The key to solving bullying is the proper implementation of child protection policies in schools

DESPITE the passage of Republic Act 10627 or the Anti-Bullying Law in 2013, bullying remains rampant in Philippine campuses. In fact, bullies have expanded their activities to social media and cyberspace where they relentlessly and brazenly bully, harass and victimize their victims, thinking they are untouchable and beyond the reach of school authorities.

Despite legislative measures to combat the bullying problem, bullying incidents continue to rise and remain a problem in the country. As repeatedly cited, the 2018 PISA report found that 65 percent of students in the Philippines reported being bullied at least a few times a month, a percentage significantly higher than the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries average of 23 percent. This percentage dropped significantly in 2022 due to the pandemic, but it is still at an alarming level that requires urgent strategies to address this problem.

Many solutions have been suggested to the Ministry of Education from various studies and I am sure that this bullying problem cannot be solved by a single measure that will act as a panacea or a magic switch to turn off the problem. Different approaches and time-based strategies are needed to help the Ministry of Education solve the bullying problem in the country.

From a legal perspective, one of the most effective solutions is to revise the Anti-Bullying Law itself, as well as the administrative policies and decrees that preceded it and those that have resulted from it since it came into force more than a decade ago.

Before the passage of the Anti-Bullying Law of 2013, the Department of Education issued Department Order No. 40 of 2012, also known as the “Child Protection Guidelines.” While it is essentially about protecting minor students in schools from all forms of abuse, thus mirroring the provisions of RA 7610 or the Anti-Child Abuse Law, it also provides for a ban on bullying in schools. Note that prior to the Anti-Bullying Law, there was no law prohibiting it except DO 40 and the Disciplinary Guidelines for Students of Individual Private Schools. When the Anti-Bullying Law came into effect, its implementing regulation, Department Order 55 of 2013, also heavily referenced DO 40 or the Child Protection Guidelines and simply reiterated them. However, in hindsight and after closely examining these guidelines, we realize that integrating an anti-bullying policy into a child protection policy framework may not be ideal.

And here's why.

The Child Protection Policy essentially protects minors from all forms of abuse by adults – these include physical, sexual, emotional, and psychological abuse. DO 40 also prohibits the imposition of corporal punishment on students as part of disciplinary action by teachers and school administrators. On the other hand, bullying is essentially a student disciplinary issue. The topic or term “bullying” here refers to bullying of students among themselves and not bullying of students by adults. Perhaps the inclusion of bullying in the DepEd’s Child Protection Policy is based on the assumption that when bullying is addressed in schools, students will be protected from bullies. However, in doing so, we also seem to have forgotten the importance of institutionalizing and strengthening student disciplinary measures in schools to prevent acts of bullying by students. Our schools have become overprotective of minors, so the duty of our teachers to discipline their students has been overly limited. While bullying offenses do not necessarily require disciplinary action from the school, but rather intervention and counseling, there are severe cases that require sanctions, especially among older students. If they persist, they become part of the school culture.

While child protection policies have reduced, if not eliminated, corporal punishment in schools over the years and taken care to avoid child abuse, the unintended consequence is that any disciplinary action taken by teachers against errant students, including bullies, is viewed as abuse or a violation of the child protection policies. Given that our society has become very litigious, many parents of students tend to invoke the child protection policies and the Child Abuse Act against teachers who are simply doing their duty to discipline their students. Teachers are constantly at risk of being sued for child abuse. As a result, teachers are hampered in their ability to discipline students and prevent bullying in schools. On the other hand, bullying is rampant due to misguided implementation of a good child protection policy. We need to balance child protection and teacher protection in student discipline. While our teachers must be very attentive, restrained and always cautious of child abuse, they must also be strict, firm and project an image of authority whenever necessary. To paraphrase the decision in Angeles v. Sison, every school has a dual responsibility to its students. First, it must provide learning opportunities and, second, it must help students grow into mature, responsible, productive, and worthy citizens of the community. Disciplining students is one of the means of fulfilling this second responsibility.

[email protected]