Guinea sets a separate penalty for small personal possession and growing

Guinea’s replacement Penal Code took effect on 26 October 2016 with a separate penalty for small personal possession, purchase and growing. It set one to three years, a fine equal to three times the value seized, or both, making the purpose and value of the drugs important to a case.

Personal possession already had a separate punishment

The 1998 Penal Code had punished personal possession and use with six months to two years, a fine, or both. Ordinary cultivation carried ten to twenty years, a fine, or both.

President Alpha Condé promulgated the replacement in October 2016. Its final article made it effective on promulgation. The new personal-quantity rule expressly included growing, giving a small personal crop a shorter range than ordinary production.

A small quantity had no fixed gram limit

The quantity had to be small enough to be considered intended for the person’s own consumption. The code gave no numerical limit in grams or plants.

The one-to-three-year tier covered high-risk plants and substances, including cannabis oil, as well as cannabis derivatives other than oil. A court could choose the fine alone, imprisonment alone, or both. The fine was calculated from the value of the drugs seized.

Ordinary high-risk production and trafficking retained a ten-to-twenty-year range, with a fine of three times the seized value or either punishment alone. Using controlled drugs outside a medical prescription remained prohibited, and the drugs could be confiscated independently of prosecution.

Treatment came with a penalty for refusal

Courts could compel a convicted drug user to undergo treatment or care instead of or alongside punishment. Refusal carried two to five years in prison.

The code also allowed additional penalties, including professional or travel restrictions and permanent exclusion of convicted foreigners. These possibilities meant a drug case could have consequences beyond its main prison term or fine.

A later cannabis hearing tested possession and valuation

At a Dixinn hearing in January 2019, eleven young men faced cannabis allegations after arrests in Ratoma. Their lawyer, Abdoulaye Barry, challenged the evidence of possession and the basis for the fines sought by the prosecutor.

The defence argued that the seized drug’s value had not been shown. The judge deferred judgment. The case made the distinction between an allegation of consumption, proof of possession and valuation of the seized substance a practical issue for people prosecuted under Guinea’s drug rules.^[1][2][3]