IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No.: CCT 11 and 12/95 In the matter between: THE STATE and BHULWANA And in the matter between: THE STATE and GWADISO AFFIDAVIT I, the undersigned, FRANCES RIX AMES, do hereby make oath and say that: 1. I am a former Associate Professor of Neurology. 2. All of the facts deposed to in this affidavit are, unless indicated to the contrary, within my personal knowledge and belief. 44 V Page 2 3. My professional qualifications and experience are the following: 3.1 I hold the qualifications of MB.CHB, M.D., M.Med, and DPM. 3.2 I have been registered as a neurologist since 1955 and was head*of the Neurology Department at the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Cape Town and at Groote Schuur Hospital from 1976 to 1985. 3.3 I am a qualified, but not a registered, psychiatrist. 3.4 I was awarded an Associate Professorship in the 1970's by the University of Cape Town for research work. Amongst my research publications are those set out in annexure "A" hereto. 3.5 I am presently in semi-retirement, but continue to hold consulting and teaching appointments at various hospitals in the Western Cape including the Psychiatry Department at Groote Schuur Hospital, and at the EEG and Out-Patients Clinic at Valkenberg Hospital. 3.6 Although my qualification, professorial appointment and research have been in the general discipline of Neurology, a specific area in which I have practised extensively and in which I have conducted research is the neurological and general medical effects which marijuana has on the human body and on the brain. Page 3 3.7 During the course of my practice and research over 37 years I have dealt with many patients who are consumers of marijuana and I have accordingly reasonably frequently had exposure to the sociological aspects of their consumption of marijuana. 3.8 By virtue of my qualifications and my experience I have given evidence as an expert in various courts in South Africa on the medical effects of marijuana. 4. The evidence which I tender to this Honourable Court is: 4.1 There is worldwide research which indicates that marijuana has specific medicinal properties. 4.2 Many patients genuinely believe marijuana to have medicinal properties and possess and consume it in the bonafide belief that it does assist them in their ailments. 4.3 Patients whom I have treated or whom I have interviewed do, by virtue of their belief in the consumption of marijuana, purchase quantities for their own consumption and purchase such quantities as may easily exceed 115 grams. Furthermore, any patient who has chronic disease is entitled to a stock of medication, which stock may possibly exceed 115 grams of marijuana. Page 4 5. Concerning the research which indicates that marijuana has medicinal properties: 5.1 Although I am informed that this fact is not central to the question to be decided by this Honourable Court, there is ongoing research which is conducted worldwide on the medicinal properties of cannabis sativa (dagga, marijuana). 5.2 Such research seems to indicate that marijuana can assist in the treatment of certain specified medical conditions, including multiple sclerosis, the nausea and vomiting accompanying chemotherapy, AIDS, glaucoma, movement disorders, asthma and epilepsy. 5.3 That research also indicates that patients do consume the substance in the hope, and the belief, that it will satisfactorily treat their ailment. 5.4 I annex hereto as annexures "B" and "C" copies of the articles written by some of the researchers who have conducted research in this area. Those articles record positive results from the consumption of marijuana in the treatment of multiple sclerosis and of epilepsy. Similar research has been conducted with respect to the other medical conditions referred to above. 6. Concerning the possession and consumption of marijuana in the belief that it treats ailments: Page 5 6.1 I have on various occasions treated and interviewed patients who have consumed marijuana in the genuine and bona fide belief that such consumption assists them in their ailment. 6.2 Although one may tend to be cynical about whether the possession of a banned substance could be bona fide, there are patients, the details of whom are irrelevant for the present purposes, whom I have treated, and whom I am completely persuaded possessed and consumed marijuana in the genuine belief that it would assist them in their condition. In this regard, I specifically refer to the case of Francois Le Blond who is a sufferer of multiple sclerosis, and who has possessed marijuana for the purposes of assisting him in the relief of his symptoms. I refer to him specifically as his case has enjoyed some publicity in the media recently. 