foreign we shall attempt to solve one essay question in constitutional law your question which I'll discuss in this lecture is a question that falls under the Constitutional law of Ghana the question reads as follows with the aid of decided cases and other relevant authorities critically discuss the prevailing position of the law pertaining to the justiceability or otherwise of the directive principles of State policy contained in chapter 6 of the 1992 constitution of Ghana with the aid of decided cases and other relevant authorities critically discussed the prevailing position of the law pertaining to the justiceability or otherwise of the directive principles of the policy contained in chapter 6 of the 1992 constitution of Ghana now before you begin solving any question especially if it is a massive question there are a few tips that you must bear in mind one is that you must read over the question sufficient times as will be enabled has to be enough to enable you understand the question read requesting carefully and ensure that you understand the requirements of the question and by saying you understand the requirements make sure you understand the key issues the legal principles and many specific instructions provided the next thing is that outside you have understood your question plan your response run your answer to the question and then make sure you begin with a very strong introduction that will create a very good impression about the person answering the question in your introduction there are a few points you should note make sure that you are concise you are clear and you are presented the main arguments that you are going to present to your answer this is your feature in your introduction the main arguments you intend to make you can let them feature in the introduction so that the reader knows that you know the answer also structure your essay effectively this is a very important step if it is another question structure your essay if it's into four parts five parts and make sure that each part contains a different points or arguments so structure your essay effectively guide your essay into coherent paragraphs and make sure that each paragraph or Point contains a separate point or arguments next one is that when you begin writing develop strong arguments that will be backed by relevant legal authorities if your case Lord let them future their strategy Provisions let them feature and you will show scholarship by showing counter arguments even if it's the position of the majority and there's a view of the minority which I think is worthy of commenting on you can bring that view to let the examiner know that you are aware of different opinions enemy or conclusion summarize all that you have said so the goal is that tell them what you are going to say the state and then tell them what you have said remember to structure your essay give different paragraphs give different parts and make sure that each part as much as possible contains a separate argument so the question once again with the aid of this other cases and other 11 authorities critically discuss the prevailing position of the law pertaining to the justiceability or otherwise of the directive principles of the policy contained in chapter 6 of the 1992 constitution of Ghana before you begin answering this question it means that you must have already learned and studied about this topic so it's not going to be another lecture on this topic so this is how a good answer will look like so this will be the introduction and I read this question raises for discussion then forcibility or otherwise of the directive principles of State policy remember what I said that you tell them what you are going to say you say it and you tell them what you have said so let's look at whether we are going to tell them what you are going to say in our introduction in this essay I shall rely on the cases of New Patriotic Party versus the Attorney General 31st December keys New Patriotic Party versus operators Association versus National Lottery Authority in the first part of this essay I shall explore the reason why the question has arisen related to the enforce ability of the dietary principles of the policy in this part I shall also discuss the 31st December case in which the holding of the majority was to the effects that insofar as the directive principles of State policy are contained in the Constitution they are enforceable Injustice in the second part of this essay I shall discuss the silver case in which the majority decision was to the effect that the provisions contained in chapter six will only be enforceable if the provision contained in chapter 6. is replicated in another part of the Constitution that creates an enforceable rights in the third part of this essay I shall explore the seeming conflicts the seeming conflicting position of the Supreme Court in the 35 December case and the silver case in the fourth part I shall describe the Lottery's case in which case it was held that whenever there is an issue about the enforce ability of the directive principle of the policy yes then the discussion must begin from a presumption of justiceability unless sin is reverted unless him is reverted by another provision in the Constitution the fifth and the final part of this essay shall conclude the discussion so if you look at this essay I'll check with what you say that we must have clearly defined matters we must have a war a good structure you can see we have in the first parts we have in the second part we have in the third parts we have in the fourth parts and we have the fifth and the final parts this will be good for you so that in case you even forget or you get over one when you're answering the question you can refer to the introduction and to let you know where you have to continue at remember you tell them what you are going to say you say it and you tell them what you have said so in this part we have told them what we are going to say and we can proceed so without proceed to the next part say it remember you tell them what you are going to say and you say it the next part to start with you're about to say it to start with the directive principles of State policy as contained in chapter six of the 1992 Constitution I intended to be a guide to the entire citizenry Parliament the Judiciary president Council of States political parties all persons in applying or interpreting the constitution of Ghana or any other laws in this quest to serve as a Guidance the directive principles of State policy embody a collection of objectives including but not limited to political economic and educational objectives an example of an economic objective is as evidence which enjoying the states to take the necessary action to ensure the maximum rate of Economic Development the state is further enjoying to take the necessary steps