Kenya’s High Court has dismissed a constitutional petition by the Rastafari Society of Kenya that sought to exempt the sacramental use of cannabis from the country’s narcotics laws, dealing a definitive legal blow to a six-year campaign. In a judgment delivered in Nairobi, Justice Bahati Mwamuye ruled that the petitioners had not demonstrated that the cultivation, possession, and consumption of cannabis constitute an indispensable element of the Rastafari faith, noting that their own witnesses acknowledged its use is not mandatory. The court further held that the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act is a law of general application enacted to protect public health and safety, and that any limitation on religious practice was justified under Article 24 of the Constitution.

The Rastafari Society had argued that the ban on cannabis infringed rights to freedom of religion, privacy, and dignity, seeking a limited exemption for private worship and designated places of worship rather than wholesale legalisation. According to the state’s submission, granting such an exemption would undermine enforcement of anti-drug laws and create loopholes for illegal trafficking. Justice Mwamuye found the petition premature, as the applicants had not exhausted existing licensing and exemption mechanisms under the law, and concluded that the evidence presented was inconsistent and insufficient to establish cannabis use as an essential religious practice. The court therefore upheld the constitutionality of the drug laws, which prescribe penalties of up to five years’ imprisonment for personal possession and up to twenty years for cultivation.

Beyond the legal ruling, the judgment devoted significant attention to what Justice Mwamuye described as a growing disconnect between the law and social realities. Observing that cannabis use in Kenya has become “ubiquitous” and that cannabis-derived products are openly sold, the judge questioned whether scarce law enforcement and prosecutorial resources should continue to be directed at small-scale possession cases. He stressed that the issue is not confined to the Rastafarian community but is “a national question that cuts across the entire spectrum of our society,” and called for “frank conversations” on cannabis policy outside the courts and legislature. In Nairobi, the remarks were interpreted by legal analysts as an invitation to re-examine a status quo the judge himself termed “untenable,” though he explicitly cautioned that his observations should not be read as an endorsement of legalisation.

The ruling prompted immediate reaction. Rastafarian representatives gathered at Freedom Corner in Nairobi to protest, with lawyer Danstan Omari confirming an appeal would be lodged, stating the community is “determined to reverse that court ruling and bring back the dignity and respect of the Rastafarians in Kenya.” Some Christian residents welcomed the decision, with one Nairobi resident telling reporters she would not advocate for marijuana use in the country. The judgment arrives seven years after a separate High Court ruling recognised Rastafarianism as a protected religion and found that expelling a student for wearing dreadlocks violated her constitutional rights. The appeal is expected to be filed in the Court of Appeal, while the judge’s call for a national conversation has opened a policy debate that extends well beyond the courtroom.