in this lecture we shall discuss the fundamental human rights provided under the 1992 constitution now it is important for everybody in ghana to know the fundamental human rights provided under the 1992 constitution because sad provisions actually define our existence and because of its monumental importance in our constitutional framework the provisions on human rights contained in chapter 5 have been made entrenched provisions under the 1992 constitution and because they are in training provisions it means that they require a special amendment procedure if they want to make any amendment to the human rights provisions contained in chapter 5 of our 1992 constitution it shall require you to go through a special amendment procedure which will even involve the whole body politic of ghana you would have to go through a referendum involving the whole body politics of ghana before you can amend them that highlights the crucial importance of the fundamental human rights provisions contained in chapter 5 of the 1992 constitution now before i begin the discussion on chapter 5 of the 1992 constitution it is important to mention that the provisions contained in chapter 5 of the 1992 constitution they begin from article 12 and the end at article 33 of the constitution they begin from article 12 and the end at article 33 of the constitution now even though chapter 5 of the constitution is headed fundamental human rights and freedoms it is important to note that there are some other human rights provisions that are still in the 1992 constitution but which you will not see under chapter 5 of the constitution for example the right to vote the right to vote has been provided for under article 42 of the constitution and this is in chapter 7 of the constitution but you cannot say that because the right to vote is not found in chapter 5 then it is not a human rights so all i'm saying is that even though chapter 5 of the constitution which starts from article 12 and ends at 33. even though that chapter 5 is devoted to fundamental human rights there are some other human rights provisions that you can see in other portions of the constitution like the right to vote contained in article 42 of the constitution and even if you look at chapter 12 of the constitution it provides for the freedom and independence of the media freedom and independence of the media if you look at that chapter 12 as well you find out some important media rights that are guaranteed under the constitution now even though there are some provisions that are not in chapter five it is important to know that this letter shall be limited to the fundamental human rights that have been provided for and guaranteed under chapter 5 of our constitution which begins from article 12 and ends at article 33 of the constitution we shall go through these articles extensively and then indicate how the case law has thrown more lights on such human rights provisions contained in chapter 5 of the 1992 constitution now before i also begin with a discussion of chapter five you will notice that i have mentioned that the fundamental human rights provisions are contained in articles 12 to article potentially this indicates the conscious efforts of the framers of the 1992 constitution to have elaborate provisions to deal with the protection of fundamental human rights but the framers of the constitution were very careful in not restricting the scope of human rights that may be recognized and enforced by the courts and therefore there is language in article 33 5 to indicate that even though a conscious effort has been made under articles 12 12 33 there's a conscious effort to indicate that the rights provided for under chapter 5 are not exhaustive and this is what article 33 plus 5 says article 33 plus 5 reads as follows and i quote the rights duties declarations and guarantees relating to fundamental human rights and freedoms specifically mentioned in this chapter shall not be regarded as excluding others not specifically mentioned which are considered to be inherent in a democracy and intended to secure the freedom and dignity of mind emphasis shall not be regarded as excluding others not specifically mentioned which are considered to be inherent in the democracy and intended to secure the freedom and dignity of man full stop so the lawmaker has been careful to tell you that the provisions contained in chapter 5 shall not be regarded as excluding the others not specifically mentioned but which are considered to be inherent in the democracy and intended to secure the dignity of man now having said sue we i can now begin with a discussion of the fundamental human rights that have been contained in chapter five and as we go through from article 12 and we strive to get all the ways that 33 bear in mind that the rights contained in chapter 5 starting from article 12 to 33 they shall not be taken to be excluded right not specifically mentioned in the chapter but which are deemed to be inherent in the democracy and to the dignity of man so we shall not begin with article 12 of the 1992 constitution article 12 meets as follows and i quote the fundamental human rights and freedoms in this chapter shall be respected and upheld by the executive legislature and judiciary and all other organs of governments and its agencies and where applicable to them by all natural and legal persons in ghana and shall be enforceable by the courts as provided for in this constitution then article 12 every person in ghana whatever his race place of origin political opinion religion creed or gender shall be entitled to the fundamental human rights and freedoms of the individual contained in this chapter but subject to respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the protection of the public interests fulfill that is article 12 now there are some key things to note about article 12 of the constitution article 12 gave a clear indication that even though we have our fundamental human rights of the individual provided in chapter five article 12 provides that those rights are subject to the respect for the rights and freedoms of others that even though you have your fundamental human rights and freedoms under article 12 of the constitution such rights are subject to the respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the public interests what does the