to ensure the maximum freedom and happiness of every person in Ghana with respects to educational objectives at the property AIDS provides that a state ought to provide educational facilities at all levels and in all the regions of Ghana to the greatest extent possible this is to be made available to all citizens of Ghana a question is what is the import of all of these we are demonstrating to The Examiner that we know what directive principles of State quality means so we shall continue it is what we emphasize in that artificial form requires Parliament the president and all persons to be guided by these objectives in interpreting or enforcing the 1992 constitution of Ghana so this is just demonstrating to The Examiner that we know what we mean by directive principle policy now let's go back to our introduction and see what he says we will discuss the first parts he said that in the first part of this essay I shall explore the reason why the question has arisen related to the enforce ability of the directive principles of the policy so so far in our first part with only demonstrated what the directive principle of the Policia we now have to answer the question why is there any issue about whether it is justiceable or not in this word that portion begins the mind-boggling issue which has plagued the minds of legal Scholars as in relation to the Constitutional status of these directive principles of State policy Holland whether they are justiceable or not this uncertainty is predominantly born out of the language of article 34 which only provides that the dietary principles of trade policy are always supports he directed to this the president Parliament and all persons who interpret on for the Constitution it does not fit emphatically that they shall not be enforceable by the courts in other jurisdictions such as India and Nigeria it has been clearly stated in their National constitutions that the directive principles of State policy I'll not forget to be enforced by the courts according to the committee of Experts of the deity principles according to the community of experts who drafted the Constitution the directive principle of the policy is to serve as a barometer to measure the performance of the government it is the loud Silence of the Ghanaian constitution of this matter that has sold a seed of this a seed of uncertainty in the minds of Scholars the uncertainty surrounding the enforceability of chapter 6. it's further accentuated by the fact that in the report of the committee of experts that drafted the 1992 Constitution it has been stated that quotes the principles shall not often by themselves be legally enforceable by any courts I'll take that portion again the uncertainty surrounding the enforce ability of chapter six is further accentuated by the fact that in the reports of the committee of experts that drafted the 1992 Constitution it has been stated that the principles shall not often by themselves be legally enforceable by any courts quote thanks now let's go back to our introduction what did we say we discussed in our first part said in the first part of this essay I shall explore the reason why the question has arisen related to the enforceability of the dietary principles of State policy at this point at the point that we have made the point we made is that the people that even drafted in the 1992 Constitution they themselves mentioned that the principles shall not often by themselves be legally enforceable by any courts meaning that those even drafted are saying that chapter 6 they are not supposed to be enforceable Often by themselves meaning you're making progress in addressing the first part and I proceed to read the answer against this backdrop it has been argued that the very people who drafted the Constitution did not intend that the provisions in chapter six with us and by themselves be legally enforceable in any courts it must be pointed out that this opinion of the committee of experts which is evidence in their reports was not adopted by the consultative assembly and for that reason it is not reflected in the 1992 Constitution in other words the opinion of the committee of experts that a Provisions in chapter 6 ought not be enforceable by themselves is not embodied in the final drafts of the 1992 Constitution for this reason the Constitution is silent on whether the provisions in chapter 6 are off and by themselves enforceable let's go back to introduction again what do you say we'll discuss in the first part we said that in the first part of this essay I shall explore the reason why the question has arisen related to the enforceability of the dietary principles of this policy I think at this part we have those with it because the paragraphs of I have mentioned that the committee of experts that drafted the Constitution they put over there that the provisions should off should not by themselves be legally enforceable mini course but when they gave their draft to their consultative assembly the second stage they did not include any expression in the Constitution so say that the provisions in chapter 6 are not supposed to be enforceable so the final one that the people gave to the people of Ghana it didn't have any statement that the provisions contained in chapter 6 will not be legally enforceable so that it appears to be the reason why there's even an issue about whether the chapter six is supposed to be enforceable or not because the people who drafted said is not supposed to be enforceable but in the final draft we don't have it inside so let me read this portion again and in other words the opinion of the committee of experts are the provisions in chapter six of not be enforceable by themselves is not embodied in the final draft of the 1992 Constitution for this reason the Constitution is silent on what are the provisions in chapter six are often by themselves legally enforceable notwithstanding The Silence of the Constitution on the matter the Supreme Court of Ghana has had opportunity to explore this area of Law and make pronouncements on the enforceability or otherwise of these directive principles of the policy now let's go back to our introduction and see whether you're on track in an introduction we saw that in the first part we shall explore the reason why the question of the reason related to the enforceability on the deity principle of the policy let me add it in this part I shall also discuss the 35 December case in which the hoarding of the majority was with the effect that in so far as the dietary principles of State policy are contained in the conversation foreign in other words in the first part of Ric we must also describe the tax very similar case so let's see whether you're on track it appears you're on track a New Patriotic Party versus that semi-general there's a fair December peace the cracks of the plaintiff's argument