Ghana, like many African countries, has attempted to promote gender equality through the adoption of progressive laws. Despite this, it seems as though the enactments of subsidiary laws to protect women and increase their participation in a free society has outpaced the evolution of Ghanaian customs and societal views. 

This discrepancy is attributable to several, primarily cultural, factors and lends itself to the question of whether gender equality can be achieved at all; because of the nature of negative social attitudes to undermine. Societal oppression against women is such an expansive issue that I could not even begin to properly do the topic justice in a minute op-ed such as this.

Thus, I will zone in on the example of pregnancy in the workplace to illustrate this wider oppression; the disregard of labour laws designed to protect women in this scenario offers a visceral depiction of the fractured nature between the law and lagging societal views.

A recent case involved two pregnant women who happened to be undergoing pupilage at a private law firm: despite having a doctor's credible submission that they were in no way incapable of performing their duties as pupils at the law firm, they were quickly suspended from the firm until after the pregnancies had been carried to full term.

This arbitrary act performed by upper management had the effect of dragging these women back by two years in their training. This is a typical example of punishing women in the workplace for being pregnant - despite labour laws that protect against this.

Prevailing negative attitudes towards women in Ghanaian society brought about by religion and historical tradition tell us that it is okay to police and make value judgements on a woman's capability on her behalf. These attitudes are so strong they tend to undermine what any law says regarding women's rights. 

In a similar case, about two years ago, the Ghana National Fire Service was forced to rescind its decision to dismiss two workers on the basis of their getting pregnant within the first three years of their employment. Speaking through His Lordship Anthony K. Yeboah, JA of blessed memory, the Court held that the women were protected under Article 17 of the 1992 Constitution and their right to family included their right to be pregnant with the entitlement to do so at any time of their choosing.

Stating that the provision relied on by the Fire Service in their dismissal of the women had a discriminatory effect on grounds of gender, the Court held the provision unjustifiable, illegitimate and illegal and ordered among other things, the reinstatement of the women.

That case showed that, at times, the law does step in to help 'correct' these injustices, but such instances are few and far between and are highly dependent on a person's ability to seek legal redress.

This ability is largely determined not only by money and time but also a mental fortitude on the part of the woman, as she must go up against negative social stigmas and attitudes regarding ‘her rightful place'. It is all well and good for laws to exist but their effectiveness is contingent upon the society's compatibility with them. If societal attitudes are stuck in the dark ages, how then do we give power to 'modern' laws designed to protect citizens?  

Canadian, Laurent Duvernay-Tardif, was the first professional NFL player to graduate in medicine in the league. He was allowed to take his degree in modules, with the university essentially tailoring the course to his specific and unique needs. And so, a course that ordinarily takes four years, he completed in seven.

Although this isn't a Ghanaian case, it offers stark contrast to the Ghanaian situation wherein women are sacked simply for being pregnant, instead of being helped to accomplish their goals through the provision of suitable adjustments. I acknowledge that this example provides too weak a sample size to make any kind of tenacious assertion.

However, one might wonder whether the same leeway would have been so readily afforded to a woman. The point I am trying to drive home is that men often do not have to prove much, societal attitudes are on their side and that is precisely why there are no male-specific laws designed to protect men.

If our laws to protect women are to work, then it’s time to do away with these antiquated views of women. We need to take deliberate steps towards unlearning them and reshaping our minds to ensure that women have the opportunity to play a full role in society and in the workplace without discrimination. We ought to begin reframing the issue at hand.

Instead of viewing women and their natural biology as inconveniences, we should begin asking ourselves how we can make the system work for women and not in spite of them. Laurent Duvernay-Tardif's story is just a drop in the ocean of countless stories of rules and systems being adapted to work for men.

It demonstrates that such adjustments can be made, we just need the political and societal willpower to change societal attitude in order to catch up with the laws designed to protect women.