Supreme Court Gives Wesley Girls’ High School 14 Days to Respond in Religious Rights Case
Wesley Girls Senior High School- Photo credit Wesley Girls
Accra, Ghana — The Supreme Court of Ghana has ordered the Board of Governors of Wesley Girls’ Senior High School, the Ghana Education Service (GES), and the Attorney General to file their legal responses within 14 days in an ongoing case alleging human rights violations against Muslim students at the school.
The directive, issued on Tuesday, November 25, marks a major step forward in a legal battle that has reignited national debate over religious freedom, educational policy, and the rights of students in mission-founded public schools.
The order follows a writ filed by private legal practitioner, Shafic Osman, who accuses the school of systematically infringing on Muslim students’ constitutional rights. The case centers on Wesley Girls’ long-standing ban on fasting during Ramadan and its alleged prohibition on wearing the hijab, which the plaintiff contends violate Articles 21 and 26 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution — provisions that guarantee freedom of religion, belief, and cultural expression.
“This case goes to the heart of Ghana’s constitutional democracy,” Osman said in his filing, describing the school’s policy as a “systemic and continuing violation of fundamental rights under the guise of tradition.”
During the hearing, the apex court stressed the urgency of resolving the matter, citing the fundamental nature of the rights involved. The 14-day ultimatum compels the defendants Wesley Girls’, the GES, and the Attorney General to justify their policies in writing before the Court reconvenes.
Previous government statements have acknowledged that while mission-founded schools have denominational roots, their public funding and oversight by the GES mean they must comply with Ghana’s secular and inclusive education policy.
In a related development, the Supreme Court granted an application by Democracy Hub, a civil society organization, to join the case as amicus curiae or “friend of the court.”
The group is expected to provide neutral, expert analysis on how the case intersects with broader issues of governance, religious pluralism, and the management of state-funded mission schools. The move signals the Court’s recognition of the case’s national policy implications beyond the immediate parties involved.
A statement from Democracy Hub said: “This matter is about the principle that no Ghanaian child should have to choose between their faith and their education.”
Read Also