was that the celebration of 31st December as a national holiday with State funds was in conflict with the letter and spirits of Articles 3 5 and 41b of the 1992 Constitution and therefore stream should be declared as unconstitutional it is worthy to note that the set article 35 and 41 are contained in chapter 6. and therefore the Attorney General argued that self-provisions which are contained in chapter 6 are not enforceable so what are we done at this point what you've done at this point is that we have given the essential facts that led to even the question about the enforceability of the diet principle of the policy because the plaintiff had anchored their case on how to do 3 35 and 41. meanwhile 35 and 41 are in chapter 6 of The Constitution so the ages arguing that those Provisions are not gestational of course and the reasonably because he's relying on what the community of experts have said so we proceed and I read why about foreign who was in the majority but otherwise according to him the whole Constitution is a justiceable document and if any part of it is not to be justiceable the Constitution itself must expressly see so the extent that he has not seen anything in chapter 6 or anywhere else in the Constitution which makes the provisions in chapter 6 non-discitiable then he would hold that the provisions are just in trouble and therefore enforceable remember in the first part in the introduction what did we see we said in the introduction that we are going to rely on the 31st and show how the majority decision was to the effect that insofar as the dietary principles are contained in the Constitution then they are enforceable and justiceable this is what we said we'll discuss in the first part so at this point where we have dealt with this portion where we have told you what about foreign to show that another GST took the view that once the directive principles are in the Constitution then they'll be justiceable so you're done with the first part let's go to introduction what will be in our second part in the second part of this essay I shall describe the siba case in which case the majority decision what's with the effect that the provisions contained in chapter six will only be enforceable in the provision interval six is replicated in another part of the Constitution that creates an enforceable rights there's more that will add to this when we discuss it so let's come to the second part so we're done with the defense subsequently and I'm reading subsequently the question as to the end for stability or otherwise of the provisions contained into passives came up again in the case of New Patriotic Party versus attorney general see about keys in this case the government of the plaintiff suits was that the Council of indigenous business associations law which mandatory required in business businessmen to join a particular Association was in Conflict within Gallia at 21 and article 37 2A of the 1992 Constitution once again since article 37 is contained in chapter 6 of The Constitution it was added the same was not justiceable distribution ruled that the provisions in chapter 6 are not of themselves justiceable unless they are read together with other enforceable Provisions in the Constitution let me go ahead to this end when a provision in chapter 6 creates a legal and enforceable rights as evidence in article 37 2A such a provision would become justiceable and enforceable because the freedom to form associations is replicated and article 21-1e of the Constitution therefore the essence of the holding in the MPP versus Ascension of civil case was that the provision in chapter 6 would be enforceable if and only if the provision in question is read together with another provision in the Constitution we create illegal rights in other words it is not every provision in chapter 6 that is associated the only ones that are decisionable are those that can be read with other provisions of the Constitution that creates a legal and enforceable rights again the Supreme Court health that's when a provision in chapter six for the Constitution in itself creates an enforceable rights within that provision will be and for some and therefore Justice um so at this point let's go back to introduction and see what we have said our introduction we added that in the third part of this essay which are next in the second part we shall describe the symbol keys in which case the majority decision was to the effect that the provisions contained in chapter six would only be enforceable let me make it will be enforceable if the provision contained in chapter 6 is replicated in another part of the Constitution that creates an enforceable rights let me out again the Supreme Court held that if the provision in question in chapter six in itself create an enforceable rights then that provision shall be enforceable and decision so that is for our second part what is our third what to win our 10 parts in the third part of this essay I shall explore the seeming conflicting position foreign it will be cute and enforceable rights so Simba has given us two things whereas the 25th am I saying that every provision in chapter 6 will be enforceable siba is making it look like there are some that will not be enforceable than the only ones that will be enforceable are the ones that if you read in conjunction with another provision they will create an enforceable right or they create an enforceable right in and of themselves so let's go to our third part and see what we said over here third parts it might be helpful to draw out the seeming conflicting decisions of the Supreme Court in the matter it will be recalled that in the 35th Marquis another DSC stated that the whole Constitution was associated implied there was no part of the Constitution which was not associable and therefore chapter 6 was transitionable on the other hand foreign according to where it is only those provinces of chapter six that come either be red together with other provisions of the Constitution that creates a legal and enforceable rights or the provisions into the sixth that are enforceable in and of themselves as creating enforceable rights so let me say that person again it might be helpful to draw out the seeming conflicting positions in the matter it should be recalled that in the 35c stated that the whole Constitution was justiceable impliedly there was no part of the Constitution which was not deficiable and therefore chapter 6 was associated on the other hand Bamford adult GSE in the silver case held that it is not every position provision in chapter six that is enforceable according to her it is only those provisions of chapter six that can either be read together with other provisions of the Constitution that creates a legal and enforceable rights or the provinces in chapter 6 that are enforceable in and of themselves has