Interview with: Naziyr Ruwach
Interview By: Heru Amun
Konsider: What is your background?
Naziyr: I am an entrepreneur and I currently run an association that teaches people about our rights, law and government; including, but not limited to, understanding the duties of their lawyers, or litigating pro se. We, also, may stand with someone as their assistance of counsel.
Konsider: Tell me what influenced you into the Cannabis Business?
Naziyr: Well, I have always been a free spirit and thus, I demand the same for my person. So, when I learned that the prohibition of cannabis was for corporate and political gain, despite its multitude of beneficial uses, I surmised that the prohibition was malevolent to people’s physical, mental health, as well to our economy and autonomy.
Konsider: Why did you decide to get involved?
Naziyr: Simple answer! Because I stand for freedom and prohibition of murder is one thing. But prohibition of something beneficial to man and his kind is another for which I stand against. I got involved to benefit the advancement of people.
Complex answer! I studied law, academically and thereafter, as a hobby. As I got into Constitutional Law, I began to understand the foundational aspect of law in this country. This opened my eyes to a few things because in my young, idealistic days I wanted to know how a “free society” could justify living in conflict with their proclaimed principles: 1) our governments have always attempted to circumvents freedoms, 2) that governments do have law that compels them, 3) what those laws are and 4) how to enforce them.
At first, to me this meant that I could influence the plight of my people to be free and not merely conditionally oppressed. History up to 2015, has shown that so called “black” folks have been imprisoned at an exponentially larger rate in proportion to populace. Then, I began to see a bigger picture; a divide and conquer strategy that is in place. Unfortunately, this is the most difficult information to process and implement because if one does not want to see that exist, they cannot be an ally and only distract (me) as a perceived enemy.
Konsider: Where are you finding the resources, magazines, blogs, etc. in the cannabis industry?
Naziyr: Honestly, my first resource on cannabis was a book on botany. I do not recall the title, but I had listened to whispering conversations when I was young about “weed” and it being made “illegal” as a trap and that it was a “harmless” plant. This book stirred me a bit.
Konsider: What are some of the issues with Washington States Legalization?
Naziyr: There are several issues in Washington. 1) The attempt to combine the medical and recreational is mentally clumsy at best. It is not well thought out and seems to be a grab for tax funds. 2) With the way in which Washington taxes the recreational, the legislature is insuring the prominence of the black market. 3) Lawfully, the entire attempt at the legislature to regulate cannabis is “ultra vires”, that is, beyond the authority of Washington Legislature. I am sure that some legal minds may argue that point and others may support it.
My point is that the justification for prohibiting cannabis in the first instance was inadequate (at best & nonexistent lies at worst) and the State and Federal governments failed to show a “compelling interest” to legitimately pass such a law and encroachment of rights.
Konsider: What are some of your views on Jury nullification issues?
Naziyr: A: We must understand that in order to have and maintain any facet of a “free society”, we must have power over government. We mistakenly think that voting professional liars into office is the end all assertion of power. We claim that this is a representative government, yet many of the laws that are passed are, in fact, repugnant to such principles.
Jury nullification has both a grand and a notorious past and many opponents will point to the dark instances of jury nullification. Such as when a so called “white” person was charged with causing some form of harm to so-called “black” folks.
The power of Jury nullification is still legitimately in place. Judges are adamant about keeping this information from the public and any potential juror that asks about such will most likely be excused. With jury nullification the people are powerful and ultimately are the sovereign. Without such, the people are ultimately subject to nine government official priests – I mean… robed justices.
Konsider: So, you think that the American people are sovereign?
Naziyr: Well, understand that there is a difference between a sovereign and popular sovereignty. One in America cannot declare themselves sovereign, but as the collective. But this does not mean that States or Federal governments are sovereign with unchecked power.
The founding principles are that governments (American) are put into place in order to protect individual rights. It is at the beginning of most every constitution in this Union of State Nations. Furthermore, almost every State has some form of Enabling Act, which conditions and limits the authority that is provided to the respective State(s). We tend to end with the Constitution, which ever one, but this is a mistake as before the constitution is established, the state is provided the conditions for establishing a government and constitution. Just read the Enabling Act of 1889 that established conditions of Statehood for North & South Dakota, Montana & Washington.
