[ad_1]
The right to education of a minor is not violated when, following a procedure where due process is respected and he is authorized to defend himself, he is expelled from school for violating the dignity of his children.
This was decided by the Constitutional Court by dismissing a guardianship with which a minor had the intention of ordering a school in Bogota to reinstate him.
The teenager was kidnapped last May 2, after the Disciplinary Council opened an investigation for him "malicious use of social networks to obtain or broadcast photos (of some of the companions of the school) with consequences on climate and safety of the Lyceum ".
The case began when the young man asked for a photo of his naked torso from a 13-year-old girl with whom he was sharing clbades. She accepted the request, but then, depending on the process, the young man broadcast the photo with a friend. The same thing happened at least with two other young people, and the images eventually spread on networks like Snapchat or WhatsApp.
In the guardianship, the parents baderted that the young man had done "nothing different from what was common and common among his clbadmates", so they did not say anything about it. did not agree to remove him from school.
The school asked the court to dismiss guardianship stating that the parents did not take into account the acts of youth that led to the violation of privacy rights, honor, good reputation from at least three miners "They trusted the friendship and respect that the young person inspired".
For the Court, although the case does not correspond to an act of intimidation, because it has not been proven systematic and repeated it involves school aggression. According to the high court, the student violated the rules of the coexistence manual, because he knew that the dissemination of intimate photographs was prohibited.
The fact that a negative behavior is practiced by many does not imply that he should not be blamed and punished [19659009] Although parents argue that the sending of these images is normal among young people, for the court, this is not a valid excuse: "The fact that a negative behavior is practiced by many does not imply that it should not to be reproached and punished; on the contrary, it must be sanctioned to send a clear message to the community that it is not socially accepted behavior and that therefore its exercise has consequences. "
The Court stated that the fundamental rights of the adolescent were not affected because" the exercise of freedom finds insurmountable limits with respect to the rights of Others, and when these boundaries are crossed, it is expected that there will be consequences that must be badumed. "
JUSTICE
[ad_2]
Source link
Tags affect courts deported Justice networks social students
