ATC240223: Report of the Select Committee on Security and Justice on the Cannabis for Private Purposes Bill [B 19B-2020] (National Assembly – S75), dated 23 February 2024.

NAME OF INSTITUTION/INDIVIDUAL

COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS

DoJ&CD RESPONSE

General

1. Peet

1.3 Advocates for cannabis reform, including a vast majority of users in South Africa, are united in the call for a regulatory framework akin to that of alcohol – a substance widely recognized as more harmful.

1.2 The proposed Bill appears to deviate from principles of fairness and equality. Rather than fostering a sense of unity, it seems to echo an ideology that could be perceived as unduly restrictive. As a community, we urge for a more balanced and evidence-based approach that aligns with our constitutional rights and promotes responsible cannabis use, similar to the accepted norms around alcohol. David Dobbrik, Dylan Pienaar

1.1 The contemplated national legislation to commercialise cannabis in its entirety may be crafted along the lines of the legislation that regulates alcohol. The Bill is not intended to commercialise cannabis, but to respond to the Prince judgment. 

1.2 It is not specified as to how the Bill deviates from principles of fairness and equality, or how it echoes an ideology that could be perceived as unduly restrictive. The restrictions in the Bill relates to, inter alia, the prohibition against smoking cannabis in public or in the presence of children or non-consenting adults.

2. Taryn Meyer

2.1 It is submitted that there are people suffering from chronic pain and insomnia and correct cannabis use is a great help. The cannabinoid receptors in the brain assist with immune function, stabilising the central nervous system and help people to cope better with cancer diagnoses.

2.2 There are thousands of success stories of people using proper cannabis protocols to help with pain management, cancer treatments and even concentration.

2.3 The herb has been used for generations and is not a gateway drug. Cannabis use for adults should be regulated in the same way alcohol and tobacco is regulated.

2.1 – 2.2 Noted.

2.3 National legislation to commercialise cannabis may be crafted along the lines of the legislation that regulates alcohol. The Bill is not intended to commercialise cannabis, but to respond to the Prince judgment. 

3. Andre Wium

Adults are allowed to use alcohol which has been proved to have negative effects on both mental and physical health, and thus adults surely should be allowed to use a plant. Cannabis has also been proven to have multiple medicinal uses and the best part is you can grow your own without big pharma adding random crap like most medicines.

Noted.

4. Wilma Nel

Cannabis already enslaves so many users. Making it legal and available to everyone will potentially risk enslaving more people, with the risk of increased criminal activities.

It is not clear how cannabis enslaves people. To an extent that it is meant that it is harmful or addictive, it is submitted that there are institutions available to help people in this regard. To make it legal is to comply with the Prince judgment which gives effect to the right to privacy. It is also not clarified as to how the Bill will increase criminal activities.

5. Dee Pringle

This should NOT be allowed at all - this has already brought our whole country down to rubbish - we are a drug, gang run state. Cannabis is the gate way to drug abuse - what do you think you are doing to the youth of this country.

The Bill is not the cause of drug use, as cannabis and other drugs have already been used before. The Bill merely legalises cannabis to give effect to the adult’s right to privacy. The Bill does not, however, give children the right to use or possess cannabis.

6. Sibusiso Mhlanga

You can't take away our right to grow cannabis, as this is more like trying to tell farmers to stop farming food.

The right to grow cannabis is not taken away in terms of the Bill, but instead it is given effect to. Cultivating cannabis cannot be compared to farming food, as cannabis was illegal before.

7. Nonhlanhla Mkhize

It is submitted that the Bill should not be passed if it excludes what benefits the black people who have suffered a lot by any of the law that make it difficult for them to be able to plant and sell, to plant and process cannabis into many products. 

The Bill applies universally to everyone in the country, and does not exclude black people from cultivating cannabis. However, the Bill prohibits everyone from selling cannabis.

8. Ian van Tonder

I object to not being able to cultivate my own.

The Bill does not prohibit self-cultivation. The regulations will prescribe the quantities that will be permitted for cultivation for personal consumption, and comments thereon will be invited.

9. Shannon Maki

Rejects the Bill. Oppression of human rights especially the disadvantaged.

The Bill gives effect to the right to privacy as decided in the Prince judgment. The limits will be prescribed in the regulations to prevent the possibility of the sale of cannabis.

10. Cradle Stoner NPC Executive

10.1 It is proposed that private social clubs be recognised as safe and legal spaces for the sharing and cultivation of cannabis, operating within a transparent and traceable framework. This will also support job creation and socio-economic growth.

10.2 By allowing regulated dealing and trade in cannabis, the state can benefit from significant tax revenues. Our model has already demonstrated substantial contributions to SARS, showing the potential for a well-regulated cannabis industry.

10.3 It is suggested the inclusion of provisions that allow traditional healers and cultural practices involving cannabis to continue under the new legislation, respecting cultural heritage and diversity.

10.4 The model should ensure stringent protocols to prevent underage access to cannabis, while offering regulated and safe access to adults. This aligns with the objectives of protecting children and reducing harm associated with unregulated black-market operations.

10.5 It is recommended to consider international models and practices in countries like Spain, and the coffee shop model in the Netherlands, where private social clubs and regulated trade have been successfully implemented.

10.1 to 10.5 The recognition cannabis social clubs and the trade in cannabis are matters for regulation in the contemplated national legislation. The Bill is only intended to comply with the Prince judgment which permits the private use of cannabis.

11. David Dobbrik

11.1 In the democratic process of enacting legislation, it is imperative within a nation such as South Africa that the government diligently serves the interests of its citizens, refraining from arbitrary decisions. The significance of public input cannot be understated, and proposed Bills should earnestly consider such feedback.

11.2 The current legislation's delineation of quantities pertaining to cannabis cultivation appears impractical, as it disproportionately favours only highly skilled cultivators capable of harvesting substantial amounts per plant. Moreover, the imposition of specific quantities for dried cannabis flower raises constitutional concerns.

11.1 The Bill is aligned to the Prince judgment, and its provisions are not arbitrary. Inputs received from the public are all considered and incorporated to the extent that they enhance the Bill.

11.2 The Bill does not provide for quantities, as these are left for determination by the Minister in the regulations. Public comments will also be invited on the draft regulations in due course.

12. Dylan Pienaar

The proposed legislation raises concerns about departing from principles of fairness and equality. Instead of fostering unity, it may be perceived as echoing an ideology that is excessively restrictive. As a concerned community, we strongly urge for a more balanced, evidence-based approach that respects our constitutional rights and encourages responsible cannabis use, aligning with the accepted norms surrounding alcohol.

