Freedom of Religion in Ghana: Constitutional Principles, Landmark Cases and the Emerging Wesley Girls Debate

By Seth Doe Esq

Freedom of religion remains one of the most firmly protected rights under the 1992 Constitution. As Ghana becomes increasingly diverse, courts are being asked to define how far this freedom extends and how it should operate within public institutions, especially schools.

The ongoing litigation in Shafic Osman v Board of Governors of Wesley Girls Senior High School and Others, Suit No. J8 23 2026, marks a pivotal moment in the evolution of this right. Across the past decade, constitutional cases involving faith, schooling and equality have reshaped how Ghana understands religious liberty.

This article explores the constitutional framework, the leading cases and the emerging legal contest over the status of mission schools in Ghana’s public education system.

1. The Constitutional Foundation of Religious Freedom

1.1 Article 21(1)(c) The Right to Practise and Manifest Religion

The Constitution provides that all persons have the right to practise any religion and to manifest that practice.
This includes both:

• • the freedom to hold a belief internally, and
  • the freedom to manifest that belief outwardly, through dress, expression, observances, rituals or conduct.

1.2 Article 17 on Equality and Non Discrimination

Articles 17(2) and (3) prohibit discrimination on grounds of religion or creed.
Discrimination arises when a person receives different treatment mainly because of their religious identity in a manner that disadvantages them.

Together, Articles 21 and 17 ensure that public authorities do not directly or indirectly restrict religious practices unless such restrictions are constitutionally justified.

1.3 Article 12 and the Principle that Rights Are Not Absolute

Article 12 introduces a key balancing element into Ghana’s human rights regime. It affirms that fundamental rights are guaranteed, but their enforcement must take place subject to respect for the rights of others and the public interest.

The Supreme Court has emphasised this in several cases. In Raphael Cubagee v Michael Yeboah Asare [2018] GHASC 14, the Court, per Pwamang JSC, explained that no human right is absolute and that courts must consider competing policy factors when enforcing rights. Human rights enforcement, in the Court’s words, is not a one way street.

This principle runs through every major religious freedom case in Ghana and becomes especially important when individual rights clash with institutional rules in schools or state policies.

2. Leading Ghanaian Cases on Freedom of Religion

2.1 Tyrone Marhguy v Board of Governors of Achimota School and Attorney General

(Suit No. HR/0055/2021) (2021) JELR 107192 (HC).

Facts

A Rastafarian student who had gained admission to Achimota School was denied enrolment because he wore dreadlocks. He argued that his dreadlocks were not simply a personal preference but a religious expression linked to the Nazarite vow that forms part of Rastafarian belief.

Decision

The High Court held that:

1. 1. Denying him admission violated Article 21 because his hairstyle was a genuine manifestation of his religion.
   2. The enforcement of a hairstyle policy that disproportionately affected a minority religious group amounted to discrimination under Article 17.

Impact

This decision marked the first major recognition of minority religious expression in a public school setting. It also demonstrated the High Court’s willingness to apply Article 12 by balancing institutional rules against constitutional rights while still protecting the claimant’s religious identity.

2.2 Osei Kofi Bomfeh v Attorney General

[2016] GHASC 19, Supreme Court

Facts

The plaintiff challenged state support for the National Cathedral project and the government’s facilitation of Hajj pilgrimages. He argued that these actions gave preferential treatment to Christianity and Islam.

Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the suit. It held that:

• • State support for religious activities does not automatically amount to discrimination.
  • The State may support religious initiatives if the support serves a legitimate public purpose and is not exclusive.

Impact

Bomfeh clarified that Ghana is not a strictly secular State. The Constitution does not require a complete separation between religion and government. Instead, what the Constitution prohibits is unequal treatment that promotes one religion at the expense of others.

3. The Emerging Case: Shafic v Wesley Girls Senior High School and Attorney General

3.1 Background

In December 2024, Shafic Osman, a Ghanaian lawyer and PhD candidate at the London School of Economics, filed a constitutional suit against:

• • Wesley Girls Senior High School, and
  • The Attorney General.

He argues that a school operating within the public education system cannot restrict the religious rights of Muslim students.
In particular, he challenges policies preventing Muslim students from fasting or observing Islamic practices on campus.

3.2 Plaintiff’s Position

Osman argues that the school’s policy violates:

• • Article 17 on equality and non discrimination
  • Article 21 on freedom of religion
  • International human rights instruments recognised under Article 40

His case frames Wesley Girls as a public school bound to religious neutrality.

3.3 The Attorney General’s Response

The Attorney General has adopted a very different position.

In a proposed amended statement of case filed on 3 November 2025, the AG argues that Wesley Girls Senior High School:

• • is not a public school in the strict sense
  • was founded and continues to be owned by the Methodist Church
  • retains its religious identity despite receiving government funding
  • forms part of a long tradition of mission schools that predate the State

The AG relies heavily on:

• • Osei Kofi Bomfeh v Attorney General [2016] GHASC 19, and
  • the Canadian Supreme Court decision in Loyola High School v Attorney General of Quebec [2015] 1 SCR 613.

Why the Loyola Case Matters Here

In Loyola High School, the Supreme Court of Canada held that a private Catholic school could not be compelled to teach its own religion from a secular or neutral perspective. Doing so would violate its religious freedom because the school had a right to transmit its faith identity to its students.

The Attorney General argues that the same reasoning should apply to Wesley Girls.
According to the AG, funding does not erase the Methodist character of the school, and the Constitution does not require the State to suppress the religious identity of mission schools.

3.4 The Issue for Determination

The central constitutional question now before the Supreme Court is:

Are mission schools that receive state funding required to act as religiously neutral public schools, or are they constitutionally recognised faith based institutions that may maintain their religious identity within the public education system?

The answer has never been directly determined by the Court.

3.5 What Happens Next

The Supreme Court is expected to hear the Attorney General’s amendment motion on 25 November 2025.
The outcome of this case will determine:

• • the rights of students from minority faiths in mission schools
  • the autonomy of faith based institutions
  • the balance between Articles 12, 17 and 21
  • the long term structure of Ghana’s public education system

Because the case is pending, the final legal position cannot be confirmed.

4. Themes Emerging Across the Jurisprudence

4.1 Protection of Minority Religious Expression

The Marhguy case signals an increasing willingness to protect minority groups where rules have unequal effects.

4.2 Ghana’s Model Is Not Strict Secularism

Bomfeh illustrates that the State may cooperate with religious institutions as long as it does not demonstrate exclusive favouritism.

4.3 The Unique Question of Mission Schools

Unlike earlier disputes, the Shafic case concerns the constitutional identity of mission schools.
The Supreme Court must decide whether state funding transforms them into fully public institutions or whether Ghana’s history and constitutional structure protect their religious character.

5. Conclusion

Freedom of religion in Ghana remains a dynamic constitutional field. Through cases such as:

• • Tyrone Marhguy v Achimota School (Suit No. HR/0055/2021) (2021) JELR 107192 (HC).
  • Osei Kofi Bomfeh v Attorney General [2016] GHASC 19
  • Loyola High School v Attorney General of Quebec [2015] 1 SCR 613
  • Shafic Osman v Wesley Girls Senior High School and Attorney General

the courts are gradually defining how Ghana balances faith, public policy and constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court’s eventual decision in the Wesley Girls case will shape the future of mission schools, the rights of religious minorities, and the partnership between church and State for many years to come.