Religious Freedom In Schools: A Concern That Must Be Heard

Religion plays a central role in Ghanaian society, and schools are often where different beliefs meet for the first time. This article critically analyses the tension between institutional religious identity and students’ constitutional right to practise their own faith, using Wesley Girls’ High School as a case study. It focuses on the pending Supreme Court case; Shafic Osman v Board of Governors of Wesley Girls’ High School and Others, which questions whether a publicly funded school can compel students to participate in Christian practices while restricting Islamic observances. 

Deconstructing  Ghana’s constitutional jurisprudence, judicial decisions, and international law, the article underscores how religious discrimination affects students’ dignity, mental well-being, and sense of belonging. This article also brings into focus the constitutional reform proposals aimed at promoting religious tolerance in schools.Finally, the article argues that respecting religious diversity in schools is not a threat to discipline or tradition, but a necessary step toward equality, social cohesion, and a truly inclusive democratic society. 

 INTRODUCTION 

Aside from law, society is majorly regulated by religion and diverse religious beliefs. This system of society has raised morality amongst Ghanaians. It is worth noting that morality and law are two different concepts. Two schools of thoughts battle the difference between morality and law. Natural law theorists believe that law comes from  universal moral principles that can be discovered through human reason and divine will. Naturalists argue that if a rule is unfair and violates moral dignity there is no obligation to obey it. This is grounded in the latin maxim  “lex iniusta non est lex”. Naturalists such as Thomas Aquinas argued that law must be based on divine and natural moral principles[1]. To Aquinas, laws that contradict natural principles is invalid.However, positivists such as HLA Hart posits that law and morality are conceptually separate. [2] Hart argued that law is grounded in social practices, institutions and enforcement mechanisms. He asserted that law is valid because it is created according to a recognised legal procedure and not because it is morally right. He introduced the rule of recognition which shows a society`s accepted method for identifying valid law. Where a rule satisfies this legal test, it is law, even if it is unfair or immoral. He further noted that a society must clearly identify what the law is, separate from what the law ought to be. To HLA Hart morality is based on ethical beliefs about right and wrong, which may vary across cultures and time. He disagreed with Acquians who said an unjust law is not law. Hart`s view on law was supported by early scholars such as  John Austin and Jeremy Bentham.This principle about the separability of law and morality has been recognised in Ghana.[3] Ghana recognises numerous religions but primarily features three major religions: Christianity, Islam and African Traditional Religions. They all co-exist within Ghana`s pluralistic framework with freedom. 

The 2021 census in Ghana revealed that approximately 71 percent of Ghana`s population are Christians, 20 percent Muslim, 3 percent adhere to indigenous or animistic beliefs and 6 percent belong to other religious groups or have no religious beliefs.[4] Under  Chapter 5 of the 1992 constitution which establishes the entrenched provisions of the Fundamental Human Rights in Ghana, it is clearly seen that all persons have the right to freedom to practise any religion and to manifest such practise.[5] Recently, there has been some tension in Wesley Girls` 

High School, Kakumdo Cape Coast on  students being denied the right to practise Islam. The school by law has the authority to regulate conduct. However, such authority must be exercised in a manner consistent with constitutional guarantees of religious freedom. On the issue of  religious disparity in the school lies before the Supreme Court a  suit titled: Shafic Osman v Board of Governors Wesley Girls` High School and Others6. 

This article provides a critical analysis of religious discrimination and the legal responses designed to prevent it. 

PART I of the article gives a brief summary on the statement of case filed by Shafic Osman and issue of discrimination in Religious Practices in Wesley Girls` and Ghana at large applying the laws of the country. 

PART II  will pen some consequences that can rise as a result of religious discrimination and possible reforms. 

 PART III  focuses on  international law concerning the freedom to practise one's choice of religion and conclusion. 