It is not specified as to how the Bill deviates from principles of fairness and equality, or how it echoes an ideology that could be perceived as unduly restrictive. The restrictions are proposed for certain impermissible conduct.

13. Kyle Matthews

13.1 I find it deeply disturbing that this was decriminalised however now is being made illegal again.

13.2 I cultivate 4 flowering plants for 2 adults in a private residence to aid anxiety (something that prescription drugs do not aid without harmful side effects). This has been allowed for years and I have paid tax on every single item used in cultivation however all of a sudden, a backwards change is being made for no valid reason and is completely violating my right as a South African.

13.3 I also find it deeply disturbing that WE the tax payers have to wait over 4 years for clarity on whether or not we are allowed to grow a plant for medicinal usage as it seems the courts cannot make up their mind.

13.1 Cannabis is not made illegal again. The Bill permits the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis, coupled with penalties for contravention of the provisions of the Bill. Penalties are in the form of fines or imprisonment in cases of serious contravention. This is not intended to make the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis illegal again as submitted.

13.2 The old version of the Bill provided for cultivation of four cannabis plants per adult person, and this is not longer the case in the current version of the Bill. The regulations will prescribe the permitted quantities, so as to regulate possession, cultivation and transportation of large quantities of cannabis. 

13.3 The processing of legislation takes long depending, inter alia, on the complexities of the subject matter of the Bill. The Bill had its own complexities, as it regulates what was illegal before. Cultivation of cannabis for medicinal use is regulated by the Medicines Act.

14. Qg Farmaman

Free cannabis, government give us access to use cannabis why not selling it to user's some of us don't have a place to plant cannabis seeds, so it means I can't use it because don't have a space to grow my own.

Those who don’t have a place to cultivate will have to rely on obtaining cannabis from others. The Bill cannot come to the rescue of those who have no place to cultivate, by permitting the sale of cannabis, which was declined by the CC. The sale of cannabis will be regulated by the contemplated national legislation.  

15. Tshidiso Setshogwe

15.1 I am reaching out to express my strong belief in the potential benefits of embracing a regulated cannabis industry in South Africa and to voice my opposition to the current Bill that restricts cannabis dealing. As both a dealer and user, I see a unique opportunity to foster job creation, economic growth, and the development of a more inclusive and forward-thinking industry.

15.2 A regulated cannabis industry has the power to be a significant driver of job creation. Legalising and regulating cannabis can transform an underground economy into a legitimate and thriving sector, providing employment opportunities at every level of the supply chain, from cultivation and processing to distribution and retail.
 

15.3 As dealers and users, we are at the forefront of the cannabis culture, and embracing a regulated industry allows us to channel that cultural knowledge into entrepreneurial endeavors.

15.4 A regulated cannabis industry provides the opportunity to build a better sandbox for all stakeholders involved. This means implementing fair and transparent business practices, ensuring product quality and safety, and fostering a sense of community among industry players.

15.5 South Africa is rich in indigenous knowledge regarding the cultivation and use of cannabis. Regulating the industry allows us to integrate this traditional wisdom into a legal framework, preserving cultural heritage while contributing to economic development.

15.6 Decriminalising cannabis is a pivotal step toward creating a legal, industrial economy. This move not only removes the stigma associated with cannabis use but also establishes a regulated system that prioritises safety, quality, and responsible business practices.

15.1 The Bill aims to respond to the Prince judgment which legalised the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis for personal consumption. The sale of cannabis will be regulated by the contemplated national legislation to be promoted by another national Department, and not the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development.

15.2 Noted, and this is a matter for inclusion in the contemplated national legislation.

15.3 Noted, and this is a matter for inclusion in the contemplated national legislation.

15.4 Noted, and this is a matter for inclusion in the contemplated national legislation.

15.5 Noted, and this is a matter for inclusion in the contemplated national legislation.

15.6 Noted, and this is a matter for inclusion in the contemplated national legislation.

16. Reatlegile Youth Chamber of Commerce and Industry

We have had too many incidents in which arrests have been made and led to people serving lengthy jail terms for no reason. This relief is welcome, as too many lives have been cut short by the misguided law enforcement actions.

Noted

17. Ras James Gift Waluza

17.1 A business man dealing with cannabis in terms of producing hair cream (marijuana hair cream) and smoking.

17.2 Sincere 2018 police have been coming to search my room and arrested for the ganja that I use only for smoking although I wasn't selling but I didn't go on the court as the police just came and said I can go home without charges. 

17.3 From 2018 up 2023 the police have been coming to search cannabis in my room without respect like I'm a criminal, while I'm using cannabis for the hair cream and smoking because I'm a Rasta man. 

17.1 The are Acts in terms of which permits are issued, e.g. Plant Improvement Act, for dealing in cannabis for specific activities, e.g. cannabis products.

17.2 The Police are allowed to arrest in certain instances where there is contravention of the law, such as in selling cannabis. If small quantities are possessed for smoking, there would be no contravention of the law in terms of the Prince judgment, and the charges may not be proceeded with.

17.3 The search of premises is allowed in instances where there is a search warrant. No one may be searched just for being a member of the Rastafari community.

18. Jamie Gouvias

18.1 One of the most important benefits of the Bill is that it would recognise and respect the cultures that grow, use and trade with cannabis. It is a part of my culture. Another benefit of the Bill is that it would create jobs. The cannabis industry is a growing industry, and it has the potential to create thousands of new jobs in South Africa. These jobs would be in a variety of fields, including cultivation, processing, sales, and marketing.

18.2 The Bill would have a positive impact on the youth gardening programmer/ employment. I am currently studying to become a Foundation Phase teacher and the school I did my Teaching Experienced at had an amazing garden and actively/ constantly involved the youth; growing fruits, vegetables, succulents, trees and hemp plants!

18.3 Cannabis is a valuable source of income for young people. I also wanted to mention that society is unaware of all the many cultures in Africa, but Rastafari is well known and loved, and so to enable the youth of the future away from prejudice and hatred we must welcome growth and diversity and include cannabis is my way of life.

18.1 The submission is noted, except that the Bill does not permit trade in cannabis. The contemplated national legislation will open doors for job creation.

18.2 Noted

18.3 The Bill does not permit trade in cannabis, but other Acts of Parliament regulate the issuance of permits for trading in cannabis.

19. Growing Green Club

19.1 There must also be laws introduced that can build a whole cannabis industry. Generating tens of thousands of jobs and millions in income and revenue across the whole of South Africa.

