In December 2006, a complainant known as Yang (20) filed a complaint to the effect that he was dismissed from “O” High School by the principal’s unilateral decision without summoning of the Student Guidance Council. The National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK) determined that the principal of the high school (located in Icheon, Gyeonggi Province) expelled the complainant without due process as set out in the school regulations by violating the principle of due process. Thus, the NHRCK recommended that the principal (i) convene the Student Guidance Council for re-deliberation of the decision to expel the complainant and (ii) follow due process as provided in the school regulations when dismissing any student from the school in the future.
According to the findings by the NHRCK, the school regulations of said high school provide that the Student Guidance Subcommittee determines light penalties including in-school and public service, while the Student Guidance Council makes decisions regarding heavy penalties such as special training and expulsion.
When the complainant was a student of the high school, he received two penalties (three days’ in-school service and public service respectively) for truancy and riding a motorcycle. Then, he was subject to a third penalty of five days’ public service by the Student Guidance Subcommittee. At the time, the subcommittee decided that the principal should be consulted as to whether Article 61(3) of the school regulations, which provides that “any student who is deemed completely unrepentant for an infraction may be expelled from the school,” should be applied to the complainant.
In an ensuing interview with the complainant’s mother, the principal requested her to confirm in writing that “the complainant is ordered to undergo special training on condition that he should be expelled from the school without summoning of the Student Guidance Council if he violates even a single school regulation in the future.” Then, the principal ordered the complainant to complete special training. Because the student continued to be truant, however, the principal expelled the complainant from the school in November 2006 without convening the Student Guidance Council, using said statement as a rationale.
With respect to such expulsion process, the principal replied that any student acknowledged to be completely unrepentant for his errors after repeated penalties should in principle be expelled from the school. However, said the principal, he holds an interview with the student’s parents and explains the situation to them to give the student another chance, and then orders a punitive measure other than expulsion after they covenant in writing that the student shall be expelled in the event of any further violation of the school regulations.
The NHRCK determined that the principal’s dismissal of the complainant from the school without due process after ordering completion of special training instead of expulsion on condition that he would be expelled without summoning of the Student Guidance Council in case of his violation of the school regulations was an expulsion based on discretionary non-stipulated procedures and accordingly constituted a breach of Article 18(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which provides for due process in penalizing a student, as well as Article 12 of the Constitution, which sets forth the principle of due process.
The Commission made said decision because it found expulsion by non-standard procedures to be a common practice at the high school in question, therefore requiring re-deliberation of the complainant’s expulsion and correction of the practice.
