The President and the Convenor of Save the Nation Ghana Dr. Appiah Korang has stated that they will lawfully resist the decision by the Supreme Court which prohibits the cultivation of “wee” for industrial purposes.
Speaking on Plan B FM morning show ‘Nkosuo Nsem’ with Nana Yaw Abroampah, Dr. Korang said, Ghanaians should rise and defend the cultivation of marijuana in the country.
He said in most western countries, marijuana cultivation has been their main source of income for years so if the law permits it to be cultivated in the country it will boost the country’s foreign earnings and stabilize the economy.
“Cultivating marijuana protects the land, now that illegal mining activities are destroying our lands we can cultivate marijuana to revitalize the land for its intended use. Frequent rainfall in the cultivated areas will boost farming activities” he stated
He added that permitting “wee” cultivation will create employment for the youth and also increase the economic gains of the country.
“All these are achievable if the government can regulate it for its intended purposes” he stressed.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has in a majority 5-4 decision affirmed its view that the law allowing the cultivation of weed in Ghana was unconstitutionally passed by Parliament.
Presiding Judge Justice Dotse stated that the threshold a party ought to meet to enable it to review its judgemjudgmentot has been met.
The court in July 2022 struck out Section 43 of the Narcotics Narcotics Control Commission Act, Act 1019.
This provision stipulated that “the Minister on the recommendation of the Commission, may grant a licenclicensehe cultivation of cannabis popularly referred to as “wee” in Ghana, which is not more than 0.3 % THC content on a dry weight basis for industrial purposes for obtaining fiber fibered for medicinal purposes.”
However, the Apex court in a 4-3 majority decision annulled this provision and declared that it is a violation of Article 106 of the 1992 constitution.
This article reads;
“No bill, other than such a bill as is referred to in paragraph (a) of article 108 of this Constitution, shall be introduced in Parliament unless-
a.
it has been published in the Gazette at least fourteen days before the date of its introduction in Parliament.”
The private citizen, Ezuame Mannan argued that the explanatory memorandum that was laid in parliament did not sufficiently lay out the policy change that was being brought by the law, specifically by section 43.
This policy change he insisted was not debated enough before its passage into law.
The Apex Court upheld this position.
Parliament was not transparent in passing Narcotics Control Commission Act – Supreme Court
The Attorney General however filed processes asking the court to review its decision.
It is only at the beginning of the process that there must be a memorandum.
“There is no requirement for a memorandum to further accompany any amendment made by Parliament.
We will respectfully talk about the amendment which is section 43, that was sneaked in at the time that the full debate had concluded.
“That it was contrary to the Constitution.
The AG has said that in amending the law, there is no need for the memorandum, the issues as well as the departure from the national policy, the position do the plaintiff is that, at the time of the debate, this particular amendment that was sneaked in, was not part.
The nation was not made aware of the clear change in the policy.” She stated.
Justice Jones Dotse ruled that the review threshold of the court had not been met.
Discussion about this post