19.2 Further criminalising of cannabis (quantities, cultivation, possession, buying and selling and transporting) will only cripple the potential of the cannabis industry.

19.1 Noted, and this law is the contemplated national legislation that will commercialise cannabis.

19.2 Cannabis is not criminalised any further as submitted. The Bill does not provide for quantities for cultivation, possession, and transportation as these are for determination by the Minister in the regulations. Public comments will also be invited on the draft regulations in due course. Buying and selling cannabis is strictly prohibited by the Bill.

20. Alice “Leela” Gouws

20.1 Arrests by SAPS continue on persons cultivating, possessing, and using cannabis in their private spaces. These arrests are oftentimes unlawful and carried out on presumption of dealing, with no evidence forthcoming.

20.2 With widespread police corruption, the Cannabis Community of South Africa has little insulation from arrests, requests for bribes, and general harassment from law enforcement.

20.1 The Police may not arrest anyone for use, possession or cultivation of cannabis that is sufficient for personal consumption.

20.2 The corruption, requests for bribes and harassment by the Police are not permitted and must be reported to the relevant authorities, e.g. Independent Police Investigative Directorate.

21. Jean Jeffery

21.1 Plant counting is hugely problematic. Different people have different needs and there are many different plants with different properties. It is therefore impossible to say how many plants any one person may have / need.

22.2 Who is going to be burdened with the task of enforcing the counting of plants? And to what end?

22.3 My space is private. It should not be invaded for the purposes of counting plants that I have a right to grow in the first place. And who should decide how many I need for my specific purposes.

21.1 The Bill does not provide for quantities for cultivation and possession as these are for determination by the Minister in the regulations. Public comments will also be invited on the draft regulations in due course. The contemplated national legislation will also regulate the possession and cultivation of large quantities for personal needs.

22.2 The Police will enforce compliance with the Bill where there is suspicions of contravention of its provisions. This will be to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Bill.

22.3 Where there is evidence of contravention of the Bill the Police will be empowered to enter the premises to investigate such contravention. The regulations will determine the quantities that may be possessed or cultivated for personal consumption in private, and public comments will be invited in this regard.

23. COSATU

The Bill appears in many instances to reflect a level of contradiction between different Departments in government.  It seeks to legalize the use of cannabis, yet it places significant restrictions in that regard. 

Although the Bill aims to legalise cannabis, there must be some conduct that cannot be permitted. For instance, smoking in public, or in the presence of children or non-consenting adults is conduct that must surely be restricted.

24. Inkwazi Farming Group

24.1 It is submitted that the Bill remains dysfunctional in many parts and read holistically, advances prohibitist and draconian policies that effectively limit commercial cannabis activities in South Africa.

24.2 The Bill has the potential to positively influence the current state of market fragmentation by providing legal clarity and enabling commercial cannabis activities in South Africa. It is of paramount importance that once the Bill is concluded, government equally allocates resources to educating enforcement authorities of the law.

24. 3 Commercialising cannabis will not only be beneficial for the industry, but also for the broader South African economy. In 2019, New Frontier estimated that South Africa’s cannabis market has the potential to be worth R27 billion annually if legalised correctly. The cannabis sector has the potential to create much needed jobs, increase tax revenues for the state and promote local and medium-sized businesses.

24.4 It is critically important that the Bill aligns to the spirit and ethos of the Cannabis Master Plan, which foresees a prosperous future for cannabis and its role in contributing to economic development in South Africa.

24.1 to 24.3 The Bill is not intended to commercialise cannabis, but to respond to the Prince judgment. National legislation will be promoted to commercialise cannabis in its entirety.

24.4 The Cannabis Master Plan developed by the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development is geared towards the commercialisation of cannabis in its entirety, whereas the Bill is a response to the Prince judgment to provide for personal use of cannabis in private.

25. Pauli Searle

Government needs to consult with the indigenous, traditional and communities who for generations were involved with recreational, cultural, spiritual and medicinal interactions with the cannabis plant, in order to better understand the needs of the South African cannabis industry and so as to be able to make informed decisions for the betterment of people who are not spoken for by government laws on cannabis.

The Bill is confined to responding to the Prince judgment, but there will be consultations with various communities when the legislation that will commercialise cannabis is processed.

26. Doctors for life

It is submitted that there is ample medical scientific proof that cannabis causes permanent irreversible harm to children, and therefore, children need to grow up in a safe environment and be guided by adults to ensure their physical, mental, and emotional health.

The submission is noted.

27. Concerned Young People of South Africa

27.1 CYPSA objects to the fact that it was considered unnecessary to refer the Bill to the National House of Traditional Leaders in terms of section 18(1)(a) of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act, as it was felt that the Bill did not contain provisions pertaining to customary law or customs of traditional communities. It is unacceptable that traditional leaders have not been adequately involved in the processes surrounding this Bill.

27.2 CYPSA has observed first-hand that the decriminalisation of cannabis for private use by the Constitutional Court has already created a misconception in the minds of South African learners that dagga is a safe substance that is in fact now legal and may be freely used by adolescents.

27.3 Within the South African education system, many learners still completing high school are over the age of 18 years old. How will those learners who are over 18 years of age, who partake of cannabis before school and during break times, and then return to school and disrupt classes and teaching, be dealt with under the proposed Bill?

27.1 The Bill was submitted to the National House of Traditional and Khoi-San Leaders in terms of the Traditional and Khoi-San Leadership Act, 2019 (Act No. 3 of 2019). Comments received from the Traditional Leaders were duly considered.

27.2 The Constitutional Court in the Prince judgment legalised the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis in respect of adults only and the Bill aims to give effect to this. In the Centre for Child Law judgment the Constitutional Court decriminalised (as opposed to legalizing) cannabis in respect of children. Even though it is well-known that some children do use cannabis, the Court did not give them the right to do so, and the Bill also does not give them such right.

27.3 Learners will be dealt with in terms of section 8A(1) of the South African Schools Act, 1996 (Act No. 84 of 1996) which prohibits the use or possession of illegal drugs at school premises or during school activities. Section 8A(8) permits random drug tests to be conducted of learners, but in terms of section 8A(14) no criminal proceedings may be instituted by the school against a learner in respect of whom a test was conducted which proved to be positive.

28. Cannabis Development Council of SA

28.1 The Bill in its current form still negatively impacts people’s rights to equality, dignity, freedom, and privacy in that it still proposes to use the criminal penal code to regulate cannabis. We should not use our society's most extreme sanction (arrest) to regulate concerns around cannabis in the absence of proof that it is necessary.

