[ad_1]
- The torturous journey so far
In mid-March 2021, Ghanaians woke up to cacophonous discussions in the media about two new students who were reportedly denied admission to Achimota School. Amid the cacophony, TV3 broadcast news that an official from the Ghana Education Service (GES), who wanted to remain anonymous, ordered the management of the Achimota school to admit the two students. I was surprised to know why the said head of GES, if he thought the directive was going in the right direction, had chosen anonymity.
This directive from the anonymous GES official was then followed by a publication in a daily newspaper that the director general of GES had officially ordered the Achimota school to “admit” the Rastafarians.
NAGRAT strongly objected to the GHG directive.
The president of NAGRAT Angel Carbonu, revealed that the Achimota school had not refused the admission of the two boys. NAGRAT, therefore, demanded that GES withdraw its previous order and reorient the Achimota School to enforce its school rules. Indeed, from the available files, the Achimota school offered admission to the two boys, gave them the school rules as part of the flyer when they showed up at school with their forms. placement and asked parents to pass the rules through their quarters.
One of those rules is of course that all students make sure their hair is cut low and well groomed. It was at this point that Rastafarian parents went mad and openly threatened to go to Facebook to embarrass the school administration and cause public disaffection with them.
It also emerged that the Achimota alumni supported the school administration in enforcing school rules and questioned the GES for bypassing the school board.
GHG INCONSTANCE
Much to the dismay of the Ghanaian public, GES went back on its previous directive to the Achimota school. This was after a reported engagement with the school administration at GES headquarters. This new directive has taken the Rastafarian question to another level and further aggravated the controversy. The GES would have saved itself from embarrassment and public ridicule if it had visited the Achimota school, or invited the principal to headquarters for a discussion to understand the issues before issuing the first directive.
This confusion reached a crescendo when two former CEOs of GES, Mr. Michael Nsowah and Mr. Charles Aheto-Tsegah locked down JOY FM, practically at odds with each other on the issue. While the former approved of the Achimota school’s action in enforcing its rules, the latter questioned school authorities for their action and challenged them to produce any school rule specifically prohibiting people with dreadlocks from be offered admission to the school. What a pathetic situation? What confusion?
What signal were the former CEOs of GES sending to teachers, principals and the general public, if they could openly disagree on such an important issue? What confidence did the leadership of the GES inspire in the Ghanaian public, when it had to go back on its previous directive, with the fragile excuse that the previous directive to the Achimota school to “admit” the Rastafarian boys does not was intended only to calm the spirits?
This lame explanation is similar to that of the former CID patron telling on national television that she knew where the kidnapped Takoradi girls were just to give assurances to their parents when she did not know where they were. Let our leaders inspire us with confidence. If they are not sure about the issues with the organizations they lead, we expect them to stay calm, to research the facts before speaking out.
CONTROVERSIES
One argument forcefully pushed by believers in admitting Rastafarian boys to Achimota school with their dreadlocks is that it is their constitutional and religious right. They argue that Rastafarianism is a religion just like Islam, Christianity and the traditional African religion taught in schools in Ghana. They claim it is like Hinduism and Judaism practiced in other parts of the world. I tend to believe that sooner or later LGBTQ people will also turn their belief into religion and seek refuge under the Constitution to be allowed to practice ‘their thing’.
Reference is made to the provisions of the Republican Constitution of Ghana of 1992. The most frequently cited are:
- Article 17 (2) which opposes discrimination based on sex, color, ethnic origin, religion, belief, etc.
- Article 21 (1) (C) emphasizing the freedom to practice any religion and to manifest such a practice
- Section 26 (1) which authorizes citizens to enjoy, practice, profess, maintain and promote any culture, language, tradition or religion, subject to the provisions of this constitution.
MY POSITION
I totally agree with NAGRAT, the Achimota school, the last position of the GES and its former general manager Mr. Michael Nsowah that the Achimota school (and indeed any other school) has the right to ensure that its internal rules of conformity and cohesion are respected by all students who wish to study under its roof.
These rules and traditions build schools to standards that make them attractive to applicants and parents to prefer them over other schools. These traditions must be protected for the holiness, the soul, the discipline and the growth of the schools.
Wesley Girls High School, Holy Child, Achimota, Mfantsipim, Prempeh College, Legon Presec, Aburi Girls, etc. all have traditions developed over the years that make them oversubscribed every year. We must protect these unique traditions by helping them apply the rules that built them.
