The Achimota School has directed its lawyers to appeal against the recent High Court ruling on the admission of the two Rastafarian students, Tyrone Marhguy and Oheneba Nkrabea.
According to a statement issued by its Governing Board, the School indicated that it disagrees with the court’s decision which orders it to admit the two students.
“The court ruled that the religious rights of the two applicants had been violated by the School Management as they sought to enforce the time-tested and well-known rules of the School.
“The Court further directed the School to admit the two applicants. The school Board disagrees with the ruling of the Court” parts of the statement said.
The Accra High Court, on Monday, May 31 instructed the Achimota School to admit the two Rastafarian students it had denied admission over their dreadlocks.
Presiding over the case, barely three months of litigation, Justice Gifty Adjei Addo, held that Achimota School’s failure to admit the two students because of their dreadlocks, which is a manifestation of their religious right, is a violation of their human rights, right to education and dignity.
Tyrone Marhguy and Oheneba Nkrabea sued the Achimota School for discriminating against them due to their religious beliefs.
They therefore wanted the Court to declare that denying them admission violates their right to dignity and right to education as guaranteed under Articles 25 (1)(b), 28 (4) in Ghana’s Constitution.
“…that the failure and or refusal of the 1st Respondent [The Achimota School], to admit or enrol the Applicant on the basis of his Rastafarian religious inclination, beliefs and culture…is a violation of his fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed under the 1992 Constitution,” one of the reliefs read.
Reliefs sought by the applicant
Meanwhile, the Executive Director of the Human Rights and Governance Centre, Martin Kpebu, has said that the case between the School and the Rastafarian boys was “too plain” for a court dispute.
He argued that the “constitution is clear in Article 28 and 21 that you don’t use somebody’s religion to discriminate against the person. Article 21 is clear that there is freedom of religion.”
With additional files from citinewsroom.com