Education and the three R'S: rastafarianism, religion and review

• Author: Vaughan Carter/Derek O'brien
• Position: LL.B. (Hons.), LL.M.,, Lecturer in Law, Cayman Islands Law School/BA. (Hons.), M.A. Lecturer in Law, Cayman Islands Law School
• Pages: 184-204

EDUCATION AND

THE THREE R'S:

RASTAFARIANISM, RELIGION

AND REVIEW

VAUGHAN

CARTER*

AND

DEREK

O'BRIEN**

INTRODUCTION

Rastafarianism, despite its cultural and political significance both in the

Caribbean and across the globe,1 has featured surprisingly rarely in Caribbean

jurisprudence. In the

case

of

Grant

and

Chin

v The Principal of John A Cumber

Primary

School,

The Chief

Education

Officer and The

Education

Council,3

however, Rastafarianism was at the core of a decision that raised profound

questions about the legal definition of religion, discrimination on the grounds

of religious belief or practice, the protection of religious belief afforded by the

common law, the status of unincorporated International Human Rights

Conventions in domestic

law,

and their relevance to the

field

of judicial review

where the review concerned infringement of fundamental rights.

*LL.B. (Hons.), LL.M.,, Lecturer in Law, Cayman Islands Law School.

**BA.

(Hons.), M.A. Lecturer in Law, Cayman Islands

Law

School.

1 The internationalization of Rastafari is now manifest in Rastafari social presence in Canada,

Britain, the United States, Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and, of course, throughout

the Caribbean.

2 See R v Hints

and

King (1971) 17 WIR 326, where the Court of Appeal of Jamaica permitted

the defendant to take the oath in accordance with his Rastafarian beliefs, and reference to 'the

Rastafarian cult,' per Duffus, JA., in R

v

Larman

et al (1964) 6 WIR 550,at

552,

'members of

the Rastafarian movement; per Peterkin, CJ., in

Freeland

v

R (1981) WIR 378, at 379, a 'cult

called the 'dreads' or 'rastas' per Lord Keith of

Kinkel,

of

the

Privy

Council,

in

Joseph

v The

State

of

Dominica

(1988) 36 WIR

216,

at 217, and 'the rastararian

sect.'

per Singh,

JA.,

in

Henry

et

at v R (1993) 46 WIR 135, at 136.

3 The case is reported in (1999) 17 Cayman Islands Law Bulletin, although all references: in this

article are to the transcript of the full judgment delivered on June 18, 1999.

The plaintiffs, both devout Rastafarians, were the parents of an eight-year-

old boy, who had been expelled from school because of his failure to comply

with school rules regarding the length of hair. The boy, in accordance with the

religious beliefs and practices of his parents, wore his hair in dreadlocks.

Dreadlocks, along with designer hairstyles were specifically prohibited under

the rules. Under the Education Law, every child between the age of 4 years

nine months and sixteen years of age was required to attend school, subject to

the power of the Education Council to expel a child pursuant to s.22 Education

Law. On December 19, 1995 the Council voted to uphold the rules and the

decision was taken to exclude the child from school on the ground that he had

failed to comply with the rules, since which time the child has been educated

at home by a private tutor at the expense of the government. The plaintiffs

pursued declaratory orders to the effect that the decision to exclude the child

was ultra vires, that the decision to expel was in breach of the Law and/or the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights and various other International

Human Rights Conventions, and that the decision was unreasonable, in a

Wednesbury5 sense, as its enforcement would infringe upon the plaintiffs'

religious beliefs.

RASTAFARIANISM

AS A RELIGION:

The

'Theistic'

Versus

The 'Functional'Approach

Whilst Rastafarianism has been recognised by the United Nations as one of

the religions of the world, in seeking to invoke the court's protection of the

free exercise of their religious beliefs, Rasrafarians have time and again been

obliged to satisfy the court, as a preliminary issue, that Rastafarianism comes

within the legally recognised definition of a religion. It should be noted from

the outset that there is no universally accepted legal definition of religion in

the common law world and the recognition of non-mainstream religions may

vary according to

jurisdiction.7

4 See

infra n.44 to n.47.

5 Associated Provincial Picture Houses

Ltd.

v

Wednesbury Corporation

[1948]

1

KB 223.

6

See, inter

alia,

The

People

v

Lewis

496 NYS 2A

258,

Reed v Faulkner 842

F.2d 960 and Re

Chikweche

[1995] 2

LRC

93.

7

For an

illuminating

discussion

of the

different

approaches cowards a

legal definition of

religion,

see

Hall, "On

the

Legal

Concept

of

Religion"

(1998)

3

Carib

LR 299.