In Accra, Rastafarian Oheneba Nkrabea reportedly departed Achimota School to attend Ghana International School (GIS).
Sources said the Rasta student’s parents moved him to the top international school after learning of the Attorney General’s decision to appeal the High Court’s earlier this year.
The move by Oheneba has been kept under wraps while the legal battle to overturn a high court verdict heats up. Ghana International School (GIS) is a leading international school in Ghana offering world-class comprehensive education to pupils aged 3 to 18.
Ras Wayoe Ghanamannti, the lawyer for Oheneba Kwaku Nkrabea, termed the Attorney General’s appeal against the High Court’s verdict in the Rasta youngsters case as regrettable.
On GHOne TV Tuesday, the lead Counsel claimed that the flagrant disregard for the children’s best interests is troubling. He thinks the children will be mentally harmed as the matter moves forward in the appeals court.
In the end, these are youngsters, young men who have started school, so any such choice will traumatize them. And we believe the AG should have examined this. We thought that considering this case and their interest in it would be appropriate.
The Achimota School Board and the Attorney-General’s Department have appealed the Human Rights High Court’s judgment allowing the two dreadlocked kids into the school. According to the appeal, the court failed in stating that the Achimota School conformity standards and regulations are unlawful and interfere with one’s religious freedom.
The school board has filed an appeal to have the entire decision set aside and the plaintiff is forced to follow the school’s rules if he chooses to attend.
The AG’s office has also appealed the decision, asking the court to accept Achimota School’s arguments and rule in its favor.
According to the notice of appeal, the judge who ruled in favor of the two boys did not require the plaintiffs to prove their assertions.
The judge had erred in claiming Achimota School had interfered with the pupils’ right to education. To suspend the Applicant’s guaranteed freedom to exercise and exhibit his faith is illegal and unconstitutional, as decided by the learned Judge.
[ads2]
