“All Communities Free to Do Business” — Except When the Business Is Cannabis

-

“All Communities Free to Do Business” — Except When the Business Is Cannabis

On 13 December 2025, Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka stated at the opening of the George Shiu Raj Complex in Rakiraki that “all ethnic communities in Fiji are safe, protected and free to pursue their economic interests.” That statement was made in a celebratory context about private investment and inclusive growth. But when examined against the Government’s existing laws and policies on cannabis — especially its export-only orientation and absence of an operational domestic cannabis regime — the assurance does not align with the evidence.

Claim vs. Legal Reality

The Prime Minister’s assurance implies sector-neutral economic freedom. Yet, under Fiji’s current legal framework:

Cannabis remains illegal for general cultivation, possession, supply, and use under the Illicit Drugs Control Act, except where narrowly exempted (i.e., industrial hemp under 1% THC). All other forms of cannabis remain classified as illicit, but even the framework for that hasn't even rolled out yet 

Industrial hemp (defined as cannabis with -1% THC) was removed from the illicit classification to allow industrial use; all other cannabis remains an illicit drug. 

As of late 2025, medicinal cannabis has not been legally established as a domestic industry in Fiji, because the enabling legislation approved for drafting has not yet been passed by Parliament. There is no publicly accessible licensing regime for citizens to cultivate or produce medicinal cannabis legally.

Fiji’s Police and narcotics authorities have confirmed that the existing illegal-cultivation provisions remain in force, and no current law permits unlicensed growing of cannabis for medicinal or recreational purposes. 

These facts show that, while the Government discusses the potential of a cannabis industry, the legal basis for ordinary citizens to participate does not yet exist.

Export-Only Policy: Where the Statement Breaks

Contrary to the Prime Minister’s assurance of universal economic freedom, the Government’s public statements on cannabis emphasise an export-only model, which in practice excludes local markets and local participants:

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade Manoa Kamikamica has repeatedly stated that any medicinal cannabis industry in Fiji will be limited to export purposes and will not be available for domestic sale or use. 

Kamikamica has also emphasised that developing this industry will not change domestic prohibition — meaning cannabis cultivation, sales, and use remain illegal for Fijians under current law while the export sector is prioritised. 

Government communications confirm that export-oriented cultivation and processing facilities would operate under strict, confined environments intended for value-added export products, with domestic market access explicitly off the table. 

These official statements indicate a policy sequence in which foreign investors and export markets are prioritised, while ordinary Fijians remain legally excluded from participating in an industry that is otherwise being positioned as economically beneficial.

How Exclusion Operates in Practice

This structural exclusion is not accidental — it is a direct product of current legislation and policy design:

1. Criminal law is unchanged for cannabis outside hemp. Cannabis cultivation and supply remain offences under the Illicit Drugs Control Act, and law-enforcement authorities have reiterated that illegal cultivation remains punishable. 

2. Medicinal cannabis legislation remains in draft form. Cabinet approval to draft law does not confer legal status or a functioning licensing regime.

3. Export-only positioning prioritises external markets. Official statements make clear that the cannabis industry is being structured for exports, not local participation. 

4. No public pathway exists for local licences. There is no published criteria, timelines, or public registry showing cannabis licences issued to ordinary citizens or community groups.

Together, these points show that participation in the cannabis economy is structurally limited, even if the industry is being promoted in policy discussions.

Optics vs. Access

The opening of the George Shiu Raj Complex — a major private sector development — is showcased as a symbol of inclusive growth. Yet in the same moment that the Government celebrates private investment, the actual legal and regulatory regime for cannabis remains inaccessible to the vast majority of Fijians. The contrast between visible economic success in traditional sectors and invisible exclusion in cannabis reveals a stark inconsistency between political rhetoric and legal reality.

International Context 

The United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs reclassified cannabis in December 2020 to recognise medical value, reducing international barriers to medicinal cannabis reform. This global shift means that countries can create domestic frameworks if they choose to do so — but it does not automatically establish such frameworks. Fiji has not yet enacted a comprehensive medicinal cannabis regime, despite the international context permitting it. (International sources on UN actions are available publicly but not all Fiji media cites this; global policy reports confirm the UN decision.)

Unanswered Questions

To reconcile universal economic freedom with the Government’s cannabis policy reality, the following questions must be answered:

1. When will the medicinal cannabis legislation be tabled, debated, and passed into law?

2. Why has an export-only framework been prioritised before establishing domestic access for Fijians?

3. Will future licensing criteria explicitly include small farmers, local cooperatives, and iTaukei landowners?

4. Will the Government publish a public register of cannabis licences, agreements, and beneficiaries once the regime is established?

Until these are publicly addressed with law and regulation, the claim of unfettered economic freedom remains unsupported in this sector.

Conclusion

Prime Minister Rabuka’s statement that “all communities are free to pursue their economic interests” reflects a broad aspiration. But in the specific case of cannabis, the law and current policy show that ordinary citizens do not have lawful access to participate in an industry being publicly developed with an export-first focus.

Where legal pathways do not yet exist, and where the Government’s own messaging restricts participation to export markets and confined facilities, the claim of universal economic freedom is not borne out by the facts.

Sign the Petition for Cannabis Reform in Fiji: www.change.org/p/decriminalize-cannabis-in-fiji-for-our-health-wealth-and-justice

.

.

.

.#CannabisFiji #LegalizingFijiCannabis #ForOurWealthAndWHealthFiji #FijiCannabisCommunity #FijiWeed #FijiMarijuana #FijiTHC #FijiCBD #FijiCannabisCulture #WeedPorn #FijiMedicalCannabis #FijiStone #FijiHemp #MaryJaneFiji #KushFiji #CBD #MedicalMarijuanaFiji #GanjaFiji #GrowYourOwn #CannabisSocietyFiji #Cannabis #LegalizeIt #HighSociety #SmokeWeedEveryday

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

World Moves Forward on Cannabis Science — Fiji Still Enforcing Outdated Laws That Punish Locals and Undermines Its Own Economic Credibility

-
The global trajectory on cannabis policy is shifting — cautiously, unevenly, but unmistakably — toward alignment with scientific evidence rather than inherited prohibition. In the United States, the Trump administration has publicly indicated consideration of moving cannabis from Schedule I — the most restrictive federal classification — toward Schedule III. As of now, no final rescheduling order has been completed, and the process remains subject to administrative review and procedural delay. Still, the discussion itself marks a significant break from decades of rigid federal positioning. A move to Schedule III would formally recognize that cannabis has accepted medical use and a lower abuse profile than Schedule I substances, potentially easing research barriers and correcting tax distortions. It would not legalize cannabis federally, nor would it eliminate federal enforcement powers — but it would represent a scientific and regulatory recalibration long delayed. While major economie...
Read more

Fiji’s Hemp Promise: More Than Three Years Lost

-
In July 2022, Fiji’s Parliament amended the Illicit Drugs Control Act to legalize industrial hemp, removing low-THC hemp from the list of prohibited substances. At the time, it was framed as a step toward economic diversification, sustainable agriculture, and new opportunities for local farmers. More than three years later, that promise remains largely unfulfilled. Hemp is legal in law — but not functional in practice. Clear regulations, licensing systems, and customs alignment have still not been fully implemented. As a result, Fiji has watched a global industry grow while remaining effectively locked out of it. This is not a debate about ideology or morality. It is about time lost, income lost, and opportunities denied. The global reality: hemp moved forward without Fiji Since 2022, the global industrial hemp industry has continued to expand. Independent market analysts estimate the global hemp market to be worth around USD 9–11 billion by 2024, with strong growth projected into the ...
Read more