28.2 They are proposing a single holistic unified cannabis Bill that would enable cannabis for food, clothes, shelter, medicines and jobs, for struggling South Africans, to develop a multi-billion Rand cannabis value chain in South Africa centered around indigenous land race cannabis and to enable the empowerment of small-scale farmers and the development of agro-processing cooperative hubs that meet our developmental agenda.

28.3 The law needs to accommodate a reasonable trade in recreational cannabis to enable people without access to land as well as those who cannot or don’t want to grow for themselves the right to still use cannabis in the privacy of their homes.

28.4 Amend the Bill to include the ability to cultivate, extract, process, manufacture, and sell cannabis-based products for recreational use, along the same lines that alcohol and tobacco are currently regulated.

28.1 The Bill permits the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis, coupled with penalties for contravention of the provisions of the Bill. Penalties are in the form of fines and imprisonment in cases of serious contravention. The Police are allowed to arrest in certain instances where there is contravention of the law, such as in selling cannabis.

28.2 These are matters for inclusion in the national legislation that will commercialise cannabis in its entirety.

28.3 The trade in cannabis will be regulated by the contemplated national legislation. Those who don’t have a place to cultivate or don’t want to self-cultivate will have to rely on obtaining cannabis from others. The Bill cannot come to the rescue of those who have no place to cultivate, by permitting the sale of cannabis, which was declined by the CC.

28.4 The contemplated national legislation to commercialize cannabis may be crafted along the lines of the legislation that regulates alcohol and tobacco. The Bill is not intended to commercialise cannabis, but to respond to the Prince judgment.

29. Nongos Joint

It is proposed the inclusion of commercial cannabis in the ambit of the Bill by including a permit for commercial cannabis trade like the hemp permit and SAHPRA licences. Under this proposed permit a regime for safe and regulated distribution of cannabis can be implemented.

The proposal is a matter for inclusion in the contemplated national legislation.

30. SANDF

30.1 It is submitted that there are far more serious risks, owing to much more onerous duties placed on members of SANDF, to allow members to use cannabis even privately, while in the service of SANDF and especially while on active duty.

30.2 The risks associated with members being under the influence of intoxicating drugs, such as cannabis, may result in injury or death to not only members, but to the greater public.

30.3 The CC judgment does not provide an interpretation as to the cultivation, possession or use of cannabis in private. Does this denotes “at home” in a “private dwelling” or “private place”?

30.4 The main problem of SANDF is that there are live-in quarters or official housing on SANDF premises, which house the member and his or her family.

30.5 It would be very rare to find to find a “private” place to smoke cannabis while on duty, besides the fact that the member may face other sanctions for being on duty while under the influence of narcotic substance.

30.6 The Department of Defence (DoD) and SANDF will find it difficult to manage the use of cannabis, even if it is legal. The right to use cannabis by members may be limited like all other rights.

30.7 There are many other instances where the inherent requirements of the job require that a person may not be under the influence of alcohol or other narcotic substances.

30.8 It is submitted, in the alternative, that partial exemption be considered for the members to use cannabis privately.

30.1 The Bill will be unconstitutional if it were to prohibit members of the SANDF from using cannabis in their private places. The Bill operates equally to all in the country, including members of SANDF even if they are still on active duty. However, the Bill does not permit members to use cannabis whilst on duty.

30.2 Noted.

30.3 In paragraph 100 the Court in Prince said:

“[100] It seems to me that, indeed, there was no persuasive reason why the High Court confined its declaration of invalidity to the use or possession or cultivation of cannabis at a home or in a private dwelling. In my view, as long as the use or possession of cannabis is in private and not in public and the use or possession of cannabis is for the personal consumption of an adult, it is protected.”. Therefore, the protection applies as long as it is not done in public.

30.4 The live-in quarters, in our view, will constitute the private place of the member, and such member will have protection under the Bill unless the policies of SANDF specifically prohibits the use of cannabis within the live-in quarters.  

30.5 The Bill does not permit the smoking of cannabis by a member while on duty. The member may smoke cannabis only in private, and if he or she reports for duty while under the influence of cannabis, the relevant policies of SANDF will apply and the necessary sanctions may be taken.

30.6 The total prohibition of the use of cannabis by members is not a justifiable limitation of that right just for the mere fact of their inability to manage its use. The remedy for DoD lies on the prohibition of the use of cannabis while on duty, or within the SANDF’s premises and not on the total denial of members’ right to use cannabis in private.

30.7 The enforcement of the policy that a member may not be under the influence of cannabis may achieve the purpose of not allowing the use of cannabis while on duty or within the SANDF premises. This would be the less restrictive means, rather than the Bill totally denying them the right to use cannabis in private. 

30.8 The denial of members of the right to use cannabis in private, either totally or partially, will amount to unjust differential treatment of members to everyone in the country just for the mere fact that they are members of SANDF. There are less restrictive means of ensuring that cannabis is not used by members while on duty or within the SANDF premises.

Long Title

1. P-Eazy Times

1.1 It is submitted that the core rights conferred by the Prince judgment were the private cultivation, and use and possession by adults of cannabis.

1.2 The Bill’s unconstitutionality in both substance and process is now automatic. This is not something that submissions should be made on. The right of an adult to privately cultivate cannabis lies at the absolute core of the rights conferred by the Constitutional Court in Prince. 

1.3 The omission of this right from the cluster of cannabis rights conferred risks re-criminalising the entire community, sending us back into the deepest and darkest corners of the prohibitionists Cannabis era.

1.4 It is proposed the insertion of the word “cultivate” in the first bullet point of the long title as follows:

“To—

* respect the right to privacy of an adult person to use, possess or cultivate cannabis;”.

1.5 Similar comments as above are made by many other members of P-Eazy Times.

1. The submission is noted as correct.

1.2 The Court put in place an interim measure which applies until the Bill has been enacted. Parliament was required to effect the amendments to the Drugs Act, and it should do so. The Bill gives effect to the judgment and also deals with other aspects that need to be dealt with in the legislation. This includes providing for penalties for contravention of certain clauses of the Bill, as the right to possess, use or cultivate cannabis is not absolute. Therefore, it was necessary for the Committee to invite comments on the Bill.

1.3 The Bill permits the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis, coupled with penalties for contravention of the provisions of the Bill. Penalties are in the form of fines and imprisonment in cases of serious contravention. This is not intended to re-criminalise the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis as submitted.

1.4 Clause 4(5) prohibits the cultivation of cannabis in excess of the number of plants that will be determined by the Minister in the regulations. It is not necessary to make the proposed insertion as the Bill leaves it for the regulations to regulate cultivation.