statement mean it means that the rights and freedoms provided for under chapter five they are rights which are not absolutes they are not absolute you cannot say that because you have a freedom of speech so you can speak in whichever way whatsoever that you want article 12 clause 2 is saying that even though you have the fundamental human rights and freedoms those wives are subject to the respect for the rights and freedoms of others so remember that even though you have a freedom of speech under article 21 another person also has a freedom of dignity right to dignity and article 15. so if you have a right to dignity and it means that even though you have the freedom of speech and article 21 when you are expressing yourself you should know that it is subject to the right of dignity of another person so you cannot go somewhere and then be defeating somebody in any way that you want even though you have a freedom of movement and article 21 remember that people also have right to property under article 18 and the right of privacy and logical eating and so even though you have the freedom to move about free it means that you must respect the privacy of other persons guaranteed and that's the 18 so that you don't just walk into somebody's house and you say that i have a freedom of movement so article 12 plus two is not that the right we enjoy under chapter five they shall be subject to their respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the public interest meaning that the rights contained in chapter 5 they are not absolute they are flew and they are also dynamic now who are the categories of persons who must respect fundamental human rights in ghana look at the language of article 12 cross one variable itself as the people who have the obligation to respect fundamental human rights and freedoms article 12 was once said that the fundamental human rights and freedoms enshrined in this chapter shall be respected and upheld by the executive legislature and judiciary and all other organs of government and its agencies it means that we are told that the government is one machinery that must make sure that they are respecting the fundamental human rights and freedoms provided for under chapter 5 of the constitution article article 12 is telling us that the government must uphold and respect the fundamental human rights and freedoms what it says the fundamental human rights and freedoms enshrined in the chapter shall be respected and upheld by the executive legislature and judiciary and all other organs of government and these agencies it also indicated that all natural and legal persons must also respect the fundamental human rights provider for chapter five all natural and legal persons it means that the people who must respect the fundamental human rights and freedoms as for in chapter 5 is not only the executive it's not only the legislature it's not only the judiciary it's not only the organs of government but natural and legal persons in ghana must also respect the fundamental human rights and freedoms of particular persons and therefore a natural person like a human being would have to respect the rights and freedoms of others a legal person a company must also respect the rights and freedom of his employees so that is what articulator tells us at the top tells us that the people who must respect the fundamental human rights is not only the government but we also have natural and legal tests and you see that under clause 1 of article 12 and also article 12 clearly indicates that the rights contained in chapter 5 shall be enforceable by the courts as provided for in this constitution shall be enforceable by the courts at the battlefield in this constitution in order for persons to understand the statement shall be enforceable by the courts as provided for in this constitution it is important for good students of conventional law in order to remember the case of india was iria was a place example of a case where under the 1960 constitution when the question was about article 13 of the 1960 constitution the supreme court held that those declarations made by the president that he was going to respect some rights and freedoms and those rights those statements were not enforceable in the court of law as enforceable rights and so even though people have been detained without trial the court held that the president had the power to detain people without trial and the court did not go into enforcing the rights of the people to let them come out because they were detained without trial that was the situation under the 1960 constitution and therefore if you see over here under article 12 that the right shall be enforceable by the courts as for whether for this constitution it is because we know where we are coming from we know there was a time in our era and in the 1960 constitution where there was a question about whether some rights were enforceable in the court of law and so remember that under article 12 the human rights provisions are also enforceable by the costs as provided for in this constitution the next provision is articulating of the constitution clause 1 of article 13 research forus and that quotes no person shall be deprived of his life intentionally except in the exercise of the execution of a sentence of the courts in respect of a criminal offence under the laws of ghana of which he has been convicted so article 13 affects what we know as the right to life he says no person shall be deprived of his life intentionally except in the exercise of the execution of a sentence of a horse in respect of a criminal offence under the laws of ghana of which he has been convicted so as article 13 plus one clearly affirms the right to life but it creates an assumption that even though we all have our right to life that right of life may be taken away from us in the exercise of the execution of a sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence under the laws of ghana or which has been convicted so for example under section 46 of the criminal offences acts of 1916 act 29 it has been provided that a person who commits murder shall be liable to suffer death and so even though after protecting of our constitution guarantees your right to life under section 46 of the criminal offences act 1960 at 29. it is that your life to life can be taken away from you it is for