The Constitutional Court (ConCourt) yesterday reserved judgment in a case where four Jehovah’s Witnesses parents and guardians of pupils at the Anglican Church-owned Arundel School are challenging the school’s decision to compel every student to attend church sessions.
BY CHARLES LAITON
The hearing was a battle of South Africa-based advocates, with Advocate Tererai Mafukidze representing the parents, Amos Makani, Mbiri Shiripinda, Plaxedes Chipangura and Daniel Sakupwanya, while Advocate Adrian de Bourbon represented Arundel School and its headmistress, Pauline Makoni.
In his submission, Mafukidze told the court his clients objected to the school’s order compelling their children to attend sessions at the chapel because there were symbols depicting crosses and Jesus Christ, which were in contradiction with the first commandment in the Bible.
He said his clients were not against the idea of their children attending prayer sessions elsewhere within the school premises, but were not comfortable doing so at the school’s chapel.
Mafukidze also accused Makoni of changing a policy that was put in place by her predecessors where pupils were not forced to participate in sessions at the chapel.
“The applicants’ daughters have over the years, and particularly during the tenure of the previous head of the school, been allowed to refrain from attending chapel meetings on grounds of religion,” Mafukidze said.
He said the school head’s policy change was meant to target about 20 students who were not Anglicans.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
Mafukidze said the move was a violation of the children’s constitutional right to freedom of religion and education. “The current headmistress was appointed early this year to head the school and replaced the previous head,” he said.
“She then sought to introduce compulsory chapel attendances for all students.
“She indicated she was going to ‘re-enforce collegiality in the school’ and that all pupils would be required to attend chapel. “Collegiality, as far as the applicants know, is a concept that is alien to their beliefs as the Witnesses of Jehovah. They do not believe in it. They do not wish to have it applied to their daughters.”
In his response, De Bourbon urged the court to dismiss the application, arguing Mafukidze had not mentioned all his arguments in the affidavit he had placed before the court.
He argued the parents had no case since they applied for their children to be enrolled at an interdenominational school and by so doing, had waivered rights to their religious beliefs.
De Bourbon said the parents ought to have enrolled their children at a Jehovah’s Witnesses school if they felt they were not supposed to be forced to comply with Anglican Church policy.
“One of the policies which are in place at the school is an enrolment policy, which is communicated to all the parents upon admission of their daughters at Arundel School, which policy was communicated and they consented to it,” De Bourbon said.
“The parents are now coming to court alleging infringement of their children’s rights, but there is an element of fraud in their application because they knew what they believed in and did not make that known to the school authorities before enrolment.”
After a lengthy submission by the parties, judgment in the matter was reserved.