1.5 See the Annexure.

2. Fields of Green for All

It is of very grave concern to ALL in the South African Cannabis Community that the cultivation of cannabis has been omitted from the latest version of the Bill.

The right to cultivate is not prohibited by the Bill. Instead, clause 4(5) prohibits the cultivation of cannabis in excess of the number of plants that will be determined by the Minister in the regulations. The omission of cultivation in the long title of the Bill does not entail that cultivation of cannabis it is prohibited.

3. Nongos Joint

It is submitted that the Bill does not provide for the right to cultivate. Should this version of the Bill be passed, it means that cultivation will be considered ILLEGAL! No person, club, previously disadvantaged population group or traditional healer would be allowed to cultivate cannabis! This is indirect contrast to the Prince.

The cultivation of cannabis is not illegal in terms of the Bill. Clause 4(5) prohibits the cultivation of cannabis in excess of the number of plants that will be determined by the Minister in the regulations.

4. Harambe Solutions (Pty) Ltd

4.1 It is proposed that the Bill be amended, in recognition of the right to freedom of association, by the insertion to the Preamble of the Bill as follows:

“To—

* respect the right to privacy of an adult person acting alone or in association with other adult persons to use, possess or cultivate cannabis in private;”.

4.2 In the Prince judgment, the Court deliberately contemplated the reality that the ‘use or possession’ or ‘cultivation’ of cannabis rarely takes place personally by the adult who consumes the cannabis, acting all alone within the core ‘inner sanctum’ or ‘truly personal’ realm of their privacy.

4.3 The SAPS Directive sternly warns SAPS members to leave such bona fide collectives alone to exercise their cannabis private-use rights in peace, the SAPS Directive is not a legal development – we need Parliament to sanction this clear understanding so that the courts may coherently adjudicate whether, in a particular case, the collective exercise of the rights takes place in private and without contravening the prohibition against dealing in Cannabis.

4.1 The Bill as it stands does not prohibit the smoking or cultivation of cannabis by an adult together with other adult persons. Therefore, it is not necessary to amend the Bill as proposed. However, the Bill does not aim to legalize the establishment of cannabis social clubs. The proposed amendment could lead to unintended consequences of enabling the use or establishment of cannabis social clubs, which Harambe Solutions is clearly advocating for.

4.2 The judgment was decided on the basis of an individual right to privacy and not in association with others. The Bill is therefore confined to an individual adult person exercising their privacy rights in private.

4.3 As must as the SAPS Directives are aimed at placing moratorium on the arrests for cannabis related activities, they do not supersede an Act of Parliament. The Bill intends to give effect to the individual right to privacy, and not the rights of a collective.

Clause 1: Definitions and interpretation

1. Western Cape Government

1.1 It is proposed the amendment of the definition of “child” as follows:

“child” has the meaning referred to in section 1 of the Children’s Act, 2005.

Alternatively:

“child” means a person under the age of 18 years.

1.2 The penalties in clause 4(11) will apply to a person who merely holds, however briefly, ignited cannabis or a vaping device producing cannabis vapours on behalf of another person.  Is it the intention to hold such a person criminally liable or is the intention to hold criminally liable the person inhaling cannabis or its vapours, or the person assisting such person to do so, in the circumstances contemplated in this clause?

1.1 The Bill defines “child” as a person who is under the age of 18 years, which is similar to the proposed alternative.

1.2 The penalties in clause 4(11) will apply to a person who merely holds cannabis for someone else as it would still cause a nuisance to others who are nearby. If this is not the case, offenders may use it as a defense that they are holding for someone else, and this provision will be capable of being dodged all time.

2. Dank Panda Farm

2.1 When excluding parts of the plant in the definition of “cannabis”, we open the door for more black-market operations.

2.2 Allow for an exclusion of traditional healers to be able to distribute small amounts of cannabis as medicine (not in terms of the Medicines Act) - in line with SAPS directive.

2.3 “Dealing in” does not include sharing cannabis as is practiced by some private social clubs and traditional groups. Nongos Joint

2.1 The Bill aims to regulate the psychoactive part of the plant, and other parts of the plant which do not get a person intoxicated are not regulated by the Bill. It is not clarified as to how the definition could open the door for more black-market operations.

2.2 The Bill aims to regulate personal consumption of cannabis in private. Cannabis has not been registered for dispensing as medicine in the country and as such, the Bill cannot permit traditional healers to prescribe cannabis as medicine.

2.3 Social clubs are not intended to be regulated by the Bill, and they will be regulated in terms of the contemplated national legislation.

3. Nongos Joint

This definition of “use of cannabis” is vague and does not unpack ‘eating’ of cannabis. There is nothing in the Bill that specifically talks to edibles, such as chocolates, sweets etc. that are currently sold to children in Malls around South Africa.

The word “eating” carries its ordinary meaning and does not need to be unpacked as proposed.

Clause 2: Cannabis for private purpose by adult person

1. P-Eazy Times

It is proposed the insertion of the word “cultivate” in clause 2(1) as follows:

“2(1) An adult person may—

(a) use, possess or cultivate cannabis; and

(b) without the exchange of consideration per occasion provide to, or obtain from, another adult person, cannabis,

in a private place for a private purpose.”.

The omission of “cultivation” in the Bill does not entail that the Bill prohibits the cultivation of cannabis. Instead, clause 4(5) prohibits the cultivation of cannabis in excess of the number of plants that will be determined by the Minister in the regulations. It is not incorrect to exclude cultivation in the clause, as the Bill leaves cultivation to be dealt with in the regulations.

1. Peet

The Bill is unconstitutional, as it offers freedom to use but yet offers no way for all South Africans to obtain cannabis, and this is contradicting in its self as not all South Africans have the ability to cultivate. How can people cultivate if sale of clones and seeds are prohibited?

Clause 2(1)(b) allows an adult person to obtain cannabis from another adult person, but this must be without exchange of consideration. The Court was specific that dealing in (which includes the sale) cannabis is a serious problem in the country and as a result it did not decriminalize the sale or purchase of cannabis. It is anticipated that national legislation to commercialize cannabis in its entirety will regulate the purchase and sale of cannabis.

3. Inkwazi Farming Group

3.1 Clause 2(1)(b) of the Bill, which prohibits individuals from obtaining cannabis for private use through exchange for consideration, is discriminatory, and opposed to the principles of fair and equitable access.

3.2 It is proposed that the phrase “without the exchange of consideration per occasion provide to, or” must be deleted from the clause, and furthermore that clause 4(1) concerning offences for “dealing in” cannabis for private use purposes must be deleted.

