[ad_1]
1. Let us not be carried away by public sensationalism and the incessant attacks on the Achimota school, which is why some sector of the public baptizes religion as repressive and selective attack. The core of the problem has little to do with religion, but more to do with a movement known for its radical nonconformist ideology.
Please give me the pleasure, Rastafari, as defined (www.britannica.com/topic/), is a religious and political movement, has its roots in Jamaica and is adopted by many groups around the world that combine Protestant Christianity , mysticism and a frying pan. -African political awareness.
Rastafarian “life” includes wearing long hair; locked up and disheveled in his natural state, adorning clothing in the colors red, green, gold, and black (symbolizing the life force of blood, herbs, royalty, and the African), and eating an “I-tal” ( natural, vegetarian diet Religious rituals include prayer services, smoking ganja (marijuana) to achieve better meditation with Jah.
Professing Rastafarianism invariably means that one submits to a prescribed way of life. And, erroneously, asking for a “total” recognition of an inalienable right to a religion of choice, at the same time, demands a recognition of all of the above, since they form the basic principles that sustain the “Rastafarian” faith. From the horse’s own mouth, these are the rights that the young man under his father’s care is trying to assert.
Achimota, like any educational, religious or administrative organization of private or other cooperation, has requirements that are justifiably discriminatory according to the law. The cases of Ayarna v. Agyemang and Nartey v. Gati provide a rational and legitimate basis for discrimination. Neurtey Korboe v. Amosa emphasizes that this justifiable discrimination is neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.
2. Justified discrimination passes the PROPORTIONALITY TEST, also known as the Oakes Test, as demonstrated in Republic v. Tommy Thompson Books Ltd (No 2), because the Rastafarian child is under 18 years of age. Article 14 (1) (e) establishes that, “Every person shall have the right to his personal liberty and no one shall be deprived of his personal liberty, except for the purpose of education or the welfare of a person who has not attained 18 years of age. age. Therefore, Article 14 (1) (e) of the 1992 Constitution is instructive.
Personal freedom is the right of an individual to behave as he pleases, except for the restrictions imposed by the laws and codes of conduct of the society in which he lives to safeguard the physical, moral, political and economic well-being of others. I would dare to say that freedom has little to do with the right of movement, but focuses on the freedom to live according to your beliefs, principles, religion and do what you want without fear or abuse. This right may be restricted in Ghana for the purpose of EDUCATING a person who has not attained the age of 18.
Let’s take a critical look at the letter and the tenor of Article 25 (Educational Rights) specifically 25 (b) secondary school in its different forms must be generally available and accessible to all by all appropriate means … Does this mean that it is unconstitutional to make rules of justifiable discrimination / requirement to regulate the enjoyment of these rights? This will take us to 12 (2) which emphasizes that rights are subject to the rights and freedoms of others (enjoyment of equal rights) and to the public interest.
For the purposes of elucidation, the country’s supreme court has poignantly defined the scope of what constitutes the public interest. In the landmark case of Ablakwa V Obetsebi-Lamptey, the court attached a narrow connotation to the public interest. The court, to its wits, holds that an act that affects a sector of the population can be considered to affect the public interest.
3. Let me help you define “discriminate”. Article 17 (3) establishes that “discriminate” means to treat the same or similar persons differently only or mainly because of their respective descriptions by race, place of origin, political opinions, color, gender, occupation, religion or creed, for what people, of one description, are subject to disabilities or restrictions to which people of another description are not subject or are granted privileges or advantages that are not granted to persons or other description.
So far I contend that the child who is asked to shave his hair will be illegally discriminatory if some other religious group of students is allowed to keep his hair as they please or go against the same rules that are being applied to him. young. The case of Nartey v. Gati says the following: “It certainly does not mean that all people within the jurisdiction of Ghana have, or should have, exactly the same rights as all other people in the jurisdiction. That position is simply not feasible.
Soldiers, police officers, students, and judges, for example, have certain rights that other people don’t. Just because they have those rights does not mean that they violate article 17. Rigid equality of treatment would often lead to unfair and unequal outcomes.
Consequently, it is widely recognized that equality before the law requires equal treatment for those in a similar situation. The provision that all persons are equal before the law, therefore, must be understood in that context, taking as reference the fact that there are no absolute rights contained in the 1992 1992 Constitution.
This authority is clear on this issue because the young man who like other academically qualified young students has submitted to the requirements of the school. All are placed equally and should be treated equally, allow the youth to smoke marijuana, wear locks, Rastafarian clothing, or anything that is outside the rules and regulations of the school to which past and present students have been subjected is serious discrimination. And this is injustice.
4. Last but not least, Achimota did not deny him admission due to his religious beliefs. They only asked him as a child to abide by the rules and regulations of the school. No one is above the law because of their higher religious beliefs, which are variable and subjective.
There is a condition that everyone must meet, not just him. Taylor J poignantly posits in the case of MARHABA AND OTHERS V. THE REPUBLIC [1978] that, “it is obvious that everything that refers to human desires and the way to satisfy them is merely empirical and subject to constant changes and, therefore, there is not a single rule of law whose positive content can be fixed.
The only thing that can be risked with regard to the content of the law is, as Thomas Aquinas would like, that it must have the welfare of the entire community as its own object, that is, the law strictly understood must have the ordering as its object. of the common good “
5. Muslims, Christians, traditionalists, etc. they have attended school over the years and have been subject to the same body of law. How peculiar is your case? Don’t we have Rastafarians without locks? We do, but unfortunately we do not have a past or present Achimota student with locks, therefore it will be illegally discriminatory to admit it. Qualify for other schools, it is not imperative that a Rastafarian attend Achimota.
I doubt your religion does too, a prerequisite for being a good Rastafarian. It is trivial knowledge that Achimota over the years has admitted children of different religions and cultures who are fully aware of the requirements of the school and apply to the rules and regulations of the school that are part of the body or sources of contemplated laws. in Article 11 of the 1992 Constitution.
If a citizen chooses to join the security services, that is, the Armed Forces, the Police, etc. Ghana, is subject to rules and regulations that are justifiably discriminatory. If a Christian goes to the mosque to worship on Sunday because there is no church nearby, he will have to take off his shoes and respect its rules. Christians are not prohibited from entering a sanctuary, but must obey its justifiably discriminatory rules.
6. I would honestly love to see the lawyers representing the young Rastafarian address the court judges in traditional African clothing. You can highlight all of Chapter Five of the 1992 Constitution, which stipulates a plethora of human rights provisions and could end up being thrown out of court.
The law has exceptions for a reason, let’s learn to take notes of those key exceptions to the law instead of taking a popular, obvious and emotional position on the issues.
–
The writer, Theophilus Kwampong Abuah, is a social activist, student leader, and senior at GIMPA Law School.
