It has been a matter of public debate, as to whether Achimota SHS was right or otherwise in its decision refusing admission to some Rastafarian students.
When I first read the story, this was what I sincerely expected to be reaction of the authorities of Achimota SHS:
“Dear Rastafarian students, we are aware that you wrote and successfully passed the BECE examination, for which reason you have been selected to study with us. You are welcome as students of Achimota SHS once you have paid your school fees in full. That notwithstanding, there are some rules that governs the conduct and actions of students which you may not be aware of. One of the rules is for you to cut down your hair failing which you may be suspended or dismissed”
The reasons why I highlighted ‘students’, ‘suspended’ and ‘dismissed’ are as follows:
The computerised placement system was put in place to take away the powers of the various SHSs in the country from unilaterally admitting or refusing admission of persons as students.
The computerised placement system therefore placed the power to admit and refuse admission of students into our SHS institutions in the hands of the GES and other stakeholders, but not in the SHS institutions.
When a BECE candidate passes the examinations and is selected to study in a particular SHS, the student is deemed automatically admitted as student of that particular SHS subject to the payment of the required school fees.
No SHS institution in this country can therefore impose rules and regulations to deny admission of person as students into its institution, because the power to admit student lies with the GES and not that particular SHS, and these rules and regulations are meant for persons who are already admitted as students of the SHS and not those who are yet to become students.
How can an SHS institution ask someone who is not yet a student of its institution to comply with the rules and regulations of that institution?
It is only after a person becomes a student of an SHS institution that the person can be asked to comply with the rules of that SHS institution.
Achimota SHS could not have ordered these Rastafarian students to comply with their rules and regulations if at the time they were being ordered to cut down their hair they were not students of Achimota SHS.
These Rastafarian students satisfied all the conditions precedent to admission into Achimota SHS, passing the exams and paying their fees, Achimota SHS cannot refuse their admission by the computerised system based on their internal rules and regulations.
For Achimota SHS to apply their internal rules and regulations to these Rastafarian students presupposes that these Rastafarians were already recognised as admitted students of Achimota SHS, and that is why the authorities cannot be heard to say that they are refusing their admission. Achimota SHS can however dismiss its students for non-compliance with specified rules and regulations.
When a person is already a student of an SHS institution, a breach of a rule or regulation will lead to a suspension or dismissal but not refusal of admission. It is the opinion of the writer that these Rastafarians were already students of Achimota SHS at the time they were ‘refused admission by Achimota SHS’. The said refusal of admission is therefore unlawful.
Give them their student numbers, assign them to their houses and allow them some grace period to experience the academic atmosphere of Achimota SHS. Afterwards, you call them before a body or committee informing them of the rules and regulations of the institution and the need to comply, failing which they will be dismissed or suspended.