potential revenue from the crop. Smaller fees would have enabled the citizens to use the Government's 2018 decision to legalise cannabis production and uplift their livelihoods and the country's economy at the same time. The country's cannabis growing laws are still very young and therefore open to different interpretations and the bureaucracy that deals with it is still young and learning, which means that everybody is finding their way through all the new rules. It is crucial to have periodic reviews of how the situation is turning out while educating citizens on the new way of doing business and how it is beneficial to the nation. It seems this has not been done and a lot of grey areas are crowding the vision of most people. # Don’t Panic About What Version of the Cannabis Bill Has Been Circulated: It Still Fundamentally Allows Private Cultivation Even Though the Wording is Dodge. Don't Panic About Clumsy Text in Cannabis Bill, the Rights of Home-Growers Are Assured Read Eish! Legislative Crisis Looms As Wrong Version of Cannabis Bill Circulated for Stakeholders Comment Stakeholders Call For An Extension for Public Comment on the Bill Once the Right Version is Circulated Read NCOP Calls For More Public Input on Cannabis Bill: New Deadline is 19 January 2024 Government hopes the Bill will be finally passed into law by September 2024. Read NEXT PREVIOUS Cannabis in South Africa: The People’s Plant We are a civil society organisation with the interests of the existing Cannabis industry and the Human Rights of ALL citizens at heart. WE’RE BRINGING A NEW STANDARD We are more than just a cannabis retail company. We are about a lifestyle that promotes vitality, balance & good health. Resources & Equipment Explore cannabis growing equipment for growing weed at home. Whether you’re just starting out, or you’re looking to enhance your outdoor or indoor weed grow setup – we have the perfect range of cannabis growing equipment to match your marijuana growing ambitions. ​ Find everything from LED grow lights, grow tents, fans, and hydroponic setups, to environmental equipment and controls, harvesting accessories, extraction equipment and plenty more. Design your ideal cannabis growing setup with high quality growing equipment available in South Africa. Explore cannabis growing equipment we’ve curated from reliable online suppliers in South Africa Explore More

Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty Explore More Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains Explore More Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least Explore More PREVIOUS NEXT Constitutional Court Media Release 22/09/30, 10:00 The Constitutional Court has made a historic ruling protecting minors accused of cannabis crimes. It has ruled that certain parts of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act are unconstitutional and says cannabis transgressions by children should be handled by social welfare and not by the criminal justice system. Case CCT210/21 [2022] ZACC 35 Hearing Date: 03 March 2022 Judgement Date: 29 September 2022 Post Judgment Media Summary The following explanatory note is provided to assist the media in reporting this case and is not binding on the Constitutional Court or any member of the Court. On 29 September 2022 at 10h00, the Constitutional Court handed down judgment in an application for confirmation of an order of constitutional invalidity made by the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Local Division, Johannesburg (High Court). The High Court declared section 4(b) of the Drugs and Drugs Trafficking Act (Drugs Act) unconstitutional to the extent that it criminalises the use and/or possession of cannabis by a child. This matter stems from a special review concerning four minor children who tested positive for cannabis during a school-sanctioned drug test. The four children were brought before the Magistrates’ Court in Krugersdorp on allegations of being in possession of cannabis. and thereby committing an offence in terms of Schedule 1 of the Child Justice Act. In the Magistrates’ Court, agreements admitting the children to participate in a diversion programme were concluded between the parents and the State and these were made orders of Court. It later transpired that the four children had failed to comply with the conditions of the diversion programme. Thereafter, the four children were referred to the Department of Social Development to be assessed by probation officers, who recommended that the children be committed to a compulsory residential diversion programme for an unspecified period. These recommendations were placed on record in the Magistrates’ Court and were implemented through an order of court. The orders of the Magistrates’ Court subjecting the children to a compulsory residential diversion were referred by the Acting Senior Magistrate to the High Court for an urgent special review. On 5 February 2019, the High Court handed its judgment and held that section 41 of the Child Justice Act did not permit compulsory residence for a Schedule 1 offence. It further held that the Magistrates’ Court did not comply with section 58(2) of the Child Justice Act and, therefore, the orders of the Magistrates’ Court were set aside. The four children were immediately released from the residential diversion programme centres. Additionally, the High Court remarked that the matter raised questions about the legality of the proceedings, in the light of the Constitutional Court’s judgment in Minister of Justice and Correctional Development v Prince (Prince). After the review application was concluded, the Acting Senior Magistrate brought to the attention of the High Court that there was a special diversion project managed by the Senior Prosecutor in Johannesburg which subjected children in similar circumstances to compulsory residential diversion programmes. As a result, the High Court issued a rule nisi calling upon all affected parties to show cause why an order directing an audit of all correctional facilities that detained children in terms of section 41 of the Child Justice Act should not be made final. After receiving submissions from various parties, the High Court delved into the question of the constitutionality of section 4(b) of the Drugs Act to the extent that it criminalises the use and/or possession of cannabis by a child. On 31 July 2020, the High Court handed down judgment, in which it held that because Prince does not apply to children, children are left in a position where they are treated as criminals and criminally prosecuted for behaviour whereas adults are not held criminally liable. The High Court held that section 4(b) creates a “status offence” and, as a consequence, was constitutionally indefensible. The High Court further held that the impugned provision singles out the child and, thus, amounts to unfair discrimination, and there are less restrictive means to advance government’s legitimate purpose of protecting the child. In addition, the High Court held that criminalising cannabis-related offences when concerning a child is not in the best interests of the child. In addition, the High Court held that the right not to be detained except as a measure of last resort was also infringed. In the result, the High Court declared section 4(b) of the Drugs Act to be inconsistent with the Constitution to the extent that it criminalises the use and/or possession of cannabis by a child. The High Court also issued a moratorium pending the law reform, prohibiting the arrest and/or prosecution and/or diversion for contravention of the impugned provision. Following the High Court’s decision, the applicant, Centre for Child Law (CCL) lodged a confirmation application in the Constitutional Court. The CCL was not a party before the High Court, but was invited to participate as amicus curiae. The applicant brought this application after 12 months had passed since the order of the High Court as it had sufficient interest in the matter and also when it became clear that none of the respondents were keen on approaching the Constitutional Court. The first respondent is the Director of Public Prosecutions, Johannesburg and was the applicant in the High Court. The second to sixth respondents are: the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services; the Minister of Social Development; the Minister of Health; Minister of Basic Education; and the Minister of Police, respectively. None of the respondents are opposing this application. Only the second respondent and the applicant participated in the proceedings before the Constitutional Court. The CCL submitted that the Constitutional Court in Prince excluded children from the protection of the judgment; therefore, the impugned provision violated the child’s right to equality. Further it averred that, the criminalisation of the possession and/or use of cannabis by a child did not satisfy South Africa’s international obligations of protecting children from the dangers of drug use. The CCL submitted that the criminalisation of the use and/or possession of cannabis by a child does not protect the child from exposure to drugs and dangers of drug abuse but rather runs the risks of exposing the child to more serious forms of drug abuse. In addition, it contended that the criminalisation has proven to be an ineffective preventative measure, instead, it negatively impacts a child’s constitutionally enshrined rights to dignity, healthcare, and social services as well the child’s best interest. The Minister of Justice conceded that the impugned provision is unconstitutional and that less restrictive, specifically child-centred measures to address drug abuse by children, should be implemented. The Minister submitted that the impugned provision creates an unfair distinction between adults and children, which is a status offence. The Minister contended that the criminalisation of possession and/or use of cannabis by a child should not be continued because it infringes on the child’s section 28(1)(g) and (2) rights. The Minister thus supported the application for the confirmation of the declaration of invalidity. In a unanimous judgment penned by Mhlantla J, the Constitutional Court held that this matter engages its jurisdiction as a declaration of invalidity must be considered by this Court before it can have any effect. The Court considered three issues and these were: (a) whether the Court should follow the same approach in Prince in considering the constitutional invalidity of section 4(b) of the Drugs Act to the extent that it criminalises the use and /or possession of cannabis by a child; (b) the impact of criminalisation on a child; and (c) whether the criminalisation places any limitation on a child’s right, and if so, whether the limitation is justified in terms of section 36 of the Constitution. The Court remarked that the matter before it was about the consequences of the use and/or possession of cannabis by a child and whether those consequences should be located in the criminal justice system which is different from what Prince decided. Prince dealt with the use and/or