Lawyers for cannabis rights advocacy group Ganja Users of Namibia (GUN) have cited a 2018 South African judgment that paved the way for the Cannabis for Private Purposes Act 2024 in heads of argument shared with Cannabiz Africa ahead of closing arguments on Friday 22 May 2026 in the GUN vs Namibian government Windhoek High Court trial. GUN is litigating for the decriminalisation of cannabis for medicinal, spiritual and religious purposes, citing constitutional rights.
GUN President Brian Jaftha and Secretary General Borro Ndungula are the plaintiffs with five government entities under the Office of the Government Attorney as the defendants: the Prosecutor-General, the Inspector-General of the Namibian Police (Nampol), the ministers of health and justice and the government itself.
Advocate Kadhila Amoomo for the plaintiffs, mentions South Africa’s Judge Davis’s verdict in Prince vs Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and commends the judge for competently addressing the tension between the courts on the one hand and the legislature and executive on the other.
This comes after the defendants argued the unripeness doctrine early into the trial in July 2025. In a special plea, they argued the GUN case was a civil rather than a judicial one arguing Namibia’s Law Reform and Development Commission’s (LRDC’s) was already adjudicating the cannabis matter. The defendants have furthermore argued executive and legislature prerogative in the matter, citing policy concerns they say outweigh any constitutional rights arguments.
The Prince judgment is among plaintiffs’ heads of argument which include the right to traditional African spirituality, Rastafarian religious practices and criticise the continuing criminalisation of private adult use as outmoded. They contend the special plea of unripeness should be thrown out with costs, stating it was misconceived.
Citing the values of Ubuntu, human dignity and freedom, the plaintiffs state “the existing prohibition is irrational, outdated, scientifically untenable” and fundamentally at odds with Section 80 of the Namibian Constitution.
The plaintiffs’ attorneys also cite case law from Canada, Argentina, Mexico and Alaska, in attempting to shore up the privacy element and shoot down the purported harm argument.
They argue: “These comparative authorities demonstrate that the courts in democratic societies based on freedom, equality and dignity do not deter constitutional challenges on personal cannabis use merely because legislative processes are underway. They intervene to protect fundamental rights where existing laws unjustifiably intrude into the private sphere”.
Namibia is the only country in its southern Africa neighbourhood yet to decriminalise cannabison medicinal or industrial grounds, with Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe having adopted friendly legislation.
#