3.3 It is highly improbable that those who cultivate cannabis for private use, having spent their own resources and time to do so, will provide cannabis to seekers without exchange for consideration.

3.4 If prohibitions are placed on the sale of cannabis for private use, there will be no legal pathway for individuals who cannot cultivate their own cannabis or find someone who is willing to provide cannabis to them for free to consume cannabis for private use.

3.1 & 3.2 The Constitutional Court in the Prince judgment declined to legalise the sale of cannabis, as dealing in cannabis is a serious problem in the country. Sale is considered dealing. Therefore, since cannabis cannot be sold or purchased, the Bill determines the manner in which people can have cannabis, being by obtaining same from others but without paying for it. The contemplated national legislation will provide for the purchase and sale of cannabis.

3.3 This is a real possibility but is also a contravention of clause 4(1) of the Bill which carries a penalty of a fine or up to 10 years imprisonment, depending on the circumstances.

3.4 It is indeed a reality that other people may not have others willing to provide them with cannabis for free. But it is not a matter for this Bill to provide for the sale of cannabis, but for national legislation to be promoted by another national Department.

4. Western Cape Government

4.1 Clause 2(3) contemplates that an adult person may “possess” but not use cannabis in a public place. While this serves to protect the right of an adult person to use cannabis for a private purpose, does this mean that an adult person may openly possess cannabis in a public place or must the cannabis at least be concealed from view, for example, from learners at a school or from members of the public as such. “Public place” is defined, amongst other things, in the Bill as any place to which the public has a right of access. 

4.2 There appears to be a disjuncture between the intention of the Bill to permit the use by an adult of cannabis for private purposes in a manner that conceals it from public view, yet inadvertently permitting the possession of cannabis in public without the qualification that it be concealed from public view.

4.1 & 4.2 The clause must be read together with the definition of “private purpose” which means that possession must be such that cannabis is concealed from the public view. The legalisation of cannabis as per the Prince judgment is to permit possession of cannabis for private purpose in private.

5. Dank Panda Farm

Create a certification scheme or permit structure that will allow for private social clubs to operate under reasonable security protocol that is less stringent than a standard medical dispensary. Nongos Joint

Private social clubs are not intended to be covered by the Bill, and they will be regulated in terms of the contemplated national legislation.

6. Nongos Joint

The Bill does not give the Consumer the option to smoke or consume cannabis at a licensed bar/premises which cater for those who cannot smoke or consume cannabis at their homes because it is not practical or possible.

The Bill provides for private use of cannabis, and a licensed bar will be a public place as defined in the Bill.

Clause 3: Protection of child

1. Sista Vee Nohombile Bush

We cannot allow a society that wishes to keep the plant hidden from children and young people. We already have the ruling for rural children to be allowed to tend the plants in the garden and this should filter down through to the rest of our communities.

Evidence has revealed that cannabis has serious negative health impact on the youth. Children are allowed to assist their parents in the cultivation of cannabis but not to use cannabis.

2. Jean Jeffery

2.1 Just as children need to be taught to understand and respect alcohol and tobacco, they need to be taught to understand and respect cannabis.

2.2 Hiding cannabis from children will not help them to learn. On the contrary, it will make them curious to find out more for themselves and remove the safety of learning in their own home.

2.3 Children of adult users of alcohol and cigarettes, etc. live with alcohol and cigarettes etc. being stored and used around them. Similarly, children of adult users of cannabis should not live isolated from the plant and they definitely should not be required to in terms of the proposed Bill.

1. Noted.

2.2 & 2.3 The Bill does not prohibit children from assisting their parents in the cultivation of cannabis in private. There are communities, such as the Rastafari community, that cultivate cannabis for business and children do assist in and learn the family business. However, the Bill does not mean that children are given the right to use cannabis. Adults should exercise control over children, to ensure that cannabis is inaccessible to them unsupervised.

3. Fields of Green for All

3.1 Spaces occupied by children are no different to the spaces that adults occupy. Their parents, guardians or caregivers may share in relationships with cannabis that place them near the plant. If we are set to provide for adult use under the Bill, should we not consider that many adults who use cannabis have children?

3.2 Requiring adults to keep their use of cannabis hidden is not practical. There are various cultural, religious, traditional and health uses that, when taken into consideration, expose deficiencies in the Bill. Being required to hide relationship with cannabis from children denies basic human rights, while also considering that the Liquor Act contains no such limitation on how children are exposed to alcohol, either within private spaces or in social situations.

3.1 The Bill does not prohibit children from assisting their parents in the cultivation of cannabis in private, and does not give children the right to use cannabis either. However, adults should exercise control over children, to ensure that cannabis is inaccessible to them unsupervised.

3.2 The Bill aims to protect children from the harms of smoking cannabis, either directly or secondarily. Cannabis has huge health harms to children than in adults. Even though they can assist their parents in the cultivation of cannabis, they do need to be protected from harms that could be caused by cannabis.

4. Western Cape Government

4.1 Clarity is still required on several areas in respect of child protection such as:

(a) How will child protection investigation processes be affected by the Bill?

(b) Would child protection social worker need to conduct a cannabis investigation to determine whether the caregiver or responsible adult who uses cannabis complies with the law or is offending beyond the stipulated legal requirements?

(c) Screening of foster parents and parents who consume cannabis?

(d) The impact of prenatal exposure on the child’s cognitive development.

(e) Should the Bill be enacted, it should be accompanied by a public awareness campaign to inform the public on cannabis-related harms.

(f) The silence in the Bill as to the protection to be afforded to children in the care of guardians permitted to smoke or consume cannabis in private.

4.2 The legislative sentence in clause 3(1) does not flow correctly. It is proposed that the clause be broken down into its constituent parts, and that this clause be re-drafted to reflect the intention of each part.

4.1 Noted:

(a) The Bill requires that processes under the relevant legislation be followed. Once that happens, the matter will be dealt with in terms of the relevant legislation, and the Bill will no longer be applicable.

(b) & (c) These are not matters to be dealt with in the Bill. If a social worker needs to investigate the caregiver or responsible adult, or to screen foster parents and parents who consume cannabis, such investigation or screening will be done in terms of the relevant legislation and not the Bill.

(d) This is not a matter to be dealt with in the Bill.  

(e) The Department does engage in public awareness in all new legislation, collaborating with Government Communication and Information System and it will be the case with the Bill.

(f) Clause 2(2)(a) prohibits the use of cannabis by any adult in the presence of a child.

