The law on the availability of restitution in the context of illegal contracts is unclear. Several irreconcilable approaches have been proposed at common law in search of a solution to the question of whether or not a party to an illegal contract who has benefitted from the contract has any right to restitution. This article examines the Ghanaian judicial approach and ascertains the extent to which it sheds light on this difficult issue. It does so by examining the evolution of judicial solutions in English common law and, in that context, evaluating the approaches adopted by the Ghanaian courts.

This case note presents the arguments made in the amicus curiae brief submitted by the UN independent expert on debt and human rights to the OECD National Contact Point in the case brought in 2018 by Open Secrets and the Centre for Applied Legal Studies concerning the alleged complicit conduct of two banks during apartheid in South Africa. It also outlines the developments in this legal case and comments on why apartheid victims’ claims against financial accomplices are now more compelling than ever.

In Nworika v Ononeze-Madu, the Nigerian Supreme Court upheld the decision of the lower court, denying the appellant standing to challenge the decision of the Imo State government. This highlighted the position of Nigerian courts on the rule of locus standi, which denies access to justice for many Nigerians who seek a court order to declare a law unconstitutional or to challenge the actions of the government or its agencies. This article examines the context of the application of the rule of locus standi before Nigerian courts and argues that the decision of the Supreme Court in Adesanya v President of Nigeria, which is the classic authority on the strict rule of locus standi in Nigeria, is outdated in the context of contemporary human rights development and that Nigerian courts can learn from the Indian courts that have discarded the strict application of the rule of locus standi through judicial activism.

Journalists play an important role in promoting and facilitating the right to freedom of expression. To promote and facilitate freedom of expression effectively, they should be free to perform their duties without fear of reprisals, intimidation or harassment. Journalists should carry out their duties in a legally safe environment. It has, however, been observed that journalists across the world are subjected to various human rights violations and abuses aimed at hindering them in performing their work. Journalists in Botswana also endure harassment and intimidation. One form in which this harassment manifests itself is through the use of sedition laws. In many countries these laws have been found to limit the right to freedom of expression unjustifiably. The legality of sedition laws has been considered by the courts of Botswana, where the High Court upheld their constitutionality. This note critically analyses the High Court's decision.