Journalists covering the human rights case filed by one of the Rastafarian students who was refused admission by Achimota Senior High School, Tyron Iras Marhguy, were Monday afternoon denied access to the courtroom.
Ahead of the judgement Monday afternoon [May 31, 2021], the clerk of the court, instructed everyone to leave the courtroom with the exception of only parties to the case.
Asked why journalists were also being asked to leave the court room, the clerk in her response said, “I have been given a specific instruction.”
Tyrone Marhguy, who was denied admission together with one other Rastafarian student sued the school because he was denied admission at the Achimota School because of his dreadlocks in order to affirm his fundamental human right.
The applicant is asking the court to declare that the failure and or refusal of the school to admit or enrol the applicant on the basis of his Rastafarian religious inclination, beliefs and culture characterised by his keeping of rasta is a violation of his fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed under the 1992 Constitution, particularly Articles 12(1); 23; 21(1)(b)(c); 26(1)); and 17(2) and (3).
Master Marhguy wants the court to declare that the failure and or refusal of the school to admit or enrol him on the basis of his Rastafarian religious inclination, beliefs and culture characterised by his keeping of rasta is a violation of his right to education guaranteed under Articles 25(1)(b),m and 28(4) the 1992 Constitution;
He is praying the court for a declaration that the order directed at him by the representative of Achimota School to step aside during the registration process on the basis of his religious belief characterised by the keeping of rasta is a violation of his right to dignity guaranteed under Articles 15(1) and 35(4),(5) of the 1992 Constitution.
A declaration that there is no lawful basis for the school to interfere with the applicant’s right to education based on his rasta through which he manifests or expresses his constitutionally guaranteed right to religion and to practice and manifest same.
He further urged the court for an order directed at the school to immediately admit or enrol the applicant to continue with his education unhindered.
The applicant asked the court for an order directed at the respondents to jointly and severally compensate the applicant for the inconvenience, embarrassment, waste of time, and violation of his fundamental human rights and freedoms.
Source: Graphic Online