PART I 

SUMMARY ON THE STATEMENT OF CASE FILED BY SHAFIC 

OSMAN 

The Statement of Case, filed in the Supreme Court of Ghana in late 2024 titled: Shafic Osman v Board of Governors Wesley Girls` High School and Others[6], involves a legal challenge brought by Shafic Osman against the Board of 

Governors of Wesley Girls Senior High School, the Education Service, and the Attorney General.The case centers on whether a publicly funded school can legally compel all students to follow a specific religion while banning the practice of others.The Plaintiff argues that Wesley Girls Senior High School often called Gey Hey enforces an Institutional Faith Clause and what he describes as a "No-Islam Policy". The key aspects of these policies include: 

1. All students are required to participate in Methodist (Christian) practices, such as attending mass, singing hymns, and participating in prayers which is compulsory. 
2. Muslim students are reportedly prevented from observing Islamic rituals like Salat (daily prayers), Ramadan (fasting), and Eid. 
3. The school prohibits students from possessing the Quran, wearing the hijab, or using prayer beads (tasbih). 
4. To be admitted, students must sign an "Undertaking" agreeing to participate in Methodist practices. 

The Plaintiff contends that these rules are egregiously unconstitutional on grounds that since Wesley Girls is a publicly funded school, the school cannot act as a private religious body. It must follow the constitution which requires the freedom to practise one's own religion and prohibits the state from establishing a compulsory religion. 

Also, the plaintiff contends that the act of the school and its policies on religion are discriminatory and unlawful because they deny muslim students the same privileges and rights granted to their Christian counterparts.The plaintiff submitted that the school has breached Article 21 of the 1992 constitution which guarantees freedom of thought, conscience and the right to practise any religion. Drawing on international treaties such as UNCRC[7], ACRWC[8], ICCPR10 and Ghana’s 

Children’s Act11,the Plaintiff argues that the best interest of the child must be the primary consideration, and children have a right to their own culture and religion regardless of the school they attend. 

The plaintiff seeks declaration that the school's policies are unconstitutional and discriminatory.An order to stop the school from enforcing these policies immediately.A directive for the Education Service to create new, constitutionally compliant guidelines for religious practice in all Ghanaian public schools to ensure this does not happen elsewhere 

 DISCRIMINATION IN RELIGIOUS PRACTISES AND THE LAW. 

The 1992 constitution of Ghana guarantees the freedom to practise one`s religion of choice. Under Article 17 of the 1992 constitution of Ghana, all persons shall be equal before the law and a person shall not be discriminated against on grounds of gender, race, colour, ethnic, origin, religion, creed or social or economic status. Article 17(3) of the 1992 Constitution, defines the word “discriminate” as giving different treatment to different persons attributable only or mainly to their respective descriptions by race, place of origin,political 

opinions,colour,gender,occupation,religion or creed, whereby persons of one description are subjected to disabilities or restriction to which persons of another descriptions are not made subject or are granted privileges or advantages which are not granted to persons of another description. Dr. S.K Date-Bah JSC  in the landmark case of  T.T Nartey v Godwin Gati[9] opined that Article 17 does not mean that every person within the Ghanaian jurisdiction has, or must have, exactly the same rights as all other persons in the jurisdiction. Such a position is not practicable. The crucial issue is whether the differentiation in their rights is justifiable, by reference to an object that is sought to be served by a particular statute, constitutional provision or some other rule of law. The learned Justice further expressed that the equality referred to in Article 17(1) of the 1992 Constitution is in effect freedom from unlawful discrimination. Article 17(2) of the 1992 Constitution makes it clear that not all discrimination is unlawful. It proscribes discrimination based on certain grounds. Drawing on Indian 

Constitutional jurisprudence[10], the court adopted a two-part test to determine if a law that treats classes of people differently is constitutionally valid. These are; First, the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes between persons or things that are grouped together from others left out of the group. 

Secondly, the differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the statute in question. 

The court further held that fundamental rights are not absolute, they are subject to the rights of others and public interest. 

