ST. GEORGE’S, GRENADA:---  In a historic shift for Caribbean drug policy, Grenada’s Parliament has approved comprehensive legislation to decriminalize cannabis for adult use and establish a framework for a medicinal cannabis industry. The new measures represent a significant modernization of the island nation's laws, balancing personal liberties with strict public health regulations.

The legislation, passed this week, officially decriminalizes the possession of small amounts of cannabis for adults and acknowledges the religious rights of the Rastafari community, while simultaneously launching a regulated therapeutic sector.

New Possession and Cultivation Limits

Under the new law, adults aged 21 and older are now permitted to possess up to 56 grams of cannabis and 15 grams of cannabis resin. The legislation also introduces home cultivation rights, allowing households to register to grow up to four plants for private use.

These changes are designed to move users out of the criminal justice system. A major component of the bill is a retroactive amnesty program. The legislation mandates the automatic expungement of criminal records for minor cannabis offenses and the immediate discontinuation of pending legal proceedings for specified small amounts.

Religious Freedom and Rastafari Rights

A key social justice element of the bill affirms the constitutional rights of the Rastafari community. For decades, Rastafarians across the Caribbean have advocated for the right to use cannabis as a sacrament. Grenada's new law formally recognizes this right, permitting the use of cannabis within registered places of worship and at special events. Specific allowances for cultivation by the community are also included in the legislative package.

Foundation for a Medicinal Industry

Beyond personal use, the government is laying the groundwork for an economic sector focused on wellness. The legislation sets the stage for a "regulated medicinal and therapeutic cannabis industry."

According to government officials, a comprehensive national cannabis policy framework is currently in development. This forthcoming framework will detail strict protocols for cultivation, processing, research, and medicinal distribution.

Attorney General Senator Claudette Joseph acknowledged the region's shifting landscape during the proceedings. "Grenada is one of the last jurisdictions to now move in the direction of the decriminalization of cannabis and ultimately the establishment of a medical cannabis industry," she stated, noting the country is now aligning itself with broader global and regional trends in drug policy reform.

Public Safety and Health Remain Priorities

Despite the liberalization of possession laws, officials have stressed that this is not a free-for-all. Public consumption of cannabis remains strictly prohibited. Furthermore, the government has instituted severe criminal penalties for anyone found supplying cannabis to minors.

Health Minister Phillip Telesford emphasized that the government's primary focus remains public well-being rather than immediate profit.

"Our policy of decriminalization will be peered with strict regulations to protect the youths and accompanied by a robust public education campaign," Telesford said. He added that there would be strong enforcement against driving while intoxicated. "The Government prioritizes health and safety over short-term economic gains."

Telesford also clarified that while the bill allows for decriminalized possession, it does not legalize a commercial recreational market at this stage. Recreational sales remain prohibited, with the commercial focus strictly limited to the controlled medical and therapeutic sectors.

This legislative milestone places Grenada alongside other Caribbean nations that have recently moved to reform outdated cannabis laws, acknowledging the plant's cultural significance and potential therapeutic value while maintaining a cautious approach to public safety.

The Hague,NETHERLANDS:---  In a world first, a Dutch court today ruled that the Netherlands breached the European Convention on Human Rights by not protecting and discriminating against citizens living in the Dutch-Caribbean special municipality of Bonaire from the impacts of the climate crisis, and ordered the State to set new, fair climate targets.
Onnie Emerenciana, plaintiff in the Bonaire Climate Case, said:
“I am very happy. Today, we are making history. Finally, The Hague can no longer ignore us. The court is drawing a line in the sand. Our lives, our culture, and our country are being taken seriously. The State can no longer look the other way. The next step is to free up funding and expertise for concrete action plans to protect our island. We truly have to do this together; Bonaire cannot solve this alone.”
Marieke Vellekoop, Director of Greenpeace Netherlands, said:
“This is truly a historic victory. People on Bonaire are finally getting recognition that the government is discriminating against them and must protect them from extreme heat and rising sea levels. The State must also contribute its fair share to staying below 1.5 degrees of warming by implementing new climate targets. This means that the reduction of Dutch greenhouse gas emissions must be accelerated significantly. This is a huge breakthrough. The current climate policy is insufficient, and the cabinet can no longer get away with failing climate policy. With this ruling in hand, communities have a powerful new asset to hold governments to account.”
In a historic ruling, the Hague District Court found in favour of the residents of Bonaire and Greenpeace Netherlands, observing that the Netherlands is doing too little to protect Bonaire residents from the impacts of the climate crisis.
The Court found the Dutch State in violation of multiple provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (Art 8 and 14 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 12), citing discriminatory treatment of citizens of Bonaire and a failure by the Dutch State to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect people against the current impacts of climate change.[1]
The Dutch court is the first court in the world to rule that the State is discriminating against its own people by failing to develop and adopt a climate adaptation plan.
The court agreed that Bonaire residents are already experiencing climate impacts, such as rising sea levels, extreme weather, and dying coral reefs. It noted that these impacts will intensify under current policies, providing even greater urgency for a coherent and integrated climate adaptation policy for Bonaire than for the European Netherlands.
This case sets a precedent with global relevance. It is the first time that a European court has ruled that a country must take concrete adaptation and mitigation measures to protect all of its citizens, no matter where they live, from the impacts of climate change.
Michael Bacon, lawyer at Kennedy Van der Laan, said:
“With this ruling the court has done precisely what an independent court in a democratic society must do: determine whether national policy complies with national and international law, and specifically with human rights. The court correctly ruled that Dutch climate policy does not comply with international law. It is now up to the State to improve its climate policy.”

