Teachers are suffering from the prolonged legal status of being suspects after being reported for child abuse due to legitimate disciplinary actions taken during class. This situation arises from the current mandatory reporting rule, which requires all cases to be forwarded to prosecutors, even if the police find no evidence of wrongdoing.
The National Assembly's Legislative Research Office recently published a report titled "Improving Procedures for Handling Child Abuse Reports Involving Teachers," analyzing these issues and proposing alternatives. The report highlights the flaws in the current system, which often misinterprets legitimate educational activities as child abuse, leading to lengthy judicial processes. It suggests separating the criminal procedure from child protection measures as a potential solution.
Seven Years in Court Despite Clear Innocence
In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court acquitted a teacher who had been accused of emotional abuse for making inappropriate comments during class. The case took seven years to resolve, illustrating the severe impact of the mandatory reporting rule.
According to Article 24 of the Special Act on the Punishment of Child Abuse Crimes, law enforcement officers are required to forward all child abuse cases to prosecutors without exception. Although police gained the authority to dismiss cases in 2021, child abuse cases remain an exception. This has led to concerns that some parents misuse the reporting system, threatening teachers' rights. In response, the government introduced a system for education officials to submit opinions on cases.
However, data from the Ministry of Education shows that of the 993 cases where education officials deemed the actions as "legitimate guidance," 90.4% (898 cases) ended without charges or were dismissed. Despite this, teachers remain in a state of limbo as suspects until the cases are resolved in court.
Teachers' organizations are calling for legal reforms, arguing that cases should be dismissed early if the police find no evidence of wrongdoing. Although five proposed amendments addressing this issue were introduced in the 22nd National Assembly, they failed to pass due to opposition from the Ministry of Justice, which argued that eliminating the prosecutor's review could compromise child protection.
Legislative Research Office Advocates for General Reforms
The Legislative Research Office has proposed a "two-track" system that would allow for the separation of criminal case closures from child protection procedures. The report states, "Forcing cases to be forwarded despite low chances of prosecution encourages misuse of the reporting system." However, concerns arise that creating special provisions for teachers could lead to fairness issues with other professions, and that the opinions of education officials could unduly influence the authority of investigative bodies.
Instead, the report recommends actively utilizing Article 47 of the Child Abuse Punishment Act, which allows judges to issue protective orders for children regardless of whether a criminal case is forwarded. This would enable judges to impose restrictions or mandate counseling and treatment when necessary.
By ensuring that police verify the need for child protection when deciding not to forward a case, and allowing prosecutors to review non-forwarded cases for 90 days, the concerns of the Ministry of Justice could be addressed. The Legislative Research Office concluded that rather than being tied to special provisions for teachers, legislative efforts should focus on general reforms that balance the early resolution of criminal procedures with the protection of vulnerable children.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.