Wesley Girls High School Case: Ghana Education Minister Affirms No Right is Divisible in Religious Freedom Dispute

Introduction

In a landmark statement on religious rights in Ghanaian schools, Education Minister Haruna Iddrisu declared that “no right is divisible,” emphasizing the government’s commitment to ensuring every girl can practice her faith freely. This pledge comes amid the high-profile Wesley Girls High School case, where Muslim students challenge school policies restricting hijab wearing, Ramadan fasting, and other Islamic practices. Delivered in Parliament on November 25, 2025, the minister’s words highlight tensions between denominational school autonomy and constitutional protections under Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, particularly Articles 26(1) and 33(5).

This Wesley Girls hijab ban controversy has escalated to the Supreme Court, drawing national attention to religious discrimination in Ghana schools. As the case unfolds, it raises critical questions about balancing school traditions with individual freedoms, making it essential for students, parents, and educators to understand the stakes.

Analysis

Minister’s Parliamentary Statement

Education Minister Haruna Iddrisu addressed Parliament directly on the Wesley Girls Muslim students restrictions, noting that alleged bans conflict with international human rights standards and Ghana’s Constitution. He stressed the state’s duty to protect every child’s rights, stating, “We will not countenance any action that denies any Ghanaian girl the opportunity to profess or practice any religion.” This reaffirms Ghana’s multi-religious fabric, where schools must accommodate diverse faiths without division.

Supreme Court Developments

On the same day, the Supreme Court granted Democracy Hub permission to file as amicus curiae (friend of the court) in the Wesley Girls Senior High School religious discrimination lawsuit. The court also directed Wesley Girls High School, the Ghana Education Service (GES), and the Attorney-General to submit responses to the plaintiff’s claims. The Attorney-General defended the school’s Methodist denominational status, arguing it retains the right to preserve its identity.

Root Causes of the Wesley Girls Case

The dispute originates from Wesley Girls’ policies, enforced as a Methodist-founded institution, which reportedly prohibit Muslim students from wearing hijabs, fasting during Ramadan, and engaging in Islamic prayers. These rules have sparked debates on whether such restrictions infringe on fundamental freedoms in public-funded schools.

Summary

The Wesley Girls High School case centers on a December 24, 2024, lawsuit by lawyer Shafic Osman invoking the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction under Articles 2(1)(b) and 130(1)(a) of the 1992 Constitution. Osman contends the school’s bans violate rights to religious freedom, equality, and non-discrimination. Minister Iddrisu’s intervention underscores government support for inclusive education, while court proceedings continue to scrutinize school policies against constitutional benchmarks.

Key Points

Practical Advice

For Students and Parents

If facing religious restrictions in Ghana schools, document incidents with dates, witnesses, and photos. Approach school administration formally, citing Article 26(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination based on religion. Escalate to GES if unresolved, and consider legal aid from organizations like Democracy Hub.

For School Administrators

Review policies for compliance with the Education Act and Constitution. Implement accommodations like designated prayer spaces or flexible fasting schedules, as recommended by GES guidelines on inclusive education. Engage interfaith dialogues to foster harmony.

Navigating Ramadan in Schools

During Ramadan, schools can allow excused absences for fasting students from physical activities. Provide water stations post-school hours and educate staff on Islamic practices to prevent misunderstandings.

Points of Caution

While advocating for rights, respect school rules during proceedings to avoid disciplinary actions. Avoid inflammatory social media posts that could prejudice the case. Denominational schools like Wesley Girls operate under specific charters; challenges must focus on constitutional breaches, not dismantle traditions. Parents should prioritize dialogue over confrontation to maintain educational continuity.

Comparison

Versus Other Ghanaian School Cases

Similar to the 2017 Achimota School case, where Rastafarian students’ dreadlocks were banned, the Wesley Girls case tests denominational autonomy against rights. Achimota upheld school rules, but Wesley’s focuses on active religious practice (hijab, fasting), potentially setting a precedent for accommodations.

International Parallels

In the UK, cases like Begum v. Denbigh High School (2006) balanced hijab rights with school uniforms, ruling in favor of schools if policies are proportionate. Canada’s Saskatchewan hijab ban challenge (2021) affirmed student rights, mirroring Ghana’s emphasis on indivisible freedoms. These highlight global tensions in religious attire in schools.

Legal Implications

The Wesley Girls Supreme Court case invokes Article 2(1)(b), allowing direct challenges to unconstitutional acts, and Article 130(1)(a) for enforcement. Article 26(1) mandates non-discrimination in education on religious grounds, while Article 33(5) protects children from practices harmful to their welfare—but not at the expense of faith expression. A ruling could mandate policy changes across GES schools, reinforce denominational rights under Article 23, or require reasonable accommodations. Verifiable precedents include Supreme Court decisions affirming religious pluralism in public institutions.

Constitutional Framework Explained

Article 21(1)(a) guarantees freedom to practice religion. Violations could lead to injunctions halting discriminatory policies, with potential remedies including damages or training mandates for schools.

Conclusion

The Wesley Girls High School case exemplifies Ghana’s commitment to equitable education amid religious diversity. Minister Iddrisu’s firm stance—”we won’t deny any girl her religion”—signals proactive government intervention. As the Supreme Court deliberates, this dispute promises to clarify boundaries between school identity and student rights, promoting inclusive learning environments nationwide. Stakeholders must prioritize unity, ensuring no child’s faith is sidelined.

FAQ