Constitutional references may seem compelling for some people to mistakenly believe that anyone has the right to be admitted to public schools in Ghana in any physical form provided that he or she can attribute religion or culture to its appearance. Such blind interpretations of the provisions of the Constitution will be a recipe for chaos and lawlessness in our schools. Let’s take a look at these scenarios:
- Among the Eʋe ethnic group of the Volta region where I come from, some practitioners of the traditional African religion belong to the Trɔkosi and Yeʋe cults. Followers of this religion believe in nudity and therefore do not wear clothing above the waist. Religiously, boys and girls, men and women, wrap white calico around their waists, leave their breasts and upper body uncovered, coat their bodies with white clay or paint, wear dreadlocks and bear walking. . They also wear bracelets around their arms and ankles made of white cowrie shells.
In some Akan communities also, I met by chance children called “Abosom Mma” (children sought from divinities by sterile women). Such children, like the followers of the Yeʋe Cult, also wear dreadlocks, go barefoot and partially bare.
Will any of the children described above be admitted to our public schools like Wesley Girls, Achimota School, Opoku Ware, Aburi Girls, Mfantsipim, etc. in their religious dress codes? Will schools allow them to ditch the school uniform and stick to their calico clothes? What will the reaction and level of concentration of the students be if a girl from Yeʋe Cult were to sit in the classroom with her breasts uncovered? Won’t the mental well-being of boys in the classroom be called into question?
I think the drafters of our constitution saw this danger and that is why we see some restrictions on the exercise of these rights.
a) Article 24 (4), for example, states that restrictions may be imposed on these rights by prescribed laws “necessary in the interests of national security or public order or for the protection of rights and freedoms of others ”. There is no reason to suggest that those teenage students sitting in class in appearances different from the uniformity and norm in the school environment cannot corrupt the public order in these schools.
Article 26 (2) of the 1992 Constitution also states that “All customary practices which dehumanize or impair the physical and mental well-being of a person are prohibited. “
I contend that the person’s mental welfare clause does not apply only to those who engage in such cultural practices, but also to those around whom such practices occur. The appearance of a student in dreadlocks, calico around the waist with luscious mature breasts popping up or barefoot can disrupt the mental well-being of other students by distracting their attention in class.
b). What is the position of dreadlocks in other public establishments? If the Ghanaian armed forces ask a new army recruit to cut their Rastafarian hair, will there be a hubbub? The military and police, by their internal rules and regulations, do not allow members to wear dreadlocks. So why can the armed forces be allowed to enforce its internal rules, but the Achimota school or any other school cannot?
VS). Can a lawyer appear before Our Lord and Madam Justice of the Supreme Court in dreadlocks under the insistence of his right to a Rastafarian religion, instead of the wig to represent a client? The answer is no! So why do we recognize the right of other public institutions to apply their internal rules when schools cannot?
I heard the Rastafarian Council lawyer say he wore dreadlocks while at KNUST and the Ghana School of Law. However, when he realized that he might not be called to the bar even if he passed his law school exams, he advised himself and cut the dreadlocks. He must be courageous and magnanimous enough to advise these young boys to follow in his footsteps as well for the sake of their education.
re). I will be extremely surprised if a Director General, past or present, will claim that he / she is unaware that Ghana’s public high schools have codified rules and a code of ethics for students. Indeed, at one of our national CHASS conferences that I attended, the principal told us that the principal (GES) had asked each school to codify its rules. All schools have complied. Understanding these rules is part of the orientation programs organized for new students admitted at the start of each academic year. Parents receive copies of these codified rules as part of the school flyer and are asked to bring them to the attention of their wards before bringing them to school the same day or showing up.
These rules include, but are not limited to, dress codes, styles and levels of hairstyle, prohibition of the use of electrical devices such as water heaters and rice cookers, observance of bedtime, participation in school gatherings, etc. These rules and traditions give character to each school and maintain discipline.
For the general public, I pray that we appreciate, not only the right of these young people to education and religious beliefs. It is equally important for us to appreciate the rights of schools to apply their internal rules, just as the armed forces and the courts do. As the President of NAGRAT said, the enjoyment of these religious and cultural rights is best achieved in an atmosphere of harmony and order.
Let us not destroy, by our actions and our declarations, the harmony and the discipline in our schools which have helped to bring them to the standards which make them attractive to our children.
In conclusion, I sincerely believe that the hubbub and controversy over the application of its rules by the Achimota school is unnecessary.
Source link