Similarly, in the case of Tyron Iras Marhguy v Board of Governors Achimota Senior High School and The Attorney General[11] ,Tyron Iras Marhguy, a seventeen-year-old student and practicing Rastafarian, was placed at Achimota 

Senior High School after excelling in his Basic Education Certificate Examination. However, when he arrived to enroll, the school refused to admit him unless he cut his dreadlocks. The school cited its internal rules,which requires all male students to keep their "hair low and neatly trimmed". 

He argued that wearing dreadlocks is a core tenet of his religious faith, rooted in the "Nazarite vow" found in the Bible (Numbers 6:5), which forbids cutting one's hair. He contended that the school's refusal violated his right to education, freedom of religion, and human dignity. The court, speaking through Her Ladyship Justice Gifty Agyei Addo  when delivering the judgement, applied a two-tier test. In determining the validity of any statutory or other limitation placed on a constitutional right, the court laid these questions for determination; 

1. Is the limitation necessary? In other words,is the limitation necessary for the enhancement of democracy and freedoms of all, is it for the public good? 
2. Is the limitation proportional? Is the limitation over-broad such as to effectively nullify a particular right or freedom guaranteed by the constitution? 

The learned Judge found that forcing a student to suspend a religious practice without any reasonable justification is unconstitutional and undemocratic. The court also expressed that every school has an obligation to set up standards for the operation of the school.The ultimate aim of the rules is to enhance the quality of education for the benefit and academic excellence of the students they enroll. The court in addition noted that the school must demonstrate how the non-compliance of the rules will impact negatively on the students educational good or those of the community of students. In the absence of any reasonable justification restricting one's right to practice a religion is unconstitutional. 

In the same vein, under section 37(2) of the Pre-Tertiary Education Act 2020 (Act 1049)  provides that “A School Management Committee or a Board of Governors shall ensure that a public basic or senior high school is managed in accordance with laid down rules and regulations of the Education Service.”  Her Ladyship 

Justice Gifty Agyei Addo in the case of Tyron Iras Marhguy analysed that section 37(2) of Act 1049 vests the Board of Governors and not the Minister of Education with the power to make rules and regulations for the management of the school. This duty imposed on the Board must be discharged with the constitutional circumspection to avoid violating the provisions of the constitution. She further noted that the essence of the rules, clearly, is for purposes of the management of the rules and regulations of the Education Service, which aims at discipline in schools. Where the rules sins against the constitutional guarantee of a person to practice and manifest any religion without legitimate justification, then the same is unconstitutional. The act of insisting a person suspends their religious manifestation is unconstitutional. 

It should be noted that the constitutionally guaranteed right must be respected at all cost. As the case regarding Wesley Girls is sub judice, the allegations cannot be relied upon as wrongdoing. Only the judiciary has final judicial power. Thus, in the unlikely event the court finds the allegations to be true, the authorities of the school will be in breach of a constitutionally guaranteed provision. Without such adjudication, no allegations can be sustained against the school. 

 PART II 

CONSEQUENCES THAT CAN ARISE AS A RESULT OF RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION. 

A possible effect of religious discrimination is segregation in society and disunity. Ghana`s pluralistic legal system is  couched in the emblem of equality of opportunity and the protection and preservation of Fundamental Human Rights and freedoms, Unity and Stability for our nation as established in the Preamble of the 1992 Constitution. It will be a shock, wonder and a disappointment to envisage a unified society that is disunited because of religious discrimination. Such should not be tolerated since it undermines the democratic framework of our nation and might lead to possible riots. 

 Ortiz-Diaz[12],defined religious discrimination as the harassment, retaliation, and adverse treatment based on the religious or nonreligious affiliation of the individual. It was shown that Religious discrimination has been found to have an impact on diverse religious groups, and the effects may include depression[13] isolation from individuals that do not hold similar religious views[14]  and loss of self-esteem18. In addition, religious discrimination can lead to increased anxiety[15]. 

A careful examination of these possible and negative effects of religious discrimination in our schools and Ghana at large can undermine the educational system of the country. 

PROPOSED REFORMS TO ADDRESS RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION. 

