Ghana Supreme Court to Define Religious Liberty in Landmark Case

A landmark case challenging religious freedom in Ghana is currently before the Supreme Court. The suit, filed against Wesley Girls Senior High School (SHS) and the Ghana Education Service, questions whether a Christian-founded, state-assisted school can legitimately restrict the religious practices of its Muslim students.

The controversy erupted after Wesley Girls SHS allegedly prevented Muslim students from fasting during Ramadan. Private legal practitioner, Shafic Osman, initiated the legal challenge on December 24, 2024, arguing that such restrictions violate Article 21(1)(c) of the 1992 Constitution, which guarantees the freedom to practice any religion.

Mr. Osman contends that the Constitution’s protection of religious freedom should not be superseded by a school’s religious affiliation. “The Constitution guarantees freedom of worship,” he asserted, “and no school should coerce students to follow its religious practices.”

The Wesley Girls School Board has publicly refuted claims of discrimination, stating that any perceived restrictions were misinterpretations of school policy. The school maintains its right to uphold its established Christian values.

However, former Director-General of the Ghana Education Service (GES), Dr. Charles Aheto-Tsegah, has cautioned that the rigid structure of Ghana’s boarding school system presents challenges to accommodating diverse religious observances. “The school is a system that is programmed, with a precise minute-by-minute schedule from a typical 4:30 am wake-up call to 10:00 pm lights-out,” he explained. “Integrating varied observances requires a very interesting reconfiguration.”

The Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Dominic Ayine, has filed a response supporting the school’s position, arguing that Wesley Girls, as an institution owned and operated by the Methodist Church, is entitled to maintain rules consistent with its religious heritage. Deputy Attorney-General, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, further affirmed that government funding does not negate the school’s religious rights.

The Methodist Church Ghana has emphasized the historical precedence of mission schools in Ghana, predating the establishment of the state itself. They argue that state funding should not be interpreted as a mandate to alter the foundational religious principles of these institutions. The Church also warned that allowing parallel religious practices could lead to administrative difficulties and disrupt communal harmony.

The Ghana Catholic Bishops’ Conference and the Christian Council of Ghana have echoed these sentiments, asserting their proprietary claim over their schools and emphasizing that state support represents a partnership, not a takeover of ownership. They cautioned that accommodating diverse religious practices could fracture the unity and discipline within the schools.

The lawsuit has ignited a national debate, with Education Minister Haruna Iddrisu publicly defending the rights of students to practice their religion. “The government will not countenance any action that denies a Ghanaian girl the opportunity to practice her religion,” he stated. This position, however, contrasts with the legal defense offered by the Attorney General.

Interior Minister Muntaka Mubarak has urged for greater tolerance within all faith-based schools, acknowledging the generally accommodating nature of Christian mission schools – with over 80% reportedly demonstrating religious inclusivity. He also cautioned against emerging instances of discrimination in some Muslim schools, such as restricting lunch for non-Muslim students during Ramadan, stressing that intolerance must be addressed regardless of its source.

Public advocates, like Kofi Asare, have pointed to the successful co-existence of Muslim students and Christian values at schools like PRESEC Legon as evidence that accommodation is possible. Democracy Hub has also been granted leave to file an amicus curiae brief, highlighting the broad public interest in the constitutional implications of the case.

The National Muslim Conference of Ghana (NMCG) has clarified that their demands are limited to the right to pray, fast, and abstain from compulsory church activities, explicitly stating they are not seeking the construction of mosques on school grounds. The NMCG cited the GES Directive on Religious Tolerance (2015) and the April 2024 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) as supporting evidence for the unconstitutionality of suppressing religious expression.

The Methodist Church Ghana, in its official response, reaffirmed its commitment to defending its interests in court while reiterating its rejection of discrimination. The Church highlighted Wesley Girls’ nearly two-century history of educating students from diverse faiths and emphasized that its policies aim to maintain a framework for unity and discipline, consistent with Christian teachings. They also confirmed full adherence to the 2024 MoU.

The Ghanaian case mirrors similar constitutional dilemmas globally. In Nigeria, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Muslim students wearing the hijab. European approaches vary, with the UK subjecting faith schools to anti-discrimination laws, while France enforces strict secularism. The U.S. model of government neutrality in secular schools is less relevant to Ghana’s system of mission-owned institutions.

The Supreme Court’s ruling will have far-reaching consequences, shaping the balance between religious pluralism and institutional autonomy in Ghana’s educational system and setting a crucial precedent for all faith-based, government-assisted secondary schools.

Image Source: MYJOYONLINE