Bullying and the Law: The duty of schools to protect students

Bullying and the Law: The duty of schools to protect students | Daily Tribune

Bullying remains a persistent concern in schools, posing a real threat to the safety and well-being of children.

A recent decision of the Supreme Court underscores the legal responsibility of schools to safeguard their students and respond appropriately when bullying occurs. (Mother Goose Special School System Inc. vs. Spouses Palaganas (G.R. 267331, 20 January 2025).

It likewise highlights the shared duty of parents, guardians and educators to maintain a secure and nurturing learning environment.

The case involved Rhys, a grade school student at Mother Goose School (the School), who was repeatedly punched by classmates during class while the teacher was outside. Rhys reported the incident to another teacher but was ignored. A classmate later relayed the information to the class adviser, who merely asked the offenders if they had punched Rhys but did not take any corrective action.

Despite knowing of the incident, the School did not inform Rhys’ parents. They learned about it only when the mother of one of the offenders reached out to them. It was only then that they were able to take Rhys for a medical examination.

Although the School eventually conducted an investigation, it dismissed the matter as mere “teasing” and “rough play.” One of the offenders even admitted punching Rhys repeatedly, yet no disciplinary action followed. A request for reinvestigation was also denied. Feeling aggrieved by the School’s failure to act, Rhys’ parents filed a Complaint for Damages.

The Supreme Court held that a school has a contractual obligation to provide and maintain a safe environment for its students. Although schools are not expected to insure students against every harm, they must exercise the diligence of a good father of a family in preventing injury and in responding effectively when incidents arise.

In this case, the School failed to act with prudence, foresight and sensitivity. By downplaying the incident and disregarding the clear admissions of bullying, it breached its duty to protect its student.

The Court stressed that when parents entrust their children to a school, they do so with the expectation that the school will uphold their safety and welfare. Indifference or an insufficient response cannot be countenanced.

This ruling aligns with the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013 (Republic Act 10627) and its Implementing Rules and Regulations. These require all schools — public and private — to adopt measures that prevent and address bullying. Among others, schools must:

1) Adopt and implement an anti-bullying policy addressing physical, verbal, social, and cyber-bullying;

2) Establish clear reporting and investigation procedures;

3) Form an Anti-Bullying Committee;

4) Conduct orientation and awareness programs;

5) Ensure confidentiality and protect victims and witnesses; and

6) Create and maintain a safe and caring environment.

Failure to comply may lead to administrative consequences, including suspension of a private school’s permit to operate.

This decision serves as a reminder that parents must remain vigilant and proactive in monitoring their children’s school experiences. They should: encourage open communication with their children; report bullying incidents promptly and in writing; request updates on the school’s actions; review the school’s anti-bullying policies; and seek professional advice when necessary.

The Court’s ruling reaffirms that schools may be held liable when they fail to protect students from bullying. It strengthens the mandate of the Anti-Bullying Act and empowers parents to demand accountability.

Every child is entitled to a safe learning environment — one where respect, dignity, and security are upheld. Ensuring that environment is a shared duty of both school and home.

For more of Dean Nilo Divina’s legal tidbits, please visit www.divinalaw.com. For comments and questions, please send an email to cad@divinalaw.com.