Adopting a critical theory framework, this paper is especially concerned with linking the economics, law, and politics and their concomitant mediations/interconnections and contradictions. Specifically, the purposes of this paper are to: (a) analyze historically how law has been pliant to the needs of powerful interests or influences by unmasking the disciplinary nature of Ghanian labor laws. The historical origins and transformations of labor relations were not only the deliberate ambiguities of sanctions but also the conflicts waged by the state to secure the respective interests of the privileged; and, (b) specify the conditions under which labor was not free from domination. The conception of the laborlaw nexus was based on struggle. The normative foundations that constitute the construction of labor, political, and economic relations contextualizes how social practices reproduce dominant forms of inequality, law, class, and social control. Consistent with critical theory, this paper upholds the significance of historical knowledge for social criticism and political change. Historical analysis enables us to grasp continuities and discontinuities with the past and to develop resources to change. This study demonstrates that law is not shaped by moral consensus but by the relative power of groups who use scarce resources to impose their economic preferences. Both legitimacy and coercion are persuasively achieved through law, economics, culture, and politics-the foundations of Ghana's postcolonial developments.

Informed by critical theory, this paper focuses on the dialectical interplay between law and economics evident in the practices and policies of the International Labour Organization (ILO). It is argued, first, that governments do not comply with international labour standards because of the inherent weaknesses of the ILO as the source and enforcer of international obligations. Second, the parochial politicization of rights defers to the arrogance of ignorance. Third, developing societies are overwhelmingly preoccupied with socioeconomic development. In exploring the impact of ILO practices on developing societies within the policies of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB), this paper asks the following questions: to what extent does capital form and inform the law in relation to conflicting economic narratives of development and nationhood? How and why does the ILO talk up legal narratives of regulation and contest? How does law hegemonize capital integration? How does law symbolically function to mediate labour relations meanings and manipulate the inaction of civil society? Within the larger structure of "market forces, " the commodity of law is a complex form of social communication that diverts attention away from the political impact of predatory economies. * Professor L.A Visano, Sociology,