Why journalists were thrown out of courtroom

The court did not allow even journalists into it [File photo]

• The Human Rights Court heard the case of the Achimota School vs Tyrone Marhguy today

• Apart from the parties directly involved in the case, nobody else was allowed access to the courtroom

• The clerk of the court told journalists that he had received “specific instruction” to not allow them in the courtroom

A “specific instruction” to the clerk of the Human Rights Court that heard the Judgment Day case of the Achimota School versus Tyrone Iras Marhguy, denied journalists present from sitting through the proceeding.

This came about after the journalists, like all others who were not parties in the case, were instructed by the clerk of the court, ahead of the hearing, to leave the courtroom.

“I have been given a specific instruction,” the clerk is quoted by graphic.com.gh to have said.

The court was expected to give a final ruling on the case brought before it after Master Tyrone Marhguy, who was denied admission together with one other Rastafarian student, sued the school.

The suit was on the grounds that he had been denied admission at the Achimota School because of his dreadlocks, seeking the court to affirm his fundamental human right in the matter.

Details of the case indicated that the applicant was asking the court to declare that the failure and or refusal of the school to admit or enroll the applicant on the basis of his Rastafarian religious inclination, beliefs and culture characterized 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).

Also, 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 characterized by his keeping of rasta is a violation of his right to education guaranteed under Articles 25(1)(b) and 28(4) the 1992 Constitution;

He is also 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.

In essence, the suit urged the court to order the Achimota School to immediately admit or enroll the applicant to continue with his education without any hindrance.

As compensation, Master Tyrone Marhguy has 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, the report said.