the purpose of executing the sentence of the courts at 29 section 46 it is clearly over there so the right to life is not absolute it can be taken away from you in the exercise of a lawful execution of a sentence of the court also linked to article 13 is article 3 plus 3 of the constitution article 3 plus 3 indicates that even a person by himself or in concert with others by any violence or lawful means he suspend or you overthrow or you have to get the constitution or you attempt to abrogate any part of it they say that you shall be deemed to have committed the offence of high treason and on conviction you shall be given the death penalty and so article 3 plus 3 of the constitution also provides that a person who commits high trading shall be liable to suffer the death penalty and so it is not true that the constitution of ghana prohibits the death penalty is not true the constitution of ghana recognizes the death penalty as legal so the dead penalty in ghana is constitutional and it is still in our law books in fact as recent as in 2011 in the case of dexter johnson versus the republic dexter it spells d e x t e r johnson versus the republic reported in 2011 through supreme court of ghana law report at page 601 in that case the supreme court by a majority decision fought one majority decision once i had to know that the death penalty provided for under articulating of the constitution another provision that the death penalty was constitutional and it was not in conflict with other laws that were allowing the death penalty because the issue was whether the mandatory death penalty provided for under section 46 of acts 29 that says that if you commit murder you shall be allowed to suffer death there was an issue of whether that probation there was in conflict with the constitution as the people say that it was not in conflict before the constitution of ghana itself under article 13 recognizing that even though or have a right to life it can be taken away from us in the exercise of the execution of a sentence of reports in respect of a criminal offence under the laws of ghana of which he has been convicted and so articulating recognizes that even though you have a right to life it can be taken away from you mr republic it was said that the penalty was constitutional now also important to note is close to of articulating now remember that plus one over 2013 indicated that no person shall be deprived of his life intentionally except in the exercise of the execution of the sentence of the courts in respect of the criminal offence under the laws of ghana or which have been convicted plus two is also very important and close to research and that could a person shall not be held to have deprived another person of his life in contravention or flows one of this article if that other person dies as a result of a lawful act of war or if that other person dies as a result of the use of force to such an extent as is reasonably justifiable in the particular circumstances okay for the defense of any person from violence or for the defense of property or be in order to affect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained or seen for the purpose of suppressing a riots insurrection or mutiny or d in order to prevent the commission of a crime by that species so usually you hear people asking that if somebody is about to kill you should you sit down and allow the person to kill you article 13 plus 2 is saying that a person shall not be healed to have deprived another person of his life if he can come under any of this if one that person used force that was reasonably justifiable in the particular circumstance for the defense of any person from violence or for the defensive property meaning that if somebody is about to kill you and then you use force that was reasonably justifiable under the for the defense of yourself or from any other person and you end up killing the other person you shall not be held to have deprived other person who are that of his life because under unlike attributes because you use force that was legally justifiable in the particular circumstance for the defense of another person from violence or for the defense or property or if you're also using justifiable force in order to effect a lawful arrest or interesting justifiable force to prevent the escape of a person lawfully between all of these counts in determining whether a person can in the commander as a protestant clause to say that he will not begin to have deprived another person of his life in contribution of verse one if you can come under any of this mention under article 13 so remember the protecting clause as protecting those with the right to life and the rights and the death penalty has been held to become in the case of dexter johnson this is the republic reported in 2011 she was supreme court [Music] article organization is also an interesting provision of the constitution it deals with our fundamental liberties it says that in class 1 that every person shall be entitled to his personal liberty so all have a right to personal liberty but article 14 was one or speak to other fools that no person shall be deprived of his personal liberty except in the following cases and in accordance with procedure permitted by law and so even though we have indicated that you have your personal liberty the constitution itself has provided situations under which your personal liberty may be interfered with in accordance with law and so we have a to g over here and all a to g will be giving us circumstances under which a person's liberty may be interfered with and i'm going ahead to mention all of them one or eight a person's personal liberty may be interfered with an execution of a sentence or order of the courts in respect of a criminal offence of which he has been convicted and so what it means is that if you have been convicted of a criminal offence and have not been for 20 years you can't say that the constitution guarantees your fundamentally basis no the constitution is now said that even though you have your personal liberty we can take it away from you if it is an execution of a sentence or other of the thoughts that's article 14 plus one a nephrotic was one b that we shall interfere with your personal liberty in the execution of an order of the court punishing you for contempt of courts in the