The Problem of Employing the Ejusdem Generis Rule in the Classification of Drugs in Nigeria

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

For all intents and purposes, the legal draughtsman (legislative counsel) is not a legislator but to trivialise his role in the process of law-making is to compromise the qualities of a good legislation. Among other things, he is responsible for elegance in statutes and by skillful use of words he assists the courts in arriving at the intention of the legislature. He has the capacity of making one piece of legislation a part of another with a few words. Such is the depth of the skills of the legal draughtsman.

However, indeterminacy of the meaning of words and lack of human prescience are the bane of the legislature in enacting laws to take care of situations that may arise ex-proviso. In this wise, the express words of the legislature at the time of enactment may prove inadequate. Here again, the legal draughtsman's skillful use of words may act as the bridge between the legislature and the courts in ascertaining and declaring the intentions of the legislature. The point being made is evident in the dictum of Lord Watson in Salomon v. Salomon¹ thus:

"Intention of the legislature' is a common but very slippery phrase, which popularly understood, may signify anything from intention embodied in positive enactment to speculative option as to what the legislature probably would have meant, although there has been an omission to enact it. In a court of Law or Equity, what the legislature intended to be done or not to be done can only be legitimately ascertained from that which it has chosen to enact, either in express words or by reasonable and necessary implications..."