The constitutional review committee appointed on  January 19, 2025  as a committee to undertake a comprehensive review of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana submitted a final report on the review titled “Transforming 

Ghana: From Electoral Democracy to Developmental Democracy20" submitted the report to the presidency.The committee's findings outlined a comprehensive, inclusive and feasible approach to addressing religious discrimination in schools. At paragraph 6.13 with the heading “The Right Education: Religious Coercion and Discrimination in Public Schools”of the titled report the committee provided as follows: 

The Committee recommends that, in line with the proposals of the 1968 Constitutional Commission, the following constitutional reforms are required to secure freedom of religion, conscience and non-discrimination in education: 

● Article 25 (Right to Education) should be amended to provide that educational institutions are required to comply fully with the rights in Chapter Five, while retaining the freedom to maintain a denominational identity and ethos that does not infringe the rights of students; to explicitly guarantee that no student shall be compelled to participate in religious 

20 Presidency,Final Recommendations of the CRC released( Press release, December 22, 

2025)https://presidency.gov.gh/presidency-releases-final-recommendations-of-the-crc/ 

worship, instruction or observance in any educational establishment; and State that admission, boarding access, discipline, student leadership and participation in school activities shall not be subject to direct or indirect religious discrimination in any educational institution. 

• Article 21 shall be amended to clarify that no person shall be disadvantaged or privileged by reason of religion, belief or non-belief, and the State shall not adopt any practice that coerces, presumes, or promotes adherence to any religious or belief system. Similarly, the State shall maintain equal regard for all faiths, beliefs and non-belief, and shall not, in the exercise of any public power, function or resource, adopt, privilege or advance the institutional interests of any religious or belief community 

• Parliament should be required to enact a statute pursuant to Articles 21 and 25: 
  • Expressly confirming that all educational institutions offering education to the general public, whether publicly funded, mission-assisted, or privately operated, are bound to respect the constitutional rights of learners under Chapter Five. This should include guarantees that participation in religious observance is voluntary, that students may opt out without penalty, and that admissions, discipline, academic opportunity and compulsory school activities are conducted on neutral and non discriminatory terms. 

• Clarifying that parental choice of a school with a religious ethos does not diminish the constitutional protections owed to learners. Private providers may maintain their religious identity, symbols, chaplaincies and moral environment, but these may not take the form of coercive religious exercises or discriminatory practices. 

• Acknowledging, without creating exemptions, that some educational institutions serve specialised purposes distinct from ordinary schooling. Seminaries and ministerial training institutions exist to offer intensive doctrinal formation to persons who voluntarily choose such paths, typically as adults or near adults. These institutions remain bound by constitutional norms; yet, because participation is based on informed consent and their purpose is not general public education, compulsory doctrinal activities within them do not raise the same coercive concerns that arise when minors or compulsory basic education are involved. 

• Establishing a voluntary religious participation framework, recognising      1. That Mission-assisted schools may maintain chaplaincies, symbols        and ethos. 

1. Participation in worship, devotions or doctrinal instruction must be voluntary, with no academic, disciplinary or social penalties for non-participation. 

1. Prohibition of religious discrimination in admissions and placement; boarding access; discipline; student leadership; and allocation of student opportunities. 

1. Establishing neutral codes of conduct and discipline that govern behaviour through non-denominational standards of respect, punctuality, honesty and decorum; and mandate that schools provide supervised and non-stigmatising alternatives to worship (e.g., study hall, library sessions, civic or constitutional education modules). 

• Establishing oversight and accountability mechanisms, such as a structured complaints mechanism in every school, anti retaliation protections for students and parents, Ghana Education Service (GES) oversight audits focused on compliance with constitutional religious freedom standards, and sanctions for coercive practices or discriminatory policies. 

• Incorporating training on freedom of conscience, religious pluralism, and constitutional neutrality into teacher preparation programmes and chaplaincy guidelines. 