court convicted for content and they clock you up for some number of days you cannot complain that you have your personality based because article 14 contemplates that we can punish a person by restraining his liberty it is for purposes of punishing for content of course again you can also restrain a person's liberty and to go for them for one city that's for the purpose of bringing him before a court in execution of an order of the courts you cannot say that your liberty has been trained because article 14 permits that you can interfere with the liberty if it is for the purpose of bringing you before a court in the execution of an order of the court again the confusion contemplates that there could be people who are suffering from infectious or contagious disease or there could be people who are of a sound mind or that could get person addicted to some kind of drugs or at home and there may be a need to keep the person at a particular place for his treatment or for the protection of a community there was a time in ghana when we had a report of somebody who was mentally our own family commercial who just carried the cement block hit it against the young man's head and killed him instantly because this mentally person was allowed to walk in above freely article 14 plus one d is saying that a person's liberty can be restricted if that person is a person suffering from an infectious or contagious disease or that person is of a sound mind if we have to detain these people for purpose of either treating them or for the protection of the community or for the protection of the community so if you are keeping the people we cannot confine you for the treatment or it can be for the protection of the community so when when we experience the problem 19 fundamentally and people have covered 19 one year kept at another isolated place remember at the very fourteenth one this is that your liberty can be restrained if your person suffering from an infectious or contented disease and it is necessary to restrain you in order to treat you or even to protect the community we can place a restriction on your personal liberty not article 14 clause 1d article 14 plus one e provides that we can also deprive a person of his liberty if and for the purpose of the education or welfare of a person who has not attained the age of 18 years so if we are present below 18 years we can interfere with your liberty it is for the purpose of the education or welfare of the person who have not attained the age of 18 years and so if you are below 18 years they will take you to a boarding school and then they said i don't move out don't go after remember article 14 plus one e provides that we can interfere with your liberty if you are below 18 years and it's for the purpose of providing you with education or for your warfare then we have article 14 plus one f that says that we can interfere with the personal liberty of another person if it is for the purpose of preventing the unlawful entry of that person in sudan or of affecting the expulsion extradition or other law for removal of that person from ghana or for the purpose of restricting that person while he has been lawfully conveyed through ghana in the course of his extradition or removal from my country to another and then article 14 of one gene provided that we can interfere with the personal liberty of another person if there's reasonable suspicion of that person have been committed or being about to commit a criminal offence under the laws of banner and so if you have committed a criminal offence and then we come and arrest you and we are taking you to the police station you cannot complain about an interference with your personal liberty because article 14 plus one dream permits us to interfere with your personal liberty if there is reasonable suspicion of you having committed or being about to commit a criminal offence under the laws of ghana article 14.1 you remain as to interfere with your personal debates then we move on to plus 2 of article 14. part 2 of article 14 provides that a person who is arrested restricted or detained shall be formed immediately in a language that he understands of the reasons for his arrests restriction or detention and of his rights to a lawyer of his choice so the key thing to note about article 14 is that whenever you are arrested restricted or detained you have to inform immediately and the information must come to you in the language that you understand so if you don't speak any language apart from french and then they are arresting you the consumer says that a person who is arrested restricted and detained shall be informed immediately in a language that he understands are there reasons for his arrest so if the only language speak is done the moment they arrest you they must inform you in the language that you understand of the reasons for your arrests restrictions and attention and they must quickly inform you to of your right to a lawyer of your choice article 14 plus two remember these are fundamental human rights so it is important that the police officers who refresh nervous must be very familiar with the language of the people that they are going to arrest then clause 3 of article 14 deals with a 48-hour rule once again people saying that as a police they can't detain you beyond 48 hours let us see what article 14 plus 3 says about that article 14 class we say that a person who is arrested restricted or detained a for the purpose of bringing him before and caught in execution of another of the courts or be upon reasonable suspicion of having committed or being about to commit a criminal offence under the laws of ghana and who is not released shall be brought before a court within 48 hours after the arrest restriction or detention you see what it says that a person who is arrested reflected or detained if he's arrested or detained upon reasonable suspicion of having committed or being about to commit a crime offense then if the president is not released he shall be banned within 48 hours to equate so it is not an absolute rule that you cannot be detained beyond 48 hours it means that once you are arrested within the 48 hours of the arrest if you are not released then the police would have to bring you to a court of competent jurisdiction and when you are taken to the court of competent jurisdiction the court