![]() |
By Sho Chang-young
According to South Korea's National Curriculum, March is the first month of the school year. It was largely presumed that this March would attract attention due to the lifting of mandatory mask-wearing in classrooms after three years of the COVID-19 pandemic. But another topic is grabbing people's attention: school violence. In fact, a certain TV drama series about school violence is currently one of the most popular discussion topics across the country.
In late February, as everyone knows, an influential public official resigned abruptly ahead of inauguration day because of his child bullying others during his high school days. The controversy continues, entangled with political objectives. The National Assembly held a pending inquiry of the parties involved.
Among those called were two principals of schools where the involved students attended. Lawmakers' accusations of the principals' responsibility were acerbic. One MP even mentioned, "Why are you principals always like that?" The term "principal" here should probably be interpreted to mean a collective representation of the school staff.
There are many cases of school violence around us. March is usually the month whereby school violence slowly begins. Children meet each other for the first time, perhaps there will be a bit of rank fighting. In the process, signs of school violence may appear and expand. Many of them are addressed amicably enough through intervention and guidance by classroom teachers, counselors and parents. However, some cases go undetected by teachers or classmates and become frighteningly amplified like poisonous mushrooms.
When the situation is revealed and known to those close to the issue, it is often impossible to solve with ordinary teaching and guidance. The distinction between the so-called "victim" and the "perpetrator" becomes clear. On this occasion, the matter is transferred to a School Violence Countermeasures Review Committee held by a special law. The committee consists of about ten experts, including supervisors, teachers, parents and police officers or lawyers.
If both the victim and the perpetrator comply with the conclusion of the committee, the school authorities will follow up and record the incident in relevant documentation and it ends. The problem is when either of the parties does not agree to the committee's decision and instead files a suit, attempting to avoid disadvantages with regard to the child advancing to upper schools. The hard times for school authorities also begin then and it happens quite often. It is an open secret that school violence nowadays has become a promising source of service for practicing lawyers.
In the abovementioned case, by the judgment of the committee, the perpetrator was transferred to another high school. But the perpetrator's parent, who was a lawyer, filed a civil lawsuit, which went all the way to the Supreme Court but ultimately lost.
Once a school violence issue becomes a lawsuit, there is little the school can do, except the incidental, such as appearing in court as a witness. Rather, for the sake of human rights and the privacy of the parties concerned, they must endure criticism from the outside in silence. They should not express the substantive truth and opinion outwardly. That is why school authorities are troubled as in the case of the two principals who were present at the congressional pending inquiry mentioned earlier.
Today, school authorities are powerless in the legal proceedings regarding school violence. It is easy to predict that this phenomenon will accelerate. That is why the principals, who oversee a school's operations, are anxious. As a former principal, I look forward to seeing solid policies that can strengthen and encourage education professionals to better deal with such school violence. This will be one of the best ways of attaining justice in the education system.
The writer (sochan57@naver.com) is a retired principal of Gunsan Girls' High School.