High Court Upholds Cannabis Ban but Calls for National Debate on Future Reform
By Doris Moraa, July 15, 2026
The High Court has upheld Kenya’s ban on cannabis, ruling that the country’s laws criminalizing the cultivation, possession and use of the drug remain constitutional. However, the court has urged the country to begin a broad national conversation on the future of cannabis regulation, citing changing global trends and growing public interest in its medicinal and economic potential.
The ruling followed a constitutional petition filed by cannabis advocates led by researcher Gwada Ogot, who challenged the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act. The petitioners argued that the blanket prohibition infringes on constitutional rights, limits scientific research and prevents Kenyans from benefiting from the crop’s medical and commercial value.
In its judgment, the three-judge bench found that the existing law serves a legitimate public purpose by protecting public health and safety from the harmful effects associated with narcotic drugs.
The judges ruled that Parliament acted within its constitutional mandate when it enacted legislation prohibiting cannabis and that the restrictions are justified in the interest of safeguarding society.
“The current legal framework remains valid and enforceable,” the court held, adding that any changes to the law should be undertaken through the legislative process rather than judicial intervention.
Even as it upheld the ban, the court acknowledged that the debate surrounding cannabis has evolved significantly in recent years, both globally and within Kenya.
The bench observed that several countries have reviewed their cannabis policies in light of emerging scientific research, medical applications and the potential economic benefits associated with industrial hemp production.
The judges encouraged policymakers, health experts, researchers, civil society organizations and the public to engage in an informed national dialogue on whether Kenya’s current legal framework remains suitable in light of these developments.
They emphasized that such discussions should carefully balance public health concerns, constitutional values, scientific evidence and economic opportunities.
The petitioners had argued that cannabis possesses recognized medicinal properties that could benefit patients suffering from chronic pain, epilepsy, cancer-related symptoms and other conditions. They also contended that industrial hemp offers opportunities in manufacturing, textiles, construction materials and pharmaceutical production.
However, the court noted that these policy considerations fall within the mandate of Parliament and relevant government agencies, not the Judiciary.
The ruling comes as several African countries continue to reform their cannabis policies. Nations including Lesotho, Zimbabwe and Rwanda have introduced legal frameworks permitting the cultivation of cannabis for medicinal or industrial purposes under strict regulatory controls, while maintaining restrictions on recreational use.
In Kenya, cannabis remains listed as a prohibited narcotic drug under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act. Individuals found guilty of trafficking, cultivating or possessing the substance continue to face criminal prosecution and penalties prescribed by law.
Legal experts say the judgment preserves the existing legal position while opening the door for future legislative discussions on cannabis regulation should Parliament choose to review the law.
The decision is expected to reignite public debate over whether Kenya should follow other countries in permitting regulated medicinal or industrial cannabis production while maintaining safeguards against abuse.