can remind you foreign again so it is not you to say that once you are arrested then you cannot be detained beyond 48 hours it's that within the 48 hours you must be arraigned before a court of competent jurisdiction yes that is the clause 3 of article 14 and then the last five days with people who have been unlawfully arrested treated or detained it says that a person who is unlawfully arrested restricted or detained by any other person shall be entitled to compensation from that other person and so if somebody unlawfully arrests you your lovely detains you he will not restrict you and to go forth into a fight that you shall be entitled to claim compensation from that other person and then clause seven others it deals with a situation whereby somebody has for instance being tried by the higher court and sentencing may be 20 years in prison and then the person has said that 20 years imprisonment or maybe he's almost done with the time of the imprisonment and then he appeals and the court of appeals allows his appeal so that president appointed in this church meanwhile has already said that 15 or 20 or 25 years other case may be article 147 say that some persons are entitled to compensation that the court maintained fixed and this is what they see it gives the power of determining the compensation to the supreme court this is what part 7 of article 14 says a person why a person who has served the whole or part of a sentence is acquitted on appeal by a court other than the supreme court the court may certify to the supreme court that a person acquitted the paid compensation and the supreme court made up an examination of all the facts and the certificates of the record consent awards have compensation as it may think fit or why that catalyst by the supreme court it may order compensation to be paid to the persons who are acquainted so article 14 personally those with people who have said their time of imprisonment and then they have ended up being acquainted and then discharged the article 14 personnel is that this is required and other compensation as the things fit as far as article 14 is concerned it is important that i draw attention to a provision in the criminal and other offences procedure acts 1960 activity section 104 subsection 4. of the expertise provides that if you you go and then you're going to stand a charity for a particular person who has been arrested you know when somebody is arrested and then they want to gun the person bill then you're gonna need to require someone to come and stand in a surety for that particular person section one is the first status before providing that when you go and stand a security for that particular place the person absorbs and is unable to unable to produce that particular person then that amount of money that you signed as a billboard if it is hundred thousand cities then you have to pay that money as your punishment then you say that if you can't pay the money then they can go and then sell your movable properties and then attach your mobile properties and then use that one to offset the amount of money that you undertook to pay now in the event that you don't have any movable property as well then what happens section one zero four star session four of the attorney says that if you can't pay the money you don't have any more property then you shall be liable to serve imprisonment without labor for attempt of imprisonment not exceeding six months so previously you could see a lot of people you can't stand a charity for bill for somebody and the president runs away then they are looking for the person everywhere the moment they find you and there's trouble then they mean that you can go and set a time of imprisonment now that question has been declared as unconstitutional that provision in the absentee section one zero four thousand three and four stating four sorry section one zero four seven section four it has been declared as unconstitutional because it has been held to be in conflict with article 1 article 14 clause 1 in article 19 plus 11 of the 1992 constitution remember article 14 plus one of the constitution article 14 man says every person shall be entitled to his personal liberty and no parents shall be deprived of his personal liberty except in accordance with the following circumstances and aspirated by law now when we mention the instances whereby a person's liberty can be strange no what did we say and did we see under the air to g that if a person's going to have a surety for bill and then he doesn't think that he can go any interference it's not dead it hasn't been provided as one of those instances whereby you can interfere with the person's liberty and also if you look at article 19 11 antibiotics letting provide that every person every person if you are going to talk any person for a criminal offense you must make sure that no parents have been punished for any criminal offence unless the offense is defined and the penalty to have been prescribed in a written law so you see under article and the article 9511 before you can punish any person for a criminal office then you must make sure that that offence has been defined and the penalty to prescribe in the written law before you can go ahead and do that so if you don't have this one how then do you go and talk about if if the president i'm not permissing any cannot face and i only can defend a surety for a person for for bill and that act is not the camera offense how did you cause me to be imprisoned for months so that probation in section 104 subsection 4 which said that if you're going to find a charity for a person for bill and the president have spoken and you don't pay the money you should have been present that provision has been declared as unconstitutional by the supreme court in the case of martin versus the attorney general martin table versus attorney general and this the citation for this case the reporter citation of this case is rest number year one stroke seventh to twenty fifteen and a government is did in fair december 2015. there's a film called hell that's the probation in section 104 subsection four of fact which enabled the court to imprison people to the austerity of bill that those provisions were in conflict with article 14 clause 1 which guaranteed our liberties and article 19 11 who say that it is only people who have