The committee's findings are not just developmental to Ghana`s jurisprudence but inclusive to ensure the safeguard of individual human rights in schools. The proposed reforms will make it mandatory for all schools to uphold fundamental human rights at all costs. Another fascinating aspect of the proposed reform is that students will not be compelled to participate in any religious activities and that no school activity will be subject to direct or indirect religious discrimination. This will set a fair competitive playing ground for students to make the best of the opportunities they get in Senior High School. 

PART III 

INTERNATIONAL  LAW ON THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, CONSCIENCE AND RELIGION. 

International law strongly protects the freedom of thought, conscience and religion.International law guarantees everyone the freedom to have or adopt beliefs, manifest them in worship and teaching and not coerced with limitations only allowed for public safety and rights of others. Article 18 of the UDHR[16] provides that; 

“ Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.” 

Similarly, the ICCPR[17] specifically in Article 18 establishes that; 

“Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practise and teaching. 

No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice” 

It is worth noting that the UDHR was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 

1948 setting out fundamental human rights for all people. Since it is a declaration, it is not legally binding but serves as a fundamental standard and inspiration for International law. However, the ICCPR is a legally binding treaty adopted in 1966 and in force in 1976, making the rights in the UDHR  enforceable by signatory states. Ghana ratified the ICCPR in 2000.  

The UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights in paragraph 5 of its General comment23 noted that an example of impermissible coercion that would impair the right to have or adopt a religion or belief include: the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers to adhere to specific beliefs and congregations, to recant their religion or belief, or to covert; and policies or practices having the same intention or effect. For this reason, international law recognises the act to worship or assemble in connection with a religion or belief. 

Another area worth indicating is that under Article 18(3) of the ICCPR freedom to manifest religion or belief may be subject to only such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. Drawing on this international treaty it is clearly seen that international law heavily frowns on discriminating against religion and supports the right to be seen, heard and practice any religious belief with limitations prescribed by law which are necessary. 

In the case of Kokkinakis v Greece24 where Minos Kokkinakis, a Jehovah`s witness, faced multiple arrests and convictions under Greek law for proselytism. The court found in his favour affirming that freedom of thought, conscience and religion is fundamental to a democratic society. 

23 UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), CCPR General Comment No. 22: Article 18 (Freedom of 

Thought, Conscience or Religion), CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4, 30 July 

1993,https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/hrc/1993/en/13375 24 1993 ECHR 

This case is to highlight the point that even at International standards, individuals are not restricted to practise their religion of choice. Hence, state institutions are mandated to facilitate the process to ensure their citizens enjoy this right without restraint. 

CONCLUSION 

Religious freedom is not only a constitutional guarantee in Ghana, it is a lived reality that shapes identity, belonging and dignity. The 1992 constitution of Ghana recognises this by protecting freedom of thought, conscience and religion while prohibiting religious discrimination. These protections place a heavy responsibility on public institutions including; schools to create an environment where diversity is respected and no individual is compelled to abandon deeply held beliefs. 

The controversy surrounding Wesley Girls` Senior High School illustrates how institutional rules when applied without sensitivity or justification easily conflicts with fundamental human rights. The pending case of Shafic Osman v Board of Governors of Wesley Girls` High School and Others[18] raises important questions about the balance between maintaining school discipline and respecting constitutional freedoms. This case also presents the Supreme Court with an important opportunity to clarify the extent to which public schools may maintain religious ethos without infringing the fundamental freedoms of students. As already expressed in the cases above, a fundamental human right can only be limited if it is necessary, proportionate and supported by compelling justifications. 

Religious discrimination carries real human consequences that can affect student mental well-being, sense of identity and academic experience. No religion or belief should be seen as unwelcome in any institution else democracy will be weakened in the country. 

International Human Rights law reinforces this position. Instruments such as the UDHR[19] and ICCPR[20] affirm the freedom to practice one`s religion without coercion. Ultimately, safeguarding religious freedom in schools is accommodating difference than suppression. Respecting religious diversity strengthens social cohesion, affirms human dignity and prepares everyone to participate in a pluralistic democracy. Constitutional inclusivity must remain central in solving this bane.