The only way possible for someone to be free is to be autonomous and understand popular sovereignty. Unfortunately, most of us stop at voting as a means to express and participate in popular sovereignty. We make a huge strategic mistake when we ignore the power of the jury.
Konsider: So do you mean to infer that “the people” caused or enabled the government to institute prohibition?
Naziyr: Yes. How many people are in prison for a nonviolent “crime” behind possession of cannabis? Why has no jury challenged the labeling of cannabis as a “schedule 1” substance? Items on the Schedule 1 list are deemed to have no health or medical benefit. Yet, science has shown us differently. No one has ever been able to show an occurrence of an overdose in cannabis. Yet, aspirin are on store shelves that require no identification. Prohibition on alcohol ended 82 years ago. People are opening their eyes to the hypocrisy, but many are confused on how to overcome these issues and check their “representatives”.
Konsider: What do you think is the most important quality or attribute that has contributed to your success?
Naziyr: Tenacity and critical thinking. When I am interested in or want something, I learn everything I can about the subject, including learning how to oppose such in order to ascertain weaknesses and strengths and foremost determine if it is worth my time and energy. Some of the worst things I have done is waste time on subjects that I did not truly understand because I failed to vet such.
Konsider: What direction do you want to see the industry go?
Naziyr: I would idealistically love for cannabis to be completely deregulated and not decriminalized. Regulation brings other issues to just behind the front. That allows government to continue its unauthorized encroachments.
We have to work on our subconscious issues behind cannabis as well. By that I mean that… I know people that have partaken of cannabis for years prior to legalization, but are still hesitant in accepting the change of decriminalization that is happening now.
Konsider: Interesting! This leads me to ask you to distinguish between decriminalization and deregulation because I sensed the words to be interchangeable. At least, when I am listening to politicians double talk. So, please explain the difference.
Naziyr: Technically, they are merely regulating cannabis. They are creating statutes to regulate it. So, it is not that cannabis is completely lawful, it is conditionally legal. Deregulation would be true decriminalization. This would mean that the current or all anti-cannabis laws on the books are stricken.
That would require the Federal government to take Cannabis off of the “schedule 1” list and admit that cannabis does, in fact, have health properties and benefits. They are beginning to make such admissions now, but essentially people in the States moved to regulate rather than decriminalize and therefore, “deregulation” may be currently impractical.
In order for States to keep the Federal government at bay, they had to regulate cannabis or have a potential face off with Federal government, which would entail raids by DEA, FBI, Homeland Security, and forth…and conflicts with local communities and law enforcement.
On another tip, one technically cannot legally grow & sell industrial cannabis in order to develop and take advantage of its many beneficial usages because the regulations that have been put into place do not address industrial cannabis, specifically. The DEA is currently still targeting crops of Industrial hemp.
Konsider: C`mon, Naz! I have clarity on what you are saying. And it is mind-boggling to say the least. Please, tell me…why hasn`t marijuana been deregulated at least?
Naziyr: Simple answer. Corporations lobby politicians to maintain this status quo. Also, the people are not educated on this and many other crucial topics. If you want a sincere representative government, then take money out of politics or restrict retention of campaign funds and maybe, career favors.
A perfect example showcases itself every Thursday, Sunday and Monday with all of these grown men of the NFL wearing pink for Breast Cancer awareness in order to find a cure. All of them should be wearing the leaf because science says that the cure currently exists. MONEY talks and powerful people use it in order to maintain the status quo. Education is a bit slow in this society. But this educating awareness and realization of the “banana in the tail pipe” (trickery) may happen eventually.
Konsider: Would there be anything you would like to add that I didn’t cover here in this interview?
Naziyr: That is too broad a question – as this would end up a chapter for a book. I would love to express to people the importance of balance. We are told that we live in a free country. Yet, we express and indulge such freedom in imbalance of fun and career. We fail to understand that freedom is not free and REQUIRES education. It is impossible to have one without the other.
We must understand law. I am not saying that we should all be lawyers and never hire an attorney. On the contrary, I am saying that in order to control the attorney that we hire, we must know what we want of him/her and demand performance. One can demand in ignorance, but will merely prove that they are incompetent and unworthy of the freedom given.
So to shorten the answer: Learn your rights and enforce them.
If someone wants to know how to contact you and your services where do they go?