A top level meeting between the Director of Plant Production at the Department of Agriculture, Joseph Mahlabe, the Registrar of the Plant Improvement Act, Ashika Kistnasamy and a delegation led by Charl Botha of H3 Legal Solutions has been scheduled for 27 January 2026 to discuss concerns relating to the Act’s recently published hemp guidelines .
In response to two letters from Botha on the new hemp regulations, the Department of Agriculture (DoA) contacted Botha and the parties agreed to meet on Tuesday, 27 January 2026.
Botha wrote to the Department raising concerns about what he described as administrative over-reach and role confusion, particularly the involvement of the South African Police Service (SAPS) in the hemp permit application process, a function Botha argues falls outside SAPS’ constitutional and legislative mandate.
“We have taken note of the issues raised in both open letters and we are open to constructive engagement on the specific matters pertaining to the Plant Improvement Act, 2018 during the upcoming meeting,” the Registrar wrote.
Botha has welcomed the Department’s response, describing it as a positive signal that government is willing to engage meaningfully with industry and legal stakeholders on a rapidly evolving regulatory framework.
“This is a constructive step. Our intention has never been adversarial, it is to ensure that regulation is lawful, coherent, and capable of supporting the development of a legitimate hemp sector without creating unnecessary barriers or uncertainty.”
He says the key issues he intends to raise at the meeting include:
• The misalignment of mandates between the Department of Agriculture and SAPS in the hemp permitting process;
• The absence of clear administrative boundaries, resulting in delays, duplication, and
regulatory uncertainty;
• The need for procedural clarity for applicants, particularly small-scale and emerging farmers;
• The risk that overly burdensome controls may undermine investment, compliance, and transformation objectives;
• Ensuring that hemp regulation under the PIA is constitutionally sound, proportionate, and consistent with broader cannabis policy reform;
Plus / Flagging four linked governance failures:
1. POPIA exposure at SAPS;
2. Unclear punitive consequences for non-compliance;
3. Absence of defined legal timelines;
4. Broken communication chains (who communicates with whom, and on what authority)
Botha has also raised concerns regarding the collection, handling, and sharing of applicant information by SAPS, particularly in the absence of clear POPIA-aligned safeguards. He argues that hemp applicants are required to submit extensive personal and business information without sufficient clarity on data protection, retention, access, or accountability, exposing both applicants and the state to legal risk.
In addition, he says the current framework lacks defined legal timelines, creating uncertainty around application processing, escalation, and review. The absence of published timelines, coupled with unclear lines of communication between applicants, SAPS, and the Department of Agriculture, undermines administrative fairness and lawful decision-making.
Botha has further questioned the punitive measures applicable in cases of non-compliance, noting that applicants are often subjected to de facto enforcement consequences without clear notice of offences, proportional penalties, or appeal mechanisms.
By way of context ahead of the meeting, the Department provided background on the purpose and scope of the Act, stating:
“The Plant Improvement Act (Act No. 11 of 2018) provides the regulatory framework for plants and propagating material intended for cultivation and sale of all crops declared in terms of this Act, with hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) being only one such crop.”
The Department added that its strategic objective is to promote the availability of high-quality, true-to-type, and healthy plant and propagating material for the agricultural sector, in support of sustainable plant production, food security, and the competitiveness of South Africa’s plant industries in domestic and international markets.”
According to the Department, implementation of the Act is intended to serve a broad range of stakeholders, including plant propagators, nurseries, breeders, farmers, traders, exporters and importers, researchers, and consumers, including through variety listing, seed certification, business registration, import and export control, and the regulation of hemp cultivation.
#