Notes:
[1] The Court Judgement
[2] On January 11, 2024, residents of Bonaire and Greenpeace went to court to demand fair climate policy from the State, after earlier research commissioned by Greenpeace Netherlands confirmed that the climate crisis is already affecting daily life on Bonaire and showed how, under current policies, climate change would continue to intensify risks for the island and its residents in the future. The hearings took place on October 7 and 8, 2025, and were attended by the eight plaintiffs. Greenpeace was assisted in this case by lawyers from Kennedy van der Laan.
Previously, the International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled that states must keep global warming below 1.5 degrees and that their climate plans must demonstrate maximum ambition, taking into account historical emissions and economical and technological capacity of the State. This is the first climate case in Europe, in which these international recommendations have been applied.

The Hague, NETHERLANDS:--- Historic victory: Dutch court declares climate policy inadequate in Bonaire climate case
The Hague, 28 January 2026
The District Court of The Hague ruled today that the Dutch State’s current climate policy infringes upon the human rights of the residents of the Dutch Caribbean island of Bonaire and results in unfair treatment compared to citizens in the European part of the Netherlands. With the current climate targets and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the State is not complying with international agreements. In doing so, the State is acting unlawfully towards the residents of Bonaire. Furthermore, the State has not taken sufficient measures to protect the inhabitants of Bonaire in the climate crisis. The court orders the State to draw up an adaptation plan and implement it by 2030 at the latest. The State must also set new binding targets for the entire Dutch economy within 18 months to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make a fair contribution to the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees.
Marieke Vellekoop, director of Greenpeace Netherlands:
‘This is truly a historic victory. People on Bonaire are finally getting recognition that the government is discriminating against them and must protect them from extreme heat and rising sea levels. The State must also contribute its fair share to staying below 1.5 degrees of warming by implementing new climate targets. This means that the reduction of Dutch greenhouse gas emissions must be accelerated significantly. This is a huge breakthrough. The current climate policy is insufficient, and the cabinet can no longer get away with failing climate policy. With this ruling in hand, communities have a powerful new asset to hold governments to account.’
Onnie Emerenciana, plaintiff in the Bonaire Climate Case:
‘I am very happy. Today we are making history. Finally, The Hague can no longer ignore us. Today, the court is drawing a line in the sand. Our lives, our culture and our country are being taken seriously. The State can no longer look away. The next step now is to make funds and expertise available for concrete action plans to protect our island. We really have to do this together; Bonaire cannot solve this on its own.’
A detailed press release with further explanation of the ruling will follow later.

PHILIPSBURG:--- The streets of Sint Maarten are on the brink of a filthy disaster, and for once, you can’t blame the men and women picking up the trash.

A furious coalition of local waste haulers—All Waste In Place, Garden Boyz, and WILCO N.V.—has finally drawn a line in the sand. In a blistering formal grievance sent to the Minister of VROMI Patrice Gumbs Jr, these companies have exposed the rot at the core of the government's new Terms of Reference (TOR) for 2026-2029. The document isn't just a contract; it’s a suicide pact for local businesses and a health hazard for the public.

The government is playing a dangerous game with public health, demanding champagne service on a tap-water budget while tightening the noose around the necks of the very people keeping our island clean.

The Budget Myth

Let’s look at the numbers, because the government clearly hasn't. The proposed budget of XCG 6.8 million is an insult to basic economics. We are living in a world of skyrocketing fuel prices, expensive parts, and rising insurance premiums. Yet, the Ministry expects haulers to do more with less.

They want 24-hour on-call service. They want night coverage. They want emergency response teams ready to jump at a moment's notice. But they refuse to pay for the standby wages and overtime required to make that happen. They are asking haulers to operate at a loss, effectively demanding that private companies subsidize a public service out of their own pockets. As the haulers rightly pointed out: "Garbage collection is not just a contract. This is public health. This is food on tables."

When the budget doesn't cover the work, the shortfall comes out of the families behind these companies. It is a direct attack on local livelihoods.

Unfair Burdens and shifting Blame

The hypocrisy in the new TOR is staggering. The government is requiring haulers to pay for repairs to government-owned bins—assets the contractors don't own and won't retain. They want contractors to install expensive GPS tracking on trucks but refuse to foot the bill for the installation or monthly fees.

Even worse is the "Split Parcel" clause. The government has reserved the right to slice up a winning bid and hand pieces of it to a third party, someone who may not have even qualified or bid fairly. This makes a mockery of the tender process. It opens the door to nepotism, incompetence, and sabotage. If this third party fails to collect the trash, guess who gets the blame? The original hauler.

The Tipping Fee Trap

Perhaps the most delusional proposal is the introduction of tipping fees without a plan to control illegal dumping. The government wants to charge for dumping, which anyone with common sense knows will lead to the public dumping their trash at collection points instead of the dump.

The haulers will then be fined for not keeping those collection points clean, while the government sits back and collects fees. It is a rigged system designed to punish the hauler for the public's bad behavior and the government's lack of enforcement.

A Recipe for Disaster

The haulers have issued a 24-hour deadline for a response, and they are right to do so. This situation has gone too far. We are looking at a system that forces local operators to invest in new equipment they can't afford, denies them reasonable contract extensions to recuperate costs, and treats them like the enemy rather than essential partners in public health.

If the streets of Sint Maarten pile up with garbage in the coming weeks, do not look at the trucks. Look at the Ministry that tried to starve them out. The haulers have carried this country on their backs long enough. It is time the government stopped treating them like trash.