The Judiciary of Uganda has distanced its self from allegations which have been circulating on various social media platforms indicating that the recent ruling of constitutional court ( in Constitutional Petition No.001 of 2017) legalized the consumption of marijuana in the country.
According to the press statement which has been issued by Judiciary spokesperson Jameson Karemani, the above allegations are not true but are being peddled by people with hidden intentions.
“In its finding, the Constitutional Court agreed with the Petitioners and declared the Act null and void for lack of quorum by Parliament in passing it. The annulment of the Act does not invalidate the provisions of sections 26, 29, 47, 49
and 60 (1) (b) and (c) of the National Drug Policy and Authority Act, which is now the applicable law in regard to regulation and use of restricted substances.”
Therefore the judiciary has added that the substances previously restricted under the National Drug Policy and Authority Act remain restricted.
ln 2015, the Parliament of Uganda passed The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act (herein after referred to as the Act) which set the control of various drugs including marijuana and Catha edulis (Khat) locally known as “miraa” or “mairungi”.
The Act repealed sections 26, 29, 47, 49 and 60(1) (b) and (c) of the National Drug Policy and Authority Act which restricted the supply, possession, use and cultivation of narcotic substances. The Act created various offences for use and being in possession of the same substances without lawful excuse.
In 2017, Wakiso Miraa Growers and Dealers Association Limited filed Constitutional Petition No.0001 of 2017 in the Constitutional Court challenging the enactment of the Act.
The grounds of the petition included among others lack of quorum by Parliament during the passing of the Act.
Last week Constitutional court passed a judgement in favor of the petitioners which was later on mis interpretated by various stakeholders thus misleading the public.
In its finding, the Constitutional Court agreed with the Petitioners and declared the Act null and void for lack of quorum by Parliament in passing it.
The annulment of the Act does not invalidate the provisions of sections 26, 29, 47, 49 and 60 (1) (b) and (c) of the National Drug Policy and Authority Act, which is now the applicable law in regard to regulation and use of restricted substances. Therefore, the substances previously restricted under the National Drug Policy and Authority Act remain restricted.