possession of cannabis by an adult. The Constitutional Court noted that the legalisation of private possession and/or use of cannabis by an adult does not require the use and/or possession of cannabis by a child also to be legalised but rather that it must be decriminalised. Moreover, the reasoning in Prince should not be imported to this judgment without cognisance of the difference between an adult and a child. Accordingly, the Constitutional Court held that, it is illegal for a child to use and/or possess cannabis; however, such a child cannot be arrested, prosecuted and/or sent to a residential diversion programme for contravening the impugned provision. The Constitutional Court also stated that the matter before it is not an extension of Prince in relation to children and, as a result, the Court cannot make a determination through the lens of status offence. Consequently, the Court considered the recourse of the best interests of the child principle in determining the constitutionality of the impugned provision. In considering the best interests of the child, the Constitutional Court highlighted that the criminalisation, and/or prosecution of possession and/or use of cannabis by a child has adverse effects and exposes the child to harsh consequences of the criminal justice system. The Court held that an appropriate response that recognises the child’s best interests should be located in social systems as opposed to the criminal justice system. In addition, the Court remarked that the State has a duty in terms of international law obligations to protect the interests of the child by placing prevention, harm-reducing and dependence treatment services and other alternatives to punitive or repressive drug control policies. Therefore, the Constitutional Court held that there is a need and an obligation to decriminalise the use and/or possession of cannabis by a child and implement non-punitive, rehabilitative alternatives to prevent children from using cannabis. Another issue the Constitutional Court dealt with is the right of children not to be detained except as a measure of last resort. The Court held that a compulsory residential diversion programme is not one of the diversion options available to a prosecutor in terms of section 53 of the Child Justice Act for a Schedule 1 offence. Therefore, the Magistrates’ Court erred when making an order subjecting the four children to residential diversion programmes. Moreover, that there are risks that will have an impact on a child’s section 28(1)(g) right should the detention be an available option to remedy the possession and/or use of cannabis by children. Thus, an alternative appropriate option must be adopted. The Court, however, said that it does not mean that a criminal sanction is never permitted but rather suggested that if there is an alternative to criminal sanctions that alternative must be thoroughly considered. The Constitutional Court agreed with the High Court and held that children are vulnerable to stigmatisation and therefore imposing criminal sanctions for possession and/or use of cannabis by a child infringes on the child’s right to dignity. In its analysis on the limitation of the child’s section 28 rights, the Court held that the extent of the limitation of the child’s rights is far-reaching and that the criminalisation has disproportionate effect on children, as children are afforded less protection by the law and may end up with criminal records while adults are protected by the outcome of Prince. In the result, the Court held that the criminalisation of the use and/or possession of cannabis by a child does not serve the intended purpose of protecting a child and that there are less restrictive means that are appropriate to respond to children using or possessing cannabis. The Court held that these less restrictive measures are found in the Children’s Act and the Prevention of the Treatment for Substance Abuse Act. In the result, the Constitutional Court held that the limitation of the child’s section 28 and section 10 rights is unreasonable and unjustifiable and therefore, section 4(b) of the Drugs Act does not pass the constitutional muster. This Court confirmed the declaration of invalidity made by the High Court. The Court further held that the order of declaration of invalidity will not have a retrospective effect to finalised matters; however, it made provision for an expungement of criminal records upon application for those who had been prosecuted and convicted under section 4(b) of the Drugs Act for the use and/or possession of cannabis as a child. The Court ordered the Minister of Justice to pay the applicant’s costs. Lastly, the Constitutional Court reiterated that this judgment does not permit a child to use and/possess cannabis without consequence, but provides that such use and/or possession must be met with social response. Furthermore, the scope of this judgment is limited to the use and/or possession of cannabis by child and no finding is made on the appropriateness of criminalising the use and/or possession of other substances by a child. The Court did not decide any issue as to the criminal liability of children who might use their possession of cannabis to deal in cannabis or otherwise induce others to use cannabis. Any adult who utilises or implores a child to be in possession of cannabis or to use cannabis can be held criminally liable. The Full judgment here SOUTH AFRICAN CANNABIS INDUSTRY BREAKING NEWS Brought to you by: Kids and Cannabis: ConCourt Rules Further Sections of the Drugs Act Unconstitutional Home African News South African News International News All News Marketplace Business News More All South African News Are Sponsored by: CHEEBA AFRICA Hydrobiz Support Locals Networking for your business Meet like minded people Advertise with us today Connecting People Opportunity for all Supporting Business Growth

Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty Explore More Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains Explore More Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least Explore More PREVIOUS NEXT Cannabiz Africa 23/08/21, 10:30 Cannabis dealers are not to be taken into custody and no arrests for personal possession. This is the essence of a SAPS Gauteng legal services communique which in its clumsy way tries to clarify “dagga policing” while the law is in a grey area. A communique from SAPS legal department says officers must exercise discretion in arresting anyone for “dagga” and even if the quantity appears more than for personal use, the suspect must not be taken into custody. This is because there is no law specifying what quantity of cannabis is allowed for personal use. A SAPS memo leaked to Cannabiz Africa (Serial 3/2023, dated 15 August 2023, entitled ‘Possession of Dagga’ instructs police not to arrest anyone in possession of cannabis if they are satisfied that it’s for personal use, even if it is in a public space. Extracts of the communique, released by SAPS Gauteng legal department’s Major General Hendricks and Brigadier Mavango to clarify the police line on cannabis, is published verbatim below (Editors note: SAPS wrangled grammar is its own literary genre ): APPLICATION OF APPLICABLE LEGISLATION “Member must take note that possession of dagga in private by an adult person is not prohibited by law, as well as use by an adult in private and therefore is not a criminal offence. Members must further take note that possession of dagga in public place as long as the possession is in private ie in a private way and the dagga must quantity and must qualify to be regarded for private consumption. As such members when addressing persons found in possession of dagga in a public place they have to rely on their discretion based on reasonable grounds as the is no description in law of how much quantity of dagga can be lawfully possessed by an adult person. Prior to effecting an arrest members They have to have due regard to all relevant circumstances Ask questions to the implicated person and any other person who might assist with information and satisfy themselves whether or not the dagga found was for personal consumption and Check the quantity of dagga found Once all the questions are answered and a member is unsatisfactory, he/she can use discretion to make use of written notice or arrest the person. The discretion to arrest must be made in good faith, rationally and not arbitrarily. If the member is satisfied based on reasonable grounds that the quantity of dagga is small enough to qualify as personal consumption he/she may not arrest and seize the dagga. However should make an entry in the pocket book/dairy and state his reasons. If the member is in doubt as to whether the quantity qualify for personal consumption must not arrest the person, register a criminal case docket and suspect must be brought to court by means of summons or written notice, dagga must be seized, weighed and booked in the SAP13. If prosecutor declines to prosecute dagga must be returned to the person it was seized provided he/she can lawfully possess it. If the dagga is large quantity that does not qualify for personal consumption, unsatisfactory explanation is provided or where suspect has been dealing arrest should be effected, case docket opened, dagga be seized, weighed and booked in SAPS13. Preliminary investigation must be conducted within 48 hours and suspect be bought before court before 48 hours expires. Members must note that the Prince judgement made no mention of possession of Dagga by a minor, therefore in law the personal consumption of dagga by a minor whether public or private remain prohibited, therefore it’s a criminal offence. Members when dealing with minors are advised always to take cognisance of Criminal Justice Act, not effect arrest or detention arbitrary, when unsure what step to take seek advice in legal service official in their district. KEY POINTS Display knowledge of the prohibited conduct by law when policing dagga Acquaint yourself with relevant legislation Use discretion in good faith, rationally and not arbitrary reasonable and Consult legal service officer in your district when unsure of which step to take. # SOUTH AFRICAN CANNABIS INDUSTRY BREAKING NEWS Brought to you by: New SAPS Gauteng Standing Orders: Hold Off Cannabis Arrests And, If In Doubt, Call District Legal Dept Before Doing Anything That Could Backfire Home African News South African News International News All News Marketplace Business News More All South African News Are Sponsored by: CHEEBA AFRICA Hydrobiz Support Locals Networking for your business Meet like minded people Advertise with us today Connecting People Opportunity for all Supporting Business Growth

Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty Explore More Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains Explore More Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least Explore More PREVIOUS NEXT Cannabiz Africa 22/12/08, 09:00 The recently released Global Cannabis Report says South Africa is well positioned to be a major player in the global cannabis market if the Government got its act together. It says Government inaction is the biggest impediment to realising cannabis’s economic potential as the country continues to wilfully squander its golden opportunities. It is the view of ACA Group and Prohibition Partners who put together the African Cannabis Report that South Africa is best positioned to develop the largest and most globally integrated medical cannabis, adult-use and industrial hemp sectors in Africa. This is due to the country’s globally competitive agricultural, pharmaceutical and medical research sectors. South Africa also benefits from strong existing global trade links, well capitalised local financial markets and a highly skilled labour force. Despite the competitive edge that South Africa has over many African and international countries, the government's slow pace to finalise sensible regulations could result in the country not realising its potential in the industry. South Africa’s government has been amongst the most vocal about its intentions to prioritise the cannabis industry for economic growth, rural development and job creation. The country is in the process of finalising its draft National Cannabis Master Plan, a policy framework that the country plans to use to action key stakeholders including labour, government and the private sector, in priority sectors and economic initiatives. Limited progress has been made with regard to the plan. However, Parliament is looking to finalise the Master Plan by 2023. However, this progress has been frustratingly slow for local stakeholders. The lack of a coherent policy has also resulted in local investors being apprehensive about investing in the sector in its current state due to regulatory uncertainty. Although the cannabis fraternity had hoped that the Cannabis for Private Purposes Bill would go further than simply setting the parameters for decriminalisation, and create a framework for a commercial adult-use market, there seems to be limited political will to achieve this. Smallholder traditional growers, and other legacy market growers in South Africa have also not been explicitly integrated into the current legal cannabis framework, causing continued discontent. South Africa is estimated to have over 900,000 traditional cannabis growers, and inclusion of these stakeholders is seen as critical, if the cannabis and hemp industries are going to have the desired broad-based economic dividend. It is Cannabiz Africa’s view that “not realising its potential “ would be the more favourable outcome going into 2023, rather than the anticipated “spiralling out of control”, as, in our view, the lack of a clear cannabis regulatory framework is sending the South African cannabis industry into a recession for at least the next year; The following bottlenecks to developing a legal cannabis market in South Africa identified in the Global Cannabis Report are: Government’s lack of a clear vision and the resultant policy paralysis; Government’s inability to communicate with stakeholders on any level; The lack of a cannabis “monograph” that would act as an industry standard; The continued criminalization of cannabis through the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act, which makes investment in the hemp industry a high-risk game; The exclusionary nature of the current regulatory framework in that significant capital needs to be invested in a facility before SAHPRA will approve a license; this eliminates traditional growers SAHPRA’S lack of capacity and the slow pace of license inspections and approvals; The lack of clarity as to whether Section 21 medical cannabis patient schemes are here to stay or whether they are a stop-gap measure; The 0,2% THC limit imposed on hemp and CBD products which is not based on scientific evidence and is locking South Africa out of the export market for CBD/hemp products; The high cost of CBD products, which limit consumer access; The 50 ha cap for hemp permits and the fencing requirements which are inhibiting any large scale investment in hemp; The lack of a local supply of hemp seed; No registered hemp seed source; The Report raises major concerns about the economic viability of the fledgling hemp market, saying that under current regulations hemp farming isn’t feasible. “The lack of clear communication and an established framework for local cannabis distribution has been a source of frustration in the industry. For example, South Africa currently doesn’t have a monograph or any well communicated guidelines for doctors, patients, and cultivators with regard to medical cannabis” says the Report. “The pace of SAHPRA licence approvals has been a source of frustration for many aspirational operators in the South African cannabis industry. The slow pace of inspections and approvals has been mainly attributed to an underfunded and understaffed regulator, with market participants lobbying the government to address this problem as a matter of urgency. Although this is a step in the right direction, concerns remain about the viability of the hemp industry under current regulations. Firstly, hemp in South Africa is defined as ‘cannabis plant material’ containing less than 0.2% THC. This is considered to be a low threshold for South Africa’s climate where cultivation has historically seen higher average levels of THC based on farmer engagements. This would make it difficult for producers to harvest compliant hemp crops and could result in significant quantities of a harvested crop not meeting regulatory approval for further use. A 1% THC threshold similar to the Czech