4.2 Having reconsidered the clause, it is submitted that clause is correct and reflects the intention of what is contemplated therein.

5. Doctors for Life International

Clause 3(2)(b) allows for an adult to administer cannabis to a child on prescription by a doctor, even without the consent of the child. It is submitted that in South Africa there are no cannabis products registered as medication. This section will cause unnecessary confusion and cause harm to children. It needs to be removed.

The clause is aimed at protecting children against having cannabis administered to them, unless if prescribed by a medical doctor. If cannabis is not registered as medication, no medical prescription can be issued in respect thereof. As a result, anyone who administers cannabis to a child will be doing so without prescription and will be in contravention of the clause.

6. Concerned Young People of South Africa

There are groups in South Africa who claim to smoke cannabis for medical reasons, whereas to ingest cannabis by smoking the substance is harmful to the human body. All substances need to pass through extensive testing and strict screening processes before they can be registered with the Medicines Control Counsel and other medical bodies in South Africa. This process can take several years of intensive study. Side effects of any substance must be documented.

If cannabis is not registered as medication, no medical prescription can be issued in respect thereof. As a result, anyone who administers cannabis to a child will be doing so without prescription and that will be in contravention of clause 3(2)(b).

Clause 4: Offenses and penalties

1. Peet

1.1 The 15-year imprisonment penalty and prescribed quantities, seem overly stringent. It is on par with penalties murderers receive. It raises a valid question as to why is cannabis subjected to such strict limitations when alcohol and tobacco, known to have significant health risks, come with comparatively lax restrictions? David Dobbrik

1.2 How can you penalize a cannabis user for merely possessing a certain amount the same as a murderer? How can you add nonsensical plant amounts? I can grow 1 plant that can produce 1kg or indoors a plant will yield 30g so plant quantity is idiotic so is quantity of flower and concentrates, lock people up for 15 years for having 10 bottles of alcohol! 

1.1 The periods of imprisonment in the Bill are the maximum years that the court may impose. It is not compulsory for the court to hand down a 15-year term of imprisonment, and it may be less but not more than that. Personal circumstances in each case will be considered. The Bill does not prescribe the quantities, as these will be dealt with in the regulations.

1.2 The periods of imprisonment in the Bill are the maximum years that the court may impose. The prescribed limits of cannabis that may be possessed or cultivated are intended to prevent the possibility of opening the doors for sale of cannabis. If people are allowed to have extremely large quantities of cannabis, they may be tempted to sell.

2. David Dobbrik

While acknowledging the necessity of protective measures for children in relation to cannabis, the imposition of a 15-year imprisonment term for mere possession of a few plants appears to contravene constitutional principles and warrants reconsideration.

A sentence will be determined in accordance with the facts of the case. A 15-year jail term is a maximum sentence that a court may impose, and may not be imposed in all cases.

3. Alice “Leela” Gouws

3.1 The fines proposed in the Bill will likely lead to the continuation of unlawful actions by the South African Police Service against South Africans in possession of or using cannabis in private for private purposes.

3.2 While R2 000 is a relatively affordable amount for most middle class and upper-class South Africans, this amount remains significant for our poor. The majority of the country’s poor will not be able to afford such fines, and will be unfairly incarcerated for years should their cannabis for private purposes be deemed to be for trade.

3.3 The harms against children whose parents have been arrested for their private use of cannabis will be devastating.

3.1 The fines are imposed in instances where there are contraventions of certain conduct that is prohibited by the Bill. The Police will be entitled to arrest in those specific instances.

3.2 The fines proposed in the Bill are maximum amounts, and the court will judge its case according to its own merits. But the prohibited conduct has to be penalised, and no conduct will be left unpunished for the mere fact of the inability to afford payment of a fine.

3.3 Even though the children will be affected by the incarceration of their parents, the prohibited conduct could not be left unpunished for the mere fact of the incarceration having a negative effect to the children. The court will consider personal circumstances of the offender when imposing a penalty. There are many other Acts that provide for incarceration, and parents are not spared imprisonment for the reason that they have children.

4. COSATU

4.1 The Bill has provided for reduced penalties for various offences, and this is welcome.  However, this contradicts the directive of the Constitutional Court to legalise cannabis and government’s own efforts to nurture and cultivate the hemp industry. 

4.2 Reducing a penalty from 6 to 3 years etc. is welcome but nonetheless is still going to serve as a serious discouragement for those seeking to legally enter the industry.

4.1 The Constitutional Court in the Prince judgment legalised cannabis for personal consumption in private, and the Bill gives effect to this directive. The contemplated national legislation to be promoted by another Department will regulate the cannabis/hemp industry in its entirety.

4.2 A court will determine the penalty in light of the circumstances of each case. The Bill proposes maximum penalties and the court will hand down a jail term on a case by case basis. Some cases will require longer others shorter jail terms, depending on the circumstances of a particular case.

5. Fields of Green for All

The proposed offences and penalties are not in the best interest of children when the penalties, such as severely sanctioning or fining parents, guardians, or caregivers for not cultivating or storing their cannabis correctly (for example) will, in turn, negatively affect their ability to care for the very children the proposed Bill purports to be protecting.

Even though children will be affected by the incarceration or fining of their parents, the prohibited conduct could not be left unpunished. Parents are not spared imprisonment for the reason that they have children. The sanctioning of parents will be severe depending on the degree of contravention of the Bill.

6. Western Cape Government

6.1 Clause 4(3) criminalises the failure by an adult person in possession of cannabis in a public place to store such cannabis in a secure space that is inaccessible to a child “as contemplated in section 3(3)”.  However, clause 3(3) does not contemplate this scenario, which appears to be a mistake in the Bill.

6.2 The Bill does not make it an offence for an adult to engage a child in cultivating cannabis. 

6.1 Clause 3(3) is not a mistake as a cross-reference thereto in clause 4(3) relates to the taking of reasonable measures to ensure that cannabis is inaccessible to a child. The clause is also correct as it covers also any other child whether under the authority, supervision or care of an adult person or not. 

6.2 It is the intention of the Bill to not penalizs an adult person who engages a child to cultivate cannabis, as there are communities, such as the Rastafari community, that cultivate cannabis for business and children do assist in and learn the family business.

7. Dank Panda Farm

Cannabis trade should not be left to the black market as it provides room for harm to society. Nongos Joint

National legislation will regulate the trade in cannabis.