 REFERENCES 

Cases 

Glah & Another v The Republic [1992] 2 GLR 15–18. 

Kokkinakis v Greece (1993) European Court of Human Rights. T.T. Nartey v Godwin Gati Reference No J6/1/2010. 

Tyron Iras Marhguy v Board of Governors Achimota Senior High School and Attorney General Suit No HR/0055/2021. 

Shafic Osman v Board of Governors of Wesley Girls’ High School and Others Suit No J1/6/2025. 

Legislation and Constitutional Instruments Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992. 

Children’s Act 1998 (as amended). 

Pre-Tertiary Education Act 2020 (Act 1049). 

International Legal Instruments 

African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child 1990. 

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966. 

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989. 

Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948. 

UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No 22: Article 18 (Freedom of Thought, Conscience or Religion) CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4 (30 July 1993). 

Books 

Aquinas T, Summa Theologica (1265–1273). 

Hart HLA, The Concept of Law (1961). 

Shukla VN, Constitution of India. 

Journal Articles and Academic Works 

Hassan G, Rousseau C and Moreau N, ‘Ethnic and Religious Discrimination: The 

Multifaceted Role of Religiosity and Collective Self-Esteem’ (2013) 50(4) Transcultural Psychiatry 475–492. 

Hopkins N and Kahani-Hopkins V, ‘Reconceptualizing Extremism and 

Moderation’ (2009) 48(1) British Journal of Social Psychology 99–113. 

Ortiz-Diaz SM, The Impacts of Religious Discrimination Towards Anxiety in Diverse Populations (Doctoral Dissertation, Walden University 2018). 

Rippy AE and Newman E, ‘Adaptation of a Scale of Race-Related Stress for Use with Muslim Americans’ (2008) 3(1) Journal of Muslim Mental Health 53–68. 

Reports and Official Publications 

Constitutional Review Committee, Transforming Ghana: From Electoral Democracy to Developmental Democracy (Final Report, 2025). 

Presidency of the Republic of Ghana, ‘Presidency Releases Final 

Recommendations of the CRC’ (Press Release, 22 December 2025). 

United States Department of State, 2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Ghana. 

[1] Summa Theologica 1265-1273 

[2] HLA Hart, The Concept of Law ( 1961) 

[3] Glah & Another v The Republic[1992] 2GLR 15-18 

[4] US Department of State. 2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Ghana. 

[5] Article 21(1)(c) of the 1992 Constitution. 6 Suit No: J1/6/2025. 

[6] Ibid 

[7] United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child.Articles 2,3,14. 

[8] African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child.Article 2,3,4,9. 10 International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights. Article 18 11 Children`s Act 1998(as amended) Sections 2 and 3. 

[9] Reference No: J6/1/2010 

[10] Shula`s Constitution of India.Pg.47-48 

[11] Suit No: HR/0055/2021

[12] Ortiz-Diaz, Sharlaine Marie, "The Impacts of Religious Discrimination Towards Anxiety in Diverse Populations" (2018). 

Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. 4670. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4670  

[13] Rippy, A. E., & Newman, E. (2008). Adaptation of a Scale of Race-Related Stress for use with Muslim Americans. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 3(1), 53–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564900802035292

[14] Hopkins, N., & Kahani-Hopkins, V. (2009). Reconceptualizing 'extremism' and 'moderation': From categories of analysis to categories of practice in the construction of collective identity. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48(1), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466608X28442518 Hassan, G., Rousseau, C., & Moreau, N. (2013). Ethnic and religious discrimination: The multifaceted role of religiosity and collective self-esteem. Transcultural Psychiatry, 50(4), 475–492. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/1363461513495586

[15] Ortiz-Diaz, Sharlaine Marie, "The Impacts of Religious Discrimination Towards Anxiety in Diverse Populations" (2018). 

Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. 4670. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4670  

[16] Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 

[17] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 

[18] Ibid 

[19] Ibid 

[20] Ibid