Recently, there has been criticism over a candidate running for the chairperson of the Jeonbuk Teachers' Union, who highlighted the 'publicization of the vice principal slapping incident' as a major achievement in their election pledge. This is because many people pointed out that the process of publicizing the 'vice principal slapping incident' was an action that should not have been taken as an educator. Many citizens who came across the news of the incident at the time also expressed mental discomfort.
The assault case of a vice principal by an elementary school student that occurred at an elementary school in Jeonju last June spread as a national issue in a short period of time through intensive media coverage. The incident itself had a significant social impact as it symbolically showed the issue of infringement of teacher's rights, but there were not a few problems in the reporting process. In particular, it became necessary to review these problems as the union in question put forward this as an achievement, putting behind the legal and ethical controversies that arose when it provided the video of the incident to the media. The responsibility of the management and supervision agencies that neglected this also seems clear.
The video released by the union vividly captured the scene of an elementary school student assaulting a vice principal, and this quickly spread through the media and SNS. The media mosaic-processed the faces of the people in the video, but some videos included scenes that could infer the student's identity, and the student's problematic behavior and the school's response were exposed without filtering. Legal experts are pointing out that the filming and leakage of the video could be a violation of the law.
The Personal Information Protection Act requires the consent of the party in relation to the provision of personal information and strictly regulates the collection and processing of data containing sensitive information. If the video contains information that can infer the student's identity (face, voice, behavioral characteristics, etc.), this is personal information.
Filming without the consent of the student or guardian and providing the video to the media may be a violation of the Personal Information Protection Act.
The State Public Officials Act prohibits public officials from disclosing information obtained in the course of performing their duties to the outside without proper procedures. If the video in question is illegally filmed material, the act of providing it to the media is likely to be a violation of the duty of confidentiality.
The media focused on highlighting the seriousness of the infringement of teachers' rights by emphasizing the sensational aspect of the incident with the video with these problems exposed. Many media outlets repeatedly reported the scene of the student's assault, highlighting the difficult reality of teachers, but in the process, students and parents were virtually 'demonized'. In particular, some media repeatedly played the assault video with sensational titles such as 'An elementary school student slapped the vice principal and cursed', stimulating public anger.
This reporting frame was successful in reminding the need to protect teachers' rights, but it had the side effect of spreading prejudice and hatred against students and parents. Furthermore, the aftermath of the media coverage, such as the trend of children imitating the assault scene, had a negative impact on society as a whole.
Eventually, the chairman of the Jeonbuk Teachers' Union, who distributed the video to the media, admitted the problems with the video provision through SNS, saying, "I feel social responsibility for the part where the (student) is demonized unintentionally. (...) Please refrain from exposing the assault video now."
Even if the union had a purpose in publicizing the incident, careful attention was needed to ensure that the rights of the child were not infringed. The media should refrain from repeatedly playing violent and sensational content without distorting the essence of the incident.
In particular, in a situation where teacher's rights are being misperceived and abused as the exclusive rights of teachers in elementary school sites, the media should not cooperate in reproducing this.
The incident revealed two conflicting issues of infringement of teacher's rights and protection of children's rights at the same time. However, teacher's rights and human rights are essentially different concepts. The authority of teachers, that is, teacher's rights, does not have a clear legal definition, and comparing it with human rights is a logical contradiction. If there is confusion in legal interpretation about the two concepts or if the value of human rights is not properly understood, it can cause confusion and conflict among members in the school site.
Teacher's rights mean the authority formed through respect and trust for the educational activities and professionalism of teachers. This is a concept limited to a specific profession and works as a notion formed in a social and cultural context, not as a clear legal status or right.
On the other hand, human rights are basic and universal rights explicitly guaranteed by the constitution and international law. It is a right that all humans have from birth, and it is legally defined and protected. Therefore, it is inappropriate to compare teacher's rights, which lack legal regulations, with human rights, which have legal universality and absoluteness.
The growing voice of some teachers who prioritize the exclusive rights of teachers and do not even understand the concept of human rights, rather than emphasizing student rights and advocating teacher's rights for student education, can only be interpreted as group egoism.
It is natural and wise for teachers to raise their voices for improvement against the Ministry of Education and the Office of Education and to prioritize system improvement for the difficulties they face.
Nevertheless, there is a great concern that the union seems to be obsessed with increasing or maintaining the number of union members by creating a frame that demonizes parents and students.
It is a time to reflect on whether it is not making it harder for teachers who are doing their best to expand the positive influence of Jeonbuk education for student education and acting as a stumbling block.
[Related articles]
