Abstract

The principle of cognitive liberty is assessed as a ground for challenging the constitutionality of the criminalisation of psilocybin mushrooms. To do so, s 12 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, is analysed, determining that s 12(2) is not a numerus clausa and is capable of enforcing further protections and/or entitlements, such as cognitive liberty. Further, it is suggested that the interpretation of s 12(2)(b) offers protection to both body and mind, and as such, also protecting the cognitive liberty right. Having established that the Constitution protects the right afforded by the principle cognitive liberty, it is deduced that the current criminalisation of psilocybin mushrooms – a means through which an individual may exercise their cognitive liberty rights – in terms of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act and Medicines and Related Substances Act, conflict with the rights established in s 12 of the Constitution. A s 36 limitation of rights analysis is presented, detailing that the criminalisation of psilocybin mushrooms is not justifiable when the nature and importance of the limited right are weighed against the importance and purpose of the criminalisation. As such, this article concludes that the current criminalising legislation is not justifiable.

摘要

认知自由原则被评估为质疑裸盖菇素蘑菇定罪的合宪性的基础。为此，对 1996 年南非共和国宪法第 12 条进行了分析，确定第 12(2) 条不是物权条款并有能力实施进一步的保护和/或权利，例如认知自由。此外，有人认为对第 12(2)(b) 条的解释为身体和心灵提供了保护，因此也保护了认知自由权。确定《宪法》保护认知自由原则所赋予的权利后，可以推断，目前《毒品和毒品贩运法》和《药品》中对裸盖菇素（个人可以行使其认知自由权利的一种手段）的刑事定罪和相关物质法，与宪法第 12 条规定的权利相冲突。提出了第 36 条权利限制分析，详细说明，当权衡有限权利的性质和重要性与刑事定罪的重要性和目的时，将裸盖菇素定罪是不合理的。因此，本文的结论是，现行的刑事定罪立法是不合理的。