Ghana’s hemp activist organization, Hempire Agric Ghana (HAG), says the proposed hemp licence fees recently presented before Parliament are unrealistic and exclusionary.
It is now seeking an audience with Parliament’s Deputy Speaker to discuss the way forward for the induction of Ghana’s long delayed hemp industry.
The hemp industry fees and licences regulations are still to be ratified but reflect a lack of input from HAG and other stakeholders and if approved, will lock out the majority of the country’s aspiring hemp farmers and investors. To get a licence to start cultivation will cost you a minimum of US$9 000, which is the entry fee for cultivating up to an acre (0.4 ha) of cannabis.
“For one, who will be your off taker? You won’t have an off taker,” HAG CEO Nana Kwaku Agyemang noted, explaining that a viable investment would require large tracts of land to enable farmers to procure and service supplier contracts. This is but one of the numerous and impractical regulatory provisions that effectively shut the door to majority participation in the value chain.
Cannabiz Africa has seen a copy of the regulations pending their gazetting and understands HAG CEO Nana Kwaku Agyemang’s decision to write to Parliament’s Deputy Speaker in protest. In the letter to Deputy Speaker Bernard Ahiafor as well as in remarks to Cannabiz Africa, Agyemang describes the licensing regulations as “the highest fees in the world”, a fitting ascription, backed up by his comparative analysis of the licensing fees of the world’s top cannabis producing countries and African growers.
The HAG study details, compares and puts into perspective the licensing structures of Malawi, South Africa, Lesotho and Zimbabwe as well as Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canada, Portugal and Jamaica. What it reveals is that Ghana shoots itself in the foot with its drafthemp licensing regime. Whereas the comparison countries’ licensing provisions are on average more affordably priced and streamlined, the structuring of Ghana’s is complex, confusing andone could add, unfair.
It is layered with tiers and categories of what at times appear gratuitous additional charges and application and renewal fees. In a nutshell, the fees and licence regulations do not appear intended to incentivise foreign and other investment. The drafters could, for instance, have used Malawi’s simplified and investor-friendly licensing template, and thereby demonstrated Ghana’s West African regional hemp powerhouse aspirations.
“They want to stop the indigenous from taking part in the industry. That’s their aim,” Agyemang told Cannabiz Africa, explaining why the proposed fees should not be passed.
Titled “Schedule of Fees for Licenses / Permits – Cannabis Regulations” the three-page document currently circulating among lawmakers is short on confidence-building and is a potential deterrent to the would-be investor from the start. Item No. 1 is a non-refundable application fee of US$1 000 and $1 500, for a Community and Company/Business entity,respectively.
In his letter, Agyemang states that the non-refundable fee is unheard of. “This amount is unreasonably high for what is only the preliminary stage of the process and bears no resemblance to licensing structures elsewhere in Africa or globally,” he writes. He also points out that the charges do not support the off taking of a new industry and criticises the cultivation fees as abnormal. He also states that “the fee structure as currently designed is both excessive and impractical” and that if not amended risks “excluding the very Ghanaian farmers and entrepreneurs the law was intended to empower”. The law in question is the Narcotics Control Commission 2020 (Act 1019) which legislated for a cannabis industry for Ghana.
A further indication of the lack of consultation with stakeholders is that fees are calculated per hectare instead of per acre as contained in the Legislative Instrument (L.I. 2475); not to mention misaligned terminology (for instance ‘community’). This is a flaw the HAG CEO flags as introducing inconsistency and complexity into the regulatory framework. It also supports HAG’s assertion that it was not consulted and its recommendations were ignored.
And in their appearing to favour the elites and established entities , the fees are inconsistent with many statutes such as Ghana’s rights-centred 1992 Constitution and the Land Act of 2020.
READ GHANA’S PROPOSED HEMP LICENSE FEES AND OTHER RELATED CHARGES HERE.
