Court orders WAEC: Release results of 20 pupils …issues 30- day ultimatum for release of BECE results

Mrs Agnes Teye-Cudjoe,Deputy Director,Public Affairs WAEC

Mrs Agnes Teye-Cudjoe,Deputy Director,Public Affairs WAEC

Mr Joseph Whittal-Commissioner-of-CHRAJAn Accra Human Rights High Court has ordered the West African Examination Council (WAEC) to release the English Language examination results of 20 pupils of A-Z Preparatory School within 30 days.


Justice Anthony K. Yeboah, presiding, said in his judgement that the decision to cancel the results of the applicants was unfair, unreasonable, and unlawful.


He awarded a cost of GH5, 000 each to the pupils against WAEC for frustrating the “impressionable minors who have had to endure this trauma all this time.”


The international examination body cancelled the May/June 2017 Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE) papers of the pupils over allegations of collusion.


Aggrieved by the decision of WAEC, the minors who sued through their lawful attorneys urged the court to quash the decision.


Counsel for the pupils, Dr  Joe Attipoe and Colonel Frank Kudu told the court that their clients were denied the opportunity to be heard.


The respondent argued that it ran an examination-cheating detection test on some of the examination papers applicants wrote using Item Differential Profile Software (IDP test) and concluded that applicants colluded among themselves during examinations.


In determining the issues presented by both sides, Justice Yeboah said the IDP test created suspicion and not a conclusive, factual proof that the applicants had colluded.


He said WAEC ought to have conducted further investigations following the denial of the applicants.


“I further hold that following the denial of the applicants, there was the imperative to conduct further investigation to choose between the allegation of collusion and the denial of it, which investigation is not apparent on the face of available evidence before the court.”


“I hold that the respondent has failed in the present proceedings to convince the court that there is any rational or evidential justification for the decision to cancel the applicant’s result.”


The judge said Article 23 of the 1992 Constitution frowns on unreasonableness, and unfairness as follows “Administrative bodies and administrative officials shall act fairly and reasonably and comply with the requirements imposed on them by the law and persons aggrieved by the exercise of such acts and decisions shall have the right to seek redress before a court or other tribunal.”


He said the respondent woefully failed to demonstrate by means of evidence or reasoning that it has not fallen foul of the provisions of Article 23 of the 1992 constitution.



Print Friendly

Leave a Comment