6.3 Concerning my own experience in the treatment of epilepsy, I was consulted about a patient who was accused in a criminal matter in the Magistrates' Court for Port Elizabeth. In that matter I was consulted on the question of evidence which was to be submitted to the effect that the particular patient had consumed the drug believing it to assist him in the treatment of epilepsy. The Court accepted as a fact that the patient's epilepsy had improved with the consumption of marijuana after having this opinion confirmed by another expert who appeared to give evidence in court. Page 6 7. Concerning the quantities which are possessed by patients for their treatment: 7.1 The administration of drugs to sufferers of various chronic diseases listed above is accepted practice. It is routine practice for hospital dispensaries to issue such patients with a full month's supply of medication. Provision is often made to repeat this for three months. 7.2 I refer to the case of Mr Le Blond. He is a patient who is wheelchair-bound and who possesses marijuana for his own use. By virtue of his disability he tended to accumulate sufficiently large quantities to preclude his having to send someone to purchase other quantities in the near future. During the course of my interviews with the patient it became clear that as a fact he did not deal in the substance but possessed the marijuana for his own consumption. The quantity which had been in his possession well exceeded 115 grams, as it represented sufficient medication for 2 years. 7.3 In general it may be said that patients who obtain illicit drugs must accumulate sufficient quantities of them so as to reduce the risk of arrest and prosecution. Thus, as the purchase of an illicit drug exposes one to the risk of prosecution, the single purchase of a large amount obviously carries less risk than the repeated purchases of the small amounts. Page 7 7.4 A further factor with a drug of the nature as cannabis is that the plant extract varies in potency. It is therefore clearly sensible for the consumer of cannabis to acquire as large a quantity of potent cannabis as possible should the opportunity arise. Such purchases of cannabis may thus easily exceed the amount of 115 grams. 8. Although this does not arise as a result of my own research, it has been reported in medical journals that individuals use cannabis for reasons other than social or medical purposes, and specifically also for religious purposes. It has been reported by one research group that members of a cult used between 2 and 4 ounces of "ganja-tobacco mixture" daily. That quantity equates with between 60 and 120 grams. Ganja is a form of cannabis sativa that is about three times more potent than marijuana. I annex hereto as annexure "DH a copy of the article written by the researchers in that case. 9. I do not hold myself out as an expert in the sociological aspects of marijuana consumption and am regrettably unable to place before this Honourable Court reliable statistics concerning the numbers of people who possess quantities in excess of 115 grams for their own consumption, as opposed to for the purpose of dealing. However, in my experience the possession of 115 grams of marijuana is not unreasonable, and is indeed acceptable in patients with chronic neurological and medical diseases. Page 8 10. The statutory presumption which relates to the possession of 115 grams or more of marijuana does therefore not reflect the factual situation relating to persons who possess and consume marijuana for medical purposes. nfv *vvU-^| ' * FRANCES RIX AMES I certify that: 1. The Deponent acknowledged to me that: 1.1 She knows and understands the contents of this declaration; 1.2 She has no objection to taking the prescribed oath; 1.3 She considers the oath to be binding on her conscience; 2. The Deponent thereafter uttered the words: "I swear that the contents of this declaration are true, so help me God." 3. The Deponent signed this declaration in my presence at the address set out hereunder on this the day of 1995. COMMKSKJNER OF OATHS [AMES] ANNEXURE "A" 1. "A clinical and metabolic study of acute intoxication with cannabis sativa and its role in the model psychoses": Journal of mental science (1958) Vol. 104 page 972. 2. Ames et al: "Effects of the oral administration of cannabis sativa (dagga) on thacma baboons (Papio ursinus)": South African Medical Journal (1979) page 1127. 3. "The effects of Cannabis sativa on the behaviour of adult female thacme baboons (Papio ursinus) in captivity": Levett, Saayman & Ames: Psychopharmacology (1977) Vol. 58 page 79. 4. "Cannabis and the brain: David Castle and Frances Ames (in press) Australian Journal of Psychiatry: March 1995.