Jersey’s Ministry for External Relations on 29 June 2026 passed the Proceeds of Crime (Cannabis Exemption – List of Jurisdictions) (Jersey) Amendment Order 2026 (the Jersey Schedule). It reinstates South Africa as a place to do cannabis business with after the country was removed from Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the international ‘grey list’.
The ‘Jersey Schedule’ exemption “provides that the production, supply, use, export or import of cannabis (or derivatives) that is lawful in an approved jurisdiction is not treated as “criminal conduct” under the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999.
“Consequently, the proceeds of such activity are not treated as criminal property in Jersey” .
The following points are drawn directly from the statement issued by the Ministry.
Key point for compliance teams:
· South Africa was removed from the list in May 2023 after the FATF placed it under increased monitoring.
· The FATF removed South Africa from increased monitoring in October 2025.
· Jersey has taken approximately eight months to reinstate it. This is a material delay.
Action for compliance officers:
· Treat this as a priority item. The combination of South Africa’s re-addition and the clear 8-month implementation lag means firms must actively manage the transition date rather than assume automatic alignment with FATF decisions.
· If you identify any exposure to non-listed jurisdictions, escalate immediately to your MLRO and consider obtaining specific legal advice on remediation.
The Ministry says that the following immediate actions are required:
1. Update policies, procedures and risk assessments (by 6 July 2026 at the latest)
· Add South Africa to your list of approved jurisdictions for cannabis-related activity.
· Update your:
o Business Risk Assessment,
o Customer Risk Assessments, and
o any cannabis-specific policies.
· Ensure staff training reflects the change.
· Document the effective date clearly (pre-6 July vs post-6 July 2026).
2. Conduct an urgent exposure review (recommended within 7–14 days).
Review all current, pipeline and historical relationships with any cannabis or cannabis-related exposure (direct or indirect). This must include:
· Funds and investment managers with cannabis holdings or mandates
· Clients or counterparties involved in cultivation, processing, distribution, or ancillary services
· Indirect exposure through holding companies, SPVs, or supply chains
· Any fees, carried interest, or distributions derived from cannabis activity
Map every jurisdiction involved against the current approved list.
· The consolidated Order is available here: https://www.jerseylaw.je/laws/current/ro_87_2021.
Pay particular attention to any exposure to countries not on the approved list, including but not limited to:
· South Africa (until 6 July 2026)
· Any other jurisdiction that has ever been removed or was never included
· Emerging cannabis markets (e.g. certain Latin American, African or Asian jurisdictions)
How a Jersey firm could be breaking the law – practical examples
Even where the underlying cannabis activity is lawful in the foreign jurisdiction, managing investments or business with exposure to a non-listed country can create serious criminal and regulatory exposure in Jersey.
· Example 1 – Investment fund
o A Jersey-regulated fund invests in a South African cannabis cultivator (lawful in South Africa).
o Until 6 July 2026, the jurisdiction is not approved. The proceeds of that investment can be treated as criminal property in Jersey.
o The fund, its manager, and any Jersey service providers could be dealing in criminal property (contrary to the Proceeds of Crime Law). This risk continues until the new Order takes effect.
· Example 2 – Investment manager/adviser
o A Jersey investment manager receives management fees or performance fees derived from a portfolio that includes cannabis assets in a non-approved jurisdiction.
o Those fees can themselves become criminal property.
o The firm and its MLRO may have failed to identify and report suspicion.
· Example 3 – Bank or administrator
o A Jersey bank or fund administrator processes subscriptions, redemptions or distributions linked to cannabis proceeds from a non-listed jurisdiction without applying enhanced due diligence or treating the relationship as higher risk.
o This can amount to inadequate systems and controls and potential facilitation of money laundering.
· Example 4 – Legacy or indirect exposure
o A Jersey firm acquired a portfolio in 2022 that included cannabis exposure in a jurisdiction later removed from the list (or never added).
o The firm has continued to manage or hold that exposure without reassessing the position after the 2023 removal or during the current gap.
o This ongoing management can constitute repeated dealing in criminal property.
· Example 5 – MLRO / compliance failure
o The MLRO or compliance function becomes aware of cannabis-related exposure to a non-listed jurisdiction but does not escalate, conduct enhanced due diligence, or consider a SAR.
o This can breach both the criminal law and the JFSC’s Codes of Practice and AML Handbook requirements.
Recommended immediate compliance checklist
· Full mapping of all cannabis-related exposure by jurisdiction (current + pipeline)
· Gap analysis against the approved list
· Update of all risk assessments and policies before 6 July 2026
· Review of any fees or distributions received from cannabis activity in non-listed jurisdictions
· Enhanced due diligence and senior management sign-off on any South African cannabis exposure until 6 July 2026
· Training refresh for relevant teams
· Board / MLRO report on findings and remediation plan