8. Doctors for Life International

The maximum imprisonment of 12 months or fine of R2 000 is grossly inadequate when considering the harm done to minors by cannabis exposure. The National Liquor Act prescribes a maximum imprisonment of 5 years and a maximum fine of R1 000 000 for providing a minor with alcohol. In many ways cannabis is more harmful than alcohol. The penalty for supplying a minor with cannabis should reflect this.

Through the processing of the Bill, comments were made to the Portfolio Committee for the reduction of the penalties proposed in the Bill. The court will determine the suitable penalty on a case by case basis. It can impose a fine or a prison term or even both, depending on the circumstances.

9. Concerned Young People of South Africa

9.1 Whilst the Bill provides for penalties for any adult permitting a child to possess or use cannabis, or causing a child to ingest cannabis, one need only think of a child living in a home where parents and siblings smoke or vape cannabis in their so-called “private” space. By the Bill’s own definitions, children will themselves be smoking cannabis when they inhale the second-hand smoke produced by their parents and siblings and no meaningful mitigation of this harm is possible as it is not realistic to think that every home can be monitored for child exposure to cannabis and cannabis products.

9.2 Offenses which relate to the ingestion of cannabis or cannabis-based products by minors because of the actions of adults, carry some of the lowest penalties of all offenses detailed, but pose the highest risk to the psychological and physical well-being of the child.

9.3 Whilst section 4(3)(a) of the Bill makes it an offense to fail to store cannabis in a secure space inaccessible to a child, the penalty of a fine of R2 000 for committing this offence is woefully inadequate.

9.1 All reasonable steps have been taken to propose measures that are aimed at the protection of children, including the prohibition against smoking in the presence of the child. However, it should be appreciated that the enforcement of provisions that are aimed at curbing or prohibiting “second hand smoking” will, among others be extremely difficult to implement and enforce.

9.2 & 9.3 The imposition of penalties is a discretion of the court, which will determine the suitable penalty on a case by case basis. It can impose a fine or a prison term or even both, depending on the circumstances.

Clause 5: Expungement of criminal records of persons convicted of possession or use of cannabis or dealing in cannabis on basis of presumption

1. Western Cape Government

The word “compelling” is used in the draft to indicate that compelling written reasons must be furnished to the Director-General to prevent the revocation of an expungement of a criminal record. The word “compelling” must be deleted, since this might create different perceptions of the quality if reasons that must be provided in the minds of members of the public.

The proposal is not supported as similar standard is required under section 271DA of the Criminal Procedure Act. To remove the requirement as suggested will create difference between the requirements under the two statutes.

Clause 6: Regulations

1. Sista Vee Nohombile Bush

It is imperative to amend your intentions for plant counting/prescribed quantities, as it is virtually impossible to assess each household’s needs to use the Cannabis plant and how much bio mass might be required for example I need to collect biomass to produce my bricks to build my house, besides my family's and animal's health needs.

The Prince judgment legalised cannabis to the extent that is sufficient for personal consumption in private. The regulations will determine the quantities that may be possessed, cultivated or transported so as to prevent the possibility of the sale of cannabis. Large quantities of cannabis required for household’s needs would be regulated by the contemplated national legislation that will commercialise cannabis. The Bill regulates cannabis that is meant for personal consumption.

2. Fields of Green for All

A concern is raised as to how the Minister may amend regulations with no indication of public consultation. It is proposed the insertion of a provision similar to section 6(3) of the Tobacco Control Act which obliges the Minister to publish the proposed regulations at least three months for public comments before issuing those regulations.

The Minister will ordinarily invite public comments on the proposed regulations, even though there is no specific provision in the Bill that makes it compulsory to invite public comments like in the Tobacco Act.

Schedule

1. Alice “Leela” Gouws

Cars are private spaces and serve as private dwellings for those who find themselves without homes. Individuals occupying the driver’s seat of their car with no intention to drive should be allowed to safely use cannabis without fear of arrest.

The smoking of cannabis in a car whilst in public is not permitted. To permit such conduct could have unintended consequences of people having to drive after having smoked cannabis.

2. Fields of Green for All

Another area of concern is the proposed amendments to the National Road Traffic Act having THC, but not cannabis, retrofitted into the penalties. There is a concern as to how these measures will further undermine the rights of cannabis users.

The Traffic Act prohibits the driving of a vehicle whilst under the influence of a drug having a narcotic effect, which includes cannabis. The rights of cannabis users will not be undermined by these amendments, as they will ensure that a car is not driven on a public road whilst the driver is under the influence of cannabis.

3. Doctors for Life International

Cannabis leads to a marked increase of motor vehicle accidents and fatalities. Drivers under the influence affect children who are pedestrians, passengers, or illegal drivers.

The submission is noted, as it supports the proposal in the Bill to amend the Traffic Act.

4. Concerned Young People of South Africa

4.1 It remains to be established how driving under the influence of cannabis in South Africa is to be avoided, policed and how the costs involved in testing for the presence of cannabis in the system of road users are to be funded.

4.2 CYPSA believes that the Department of Transport is not adequately equipped to deal with the increased burden of testing for and policing of cannabis road users that the Bill will place on them.

4.3 Whilst section 4(8)(c) of the Bill makes it an offense for an individual to smoke or consume cannabis whilst in a vehicle or on a public road, this provision does not address those who smoke or consume cannabis privately before entering and driving a motor vehicle on public roads, thereby jeopardizing the safety and lives of innocent road users and their families.

4.4 The Bill in many cases makes no stipulation as to the value of fines that may be imposed for offences and that the fines which stipulated appear to be extremely low, and we consider these provisions deficient as a result.

4.1 The aim of the Bill in amending the Traffic Act to include cannabis is intended to penalise drivers for driving under the influence of cannabis. It will be policed the way driving under the influence of alcohol is being policed. The funding for the test kits will have to be budgeted for and secured like it is the case with the test kits for alcohol testing.

4.2 It is acknowledged that there may be challenges in the implementation of these amendments, and the Department of Transport will be engaged before the Bill (if passed and assented to) is put into operation. The amendments to the Traffic Act may, if it comes to that, be suspended and put into operation only at a late stage when full implementation of the amendments is feasible.

4.3 The Bill permits an adult to smoke cannabis in private, but when that adult goes ahead to drive under the influence of cannabis, the provisions of the Traffic Act will kick in and become applicable. If the penalty for driving under the influence of cannabis is included in the Bill, there would be a need for inclusion also of the provisions dealing with the testing, the quantity of blood concentration of cannabis and other related provisions which are already covered in the Traffic Act, and that would be an unnecessary duplication.

4.4 It is not wrong for the Bill to leave the value of fines for determination by the court, which will consider the circumstances of each case.