BY Nadia Ntiamoah
In a landmark ruling that has reignited debates over religious freedom and school autonomy in Ghana, the Supreme Court of Justice, sitting in its Original Jurisdiction in Accra, has declared certain policies of Wesley Girls’ Senior High School unconstitutional.
The decision, handed down by Justice Gabriel Pwamang on Tuesday, February 17 2025, responds to a lawsuit filed by private legal practitioner Shafic Osman challenging the school’s restrictions on Muslim students’ religious practices.
The suit, filed as J1/XX/2025, named three defendants: the Board of Governors of Wesley Girls’ SHS, the Ghana Education Service (GES), and the Attorney-General.
Osman contended that the school, a publicly funded mission institution, enforced rules preventing Muslim students from wearing the hijab, fasting during Ramadan, and performing Islamic prayers.
He also argued that students were compelled to attend Methodist worship services, which he claimed amounted to systemic discrimination and a violation of constitutional rights.
The plaintiff sought declarations of unconstitutionality and directives for reform of the school’s policies.
Constitutional Questions And Legal Framework
At the heart of the case was whether mission schools that receive public funding may enforce denominational rules that limit the religious practices of students from other faiths.
The Court analysed relevant provisions under the 1992 Constitution, including Articles 12(2) on fundamental rights, Article 17 on equality before the law, Article 21 on freedom of thought and religion, and Article 28(4) guaranteeing a child’s right to education irrespective of faith.
International human rights instruments, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, were also considered.
Court Analysis And Application of the Marghuy Test
Justice Pwamang applied the Marghuy Test, a framework established in Tyrone Marghuy v. Achimota School (2021), to determine whether the school’s policies unjustly interfered with religious freedom.
The Court concluded that the rules did interfere with genuine religious expression, deprived students of educational choice due to their faith, and were not justified under public interest.
The Defendants failed to demonstrate any compelling public rationale beyond institutional preference.
The Court also referenced comparative jurisprudence from other jurisdictions. Nigerian courts, in Provost v. Asogwa, upheld students’ rights to manifest their religion in public schools. Kenyan courts, in Republic v. Head Teacher, St. Paul’s Primary School, struck down a ban on hijab as unconstitutional. Indian jurisprudence, including Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala, similarly protects students from being compelled to act against their conscience in educational settings.
These precedents reinforced the Court’s stance that religious accommodation in education aligns with global constitutional norms.
Ruling And Orders
The Supreme Court held that the policies of Wesley Girls’ SHS compelling participation in Methodist worship and prohibiting Islamic practices violated Articles 12(2), 17(2), 21(1)(b)-(c), and 28(4) of the Constitution.
The Court declared the policies null and void and issued a mandatory injunction requiring the school to allow Muslim students to wear the hijab, fast during Ramadan, and perform prayers, provided these practices are consistent with school discipline.
Furthermore, the Court directed the Ghana Education Service to implement national guidelines within six months to ensure reasonable accommodation of religious practices in all publicly funded schools, thereby setting a precedent for religious inclusivity across the educational system.