committed criminal offences who shall be punished by the courts now since since turning a surety for a person is not a criminal offense defined meaning though you can't imprison the person for it also important to note is the provision in section 96 subsection 7 of the same criminal and other offenses act 1960 activated you will notice that under section 96 starting seven some offenses have been labeled as non-available offenses it says that aircraft shall refuse to ground bill in the case of the act of terrorism treason subversion murder robbery offenses listed in part one and two of the narcotic guys control and further sanctions law hijacking piracy rip or escape from lawful custody or where a person is being held for extradition to a foreign country now for any of these ones the courts are refused to gun deal it means that if anybody has been charged with any of these offenses if i got reported to today to for an offensive matter if you go by section 96 subsection 7 over 30 it means you are not supposed to be granted bill at all now what is the import of this particular provision in order to appreciate the input of that probation look at article 19 plus 2c of the constitution actor 19 2 says that a person shall be presumed to be innocent until his fruit or as legit duty if i'm supposed to presume to be innocent why do you tell me that the moment you charge me for murder i'm supposed to refuse bill forever until the case is over so that you lock me up for five years until the case is over if i'm presumed to be innocent why do you say that as soon as i'm child from better i should be locked in forever until until the case is over and what i'll say about article 14 plus one that guarantees my personal liberty as an individual and so once again in another case of martin pebble once again matching table versus that in general this one is events number day one through 13 2015 and the government is delivered fifth may 2016. in this case the supreme court held that the probation in section 96 subsection seven of the activity which made some offenses non-verbal offenses that our probation was in conflict with the presumption of demons under article 19 plus 2c and now personal liberty and article 41 and therefore the provision contained in section 967 making some offenses unbelievable was unconstitutional so today that section 1966-77 that made some offenses unbelievable those provisions have been declared as unconstitutional and they've been struck down under our laws so now in ghana all offenses are available all offense available but before according to one bill the court must be guided by section 96 subsection five and six of the a petty he has given some guidelines the court must consider before the grant or refuse bill section 96 thousand five and six of their acts 30. so if you look at section 96 status in five it says that the courts are refused to grant bill if it is satisfied that the defendant's team may not appear to stand trial or b may interfere with the witness or the evidence or may in any way hamper for these investigations or c may commit a further offense when on bill or d is charged with an offense punishable by imprisonment exceeding six months which is unless to have been committed while the defender was on build so if any of this can be proven then the courts are refused to grant you if the perceive that you will not appear in some trial or you are going to interfere with the witnesses or you may commit a federal offense while on bill these are all grounds underway the courts may refuse to grant you and emma sessions 96 started in stress of the activity it says that when the court is considering whether to grant bill it shall take into account a the nature of the accusation b the nature of the evidence in support of the accusation see the severity of the punishment with convictions will ensue d what are the defendants having been released on bill on a previous occasion has willfully failed to comply with the conditions of the recognizance entered into by the defendant on that occasion whether or not the defendant has a fixed place of our vote in the republic and is gainfully employed and f whether the charities are independent of good character and not sufficient means so these are factors that is supposed to take into account in deciding whether to grant or to refuse bill so for today because of the case of martin table versus the attorney general that probation in section 96 status is seven that makes our offenses unbelievable we have tracked ours that probation and from our laws it is unconscious now so you know my part of our laws so now every offense is available but when the court is going to grant you the economy guided by the requirements in section 96 2005 and sixth of the night of the apac it means that it's not automatic that they're going to view when the culture divided by those contributions so we have dealt with the right to life under article 13 we're done with article 12 and we are done and we are dealt with article 14 and article 14 is very extensive remember that because of article 14 that provision is that that provision that indicated that when you bring some assurity for a person and that his person runs away that provision in that is that says that we can imprison you it has been struck out as unconstitutional again to the glory of article 14 and martin pebble those provisions in the at 30 that made some offenses unbelievable those provisions to have been declared as unconstitutional but remember we are not saying that every offense is available and so automatically you will always automatically get bill remember that the court in deciding whether to refuse or to grant bill shall be guided by the nature of the offence of the accusation we shall find out whether you you are somebody who will not appear to stand trial whether somebody who may appear with their witnesses whether you are likely to commit a further offense going on bill the court to consider all of these in determining whether to grant or to refuse the bill this is where we shall wrap up with our lecture in this particular lecture since we have been able to discuss article 12 you have discussed article 13 you have discussed article 14 in our subsequent lectures we shall deal with the other rights contained in other provisions in chapter 5 of the constitution thank you