created affordable rights that will be the official Studio conflicts so now we can move on to the fourth part what do we see will do is has the fourth part so in the fourth part I shall discuss the Lottery's case in which case it was held that whenever there's an issue about the enforceability of the United principles the discussion must begin from a presumption of justiceability unless you miss about it so let's go to the fourth part and I read final Clarity was brought to the matter in the case of national Lotto operators Association versus National Lottery Authority in which case the Supreme Court once again had an opportunity to represent the issue on the justiceability of the dietary principles of State policy in this case that about GST held that there is a presumption of justiceability on chapter six he reasoned that whenever the question arises as to whether the provisions in chapter 6 are justiceable or not the starting point of analysis should be that all Provisions in the Constitution are justiceable unless there are strong indications to the contrary as indicated in the text or context of the Constitution most importantly he reason that there may be some Provisions in chapter 6. which do not lend themselves to enforcement and it is such Provisions that would react the presumption of justiceability in other words so long as there is no evidence to show that a particular provision does not lend itself to enforcements the courts are Duty bound to enforce the provisions in chapter 6. this position appears to have been affirmed by the Supreme Court in the case of izwani Manan versus the Attorney General in this case the courts are you making the Supreme Courts after affirming the position that the provisions in chapter 6 are primaries when trying to hold that article 40 of the Constitution is in is in and of itself justiceable so our four parts let's go back to our introduction what do we say we discussed in our four parts said in our fourth part we shall describe the notice case in which case it was held that whatever there's an issue about the enforceability of the deities principles the discussion must begin from a presumption of justiceability unless they miss about it but another provision the Constitution I think we have dealt with that portion too as well now that's what we have over here I shall read that portion once again the fourth part final Clarity was brought to the matter in the case of national Lotto or previous Association versus National Lottery Authority in which case the Supreme Court once again had an opportunity to really assess the issue on the gestational ability of the deities principles of State policy in this case that the man GSC helped that there is a presumption of justiceability of chapter six he reasoned that whenever the question arises as to whether the provisions in chapter six are Justice or not the starting point of analysis should be that all the provinces in the Constitution are justiceable unless there are strong indications to the contrary as indicated in the text or context of the Constitution most importantly he reasoned that there may be some Provisions in chapter 6 which do not lend themselves to enforcement and it is sub-provisations that would reverse the presumption of justiceability in other words so long as there's no evidence to show that a particular provision does not lend itself to enforcements the courts are due to bound 24 the provisions in chapter 6. this position appears to have been affirmed by the Supreme Courts in the case of the is Attorney General in this case the Supreme Court after framing the position that the provisions contained in chapter 6 are primarily justiceable went ahead to hold that article 40 of the Constitution if in and of itself justiceable so indeed we are done without four parts let's go back to our introduction what did we say with discussion of hate Parts what do we see the fifth and the final part of this essay shall conclude a discussion so conclusion what is the final position of the law and the provisions that sociable or not is there a conflict in the decisions of the Supreme Court in the matter so let's just make this one in conclusion the foregoing discussions clearly demonstrates that's sounds qualis and legal commentators have opined that the decisions in the Northeast case conflicts with that in the silver case but there is no sub conflicts so don't make it in conclusion some Scholars and legal commentators I will find that a decision in the Lottery's case conflicts with that in the silver case but there is no such conflict the two decisions rather corroborate each other rather than conflicts the two decisions convert in the sense that they both recognize that it is not all the provisions in chapter 6 that others the two cases further create exceptions that is if it is established foreign for example in the silver case if the provision cannot be read together with another provision of the Constitution really create a legal rights then it will not be transitionable in the same vein a lottery case from the Northwest case if there's a provision in chapter six with an online itself to enforce them by the courts then the presumption of their sociability will be about it and therefore that a provision would be unenforceable the two cases therefore do not conflict but rather bring finality to the question of the accessibility or otherwise of the provisions in characteristics of the Constitution what is very setting is that the two cases significantly differ from the case of MPP versus attention now that spread the monkeys this is because in meditation about case it was God that all the provisions contain the Constitution Al however as demonstrated from there luxurious case and the seabakis foreign themselves to end possibilities right so this will be the end of the answer let's do a check again remember what we said from the beginning you understand the question what do you do tell them what you are going to say so you have a very powerful introduction what I'm going to say then you say it like we did over here then if you look at our conclusion you tell them what you have said in our conclusion you have innocence summarized everything you've said we'll discuss the siber case not just case and you've also the scars meaning that we have told them what we have said in our conclusion so this will be the end of our discussion on answering a messy question on the directive principles of State policy take note that this is only a guide you may reduce it to suit the demands of your question and how much time you have to write but remember the structure must have a powerful introduction tell them what you're going to say say it and then tell them what you have said this is where we shall draw the curtains for the essay question on the dietary principles of State policies thank you foreign