Republic and Switzerland has been proposed by the Cannabis Research Council of South Africa, and feedback from the Department of Agriculture seems to indicate that this may be implemented. Secondly, the requirement for fencing around the earmarked cultivation areas adds significant set up costs that limits the ability of previously disadvantaged and cash strapped farmers to enter the industry. This is particularly challenging as financing support for emerging hemp farmers is currently limited in South Africa. Thirdly, due to the fact that cannabis is still regulated under the Drug and Drug Trafficking Act, there are significant limitations to the development of hemp, including challenges with registering local hemp seeds. All hemp seeds need to be imported. The lack of testing and data on the performance of these seeds across South Africa increases the risk of failed or suboptimal harvests. Lastly, the permits only allow for cultivation on a maximum of 50 hectares. Due to hemp being a high volume, low margin crop, cultivation on such a limited space may make hemp extremely difficult in terms of commercial viability at this stage. The local hemp supply chain is also still in its infancy, with very few local industries having any knowledge on how to integrate hemp material into their businesses. The Report says the lack of clarity around a domestic medical cannabis policy is also an inhibitor. In South Africa, medical professionals are permitted to apply to SAHPRA to utilise unregistered medicines for patients. South Africa is estimated to have just under 1,000 registered patients to date. It’s still unclear whether the Department of Health and SAHPRA intend to scale this scheme in a similar way to Australia, or whether the scheme is still intended for exceptional medical cases. It’s the view of ACA Group and Prohibition Partners that South Africa’s cannabis industry growth potential is hampered by not allowing for broad access to the medical cannabis supplied by local cultivators. Countries such as; Germany, Australia and Israel have over 150,000 registered medical cannabis patients supporting the development of the sector, further improving their global competitiveness, R&D investment spending and international integration. Due to the high price point of CBD products, CBD is currently bought by affluent consumers. Furthermore, due to South Africa’s ailing economy, we expect premium CBD product sales to lag behind comparable international markets. South Africa’s major retail pharmacy chains, Clicks and DisChem, both stock a number of CBD brands across most of their +700 retail stores. These include; Rethink, Releaf, Elixinol, africanpure and ADCO CBD. The range of CBD brands being stocked by these retailers has reduced significantly over the last 18 months. At the beginning of 2020, approximately 15 brands were listed across these retailers, now between three to seven brands are listed on average. As one stakeholder commented, “if only Government had the capacity just to get itself out of the way, that would be good, but it can’t even do that even though it knows it would be for its own benefit!” SOUTH AFRICAN CANNABIS INDUSTRY BREAKING NEWS Brought to you by: SA Govt Stuck in a Cannabis Communication Deficit Which is Driving Stakeholders Crazy and Costing Them Plenty Home African News South African News International News All News Marketplace Business News More All South African News Are Sponsored by: CHEEBA AFRICA Hydrobiz Support Locals Networking for your business Meet like minded people Advertise with us today Connecting People Opportunity for all Supporting Business Growth

UK Police in Biggest Cannabis Crackdown Ever in Operation Against Organized Crime More than 450 people were charged in the UK and hundreds of thousands of cannabis plants worth millions of pounds seized in a massive operation conducted over the previous month, British police said Friday,7 July 2023. Agence France Presse 23/07/09, 06:00 This report from Agence France Presse. UK Police say cannabis production is a cash cow for organised crime, fuelling gang violence as groups compete for territory. "We know that organised networks involved in cannabis production are also directly linked to an array of other serious criminality such as class A drug importation, modern slavery and wider violence and exploitation," said Steve Jupp, the National Police Chiefs' Council lead for serious organised crime. "This operation not only successfully disrupted a significant amount of criminal activity, but the intelligence gathered will also help inform future law enforcement activity across the country." Operation Mille saw searches and arrests carried out across England and Wales "at a scale and pace not seen before". READ | Hong Kong jails first traveller under CBD ban "Nearly 200 000 cannabis plants with an estimated street value of between 115-130 million ($147 million - $166 million, 135 million - 152 million euros) were seized," police added in a statement. Around 1 000 people were arrested and of those, "more than 450 were later charged". Nyandeni Municipality Punts Cannabis as an Investment Opportunity to Ease Dreadful Poverty READ Thailand: Pro Cannabis Party Makes Better Than Expected Parliamentary Gains READ Portland, Oregon is the Most “Cannabis Friendly" City in the US; Birmingham, Alabama the Least READ Nigerian Journalists Fined for Conspiracy and Defamation After Investigation into Cannabis Use at Rice Factory READ UK Parliament Debates Medical Cannabis for the First Time READ INTERNATIONAL BREAKING NEWS PREVIOUS NEXT