Event review
On May 29, 2015, a ninth-grade student at the "Malchow Green Campus" of Lichtenberg Middle School was confiscated for using a mobile phone during school. However, this confiscation was unusual because the student's mobile phone was kept by the school throughout the weekend. The student and his parents were strongly dissatisfied with this, believing that the student's basic rights were violated, and took the matter to court.
Court ruling
The student's parents wanted to confirm school's confiscation through litigation and claimed that this measure damaged the student's honor and humiliated him. However, the Third Chamber of the Berlin Administrative Court dismissed the lawsuit, arguing that the student had no special interests to declare after the mobile phone was returned. Since the student has left the school, the incident will not happen again and any discrimination will not have an impact. Therefore, the court ruled that this did not constitute a serious violation of basic rights.
The judge's opinion
The judge stressed that the inability to use mobile phones on weekends does not affect the rights of parents. Even if the student, according to his own statement, "suddenly cannot be contacted", this does not mean that his basic rights are unreasonably impaired. The student and his family can apply for an appeal to the Higher Administrative Court of Berlin-Brandenburg , but they did not take advantage of this opportunity.
The position of the student committee
Nevertheless, the state student committee has been dealing with the issue of "banning the use of mobile phones in schools". State student representative Constantine Gilden believes that there should be no such ban, at least in high school, because it is "no longer appropriate". He advocates that schools should teach "responsible use of media", which requires more involvement of students in the curriculum. Gilden believes that some schools confiscate mobile phones for too long, which raises questions about rationality.
Legal status and use of signal jammers
The state student committee has asked the education administration to examine the legal situation and clarify "what teachers and students can do in this regard". However, this inspection failed to provide clear instructions and only stated that it was the school's responsibility. Gilden expressed dissatisfaction with some schools taking radical measures, such as installing mobile phone jammers, and believed that this did not solve the actual problem.
Court Statement
The current ruling does not fully explain the legal assessment of the confiscation of mobile phones. This ruling only determines the legality of the procedure in a specific case. A court spokesperson explained that this "declaratory action" can only succeed "if there is a risk of repetition or fundamental rights are violated." Since the student is now attending another school, this situation does not apply.
Summary
This incident reflects the legal and ethical challenges faced by schools when enforcing mobile phone bans. Although the court ruled that students' fundamental rights were not violated, the controversy surrounding mobile phone use remains. As technology develops, how schools balance management and student rights will continue to be a focus of discussion.