|  ElCiudadano.cl |  Noticias

El Ciudadano

Original article: Mismo delito, distinto castigo: oposición alerta que Escuelas Protegidas golpea a estudiantes con gratuidad

Same Offense, Different Punishments: Opposition Warns that Protected Schools Bill Harms Students’ Right to Free Education

«Same offense, different consequences based on financial status«. With this stark warning, the opposition in the Chamber of Deputies criticized the Protected Schools Bill, an initiative pushed by President José Kast, which was approved in general with 105 votes in favor and 46 against, but faces constitutional reservations from several lawmakers.

The primary concern revolves around a provision linking access to free higher education with the absence of convictions for a range of offenses, which, according to legislators, imposes a disproportionate and additional penalty that disproportionately affects the most vulnerable students.

The law, comprising six articles, establishes security, order, and respect measures in schools, including the controversial backpack checks, a ban on hoods, and penalties for participation in occupations or acts of violence. However, the most contentious point introduces a new requirement to access the benefit of free education: absence of a final conviction for crimes against life, physical or mental integrity, property, or public infrastructure.

This condition, opposition parliamentarians warn, violates fundamental guarantees and establishes a double penalty for low-income youth.

Deputy Héctor Ulloa (IND-PPD) was emphatic in denouncing the inequality, stating that “a student who self-funds their education can continue studying even with the same conviction; they lose nothing. Same offense, different consequences based on financial status.«

In his view, the regulation infringes on Article 19 of the Constitution, which prohibits arbitrary distinctions and the principle of non bis in idem, by adding a second penalty that the penal system does not contemplate and «that exclusively affects the most vulnerable».

Concerns Raised that Backpack Checks «Violate Privacy and Dignity»

Meanwhile, deputies Juan Santana (PS) and Emilia Schneider (FA) also raised constitutional reservations.

In this regard, Santana argued that the provision allowing for backpack, bag, or personal belongings checks infringes on privacy and dignity, deeming it a «disproportionate measure».

“Also regarding Article 6, as the establishment of a double sanction—that is, the penalty of losing free education and having the regulations derived from the regulations—contradicts the guarantee of due process and disproportionately affects the right to education, violating provisions in numerals three, 10, and 26 of that article,” the legislator elaborated, as cited by Diario U. de Chile.

Schneider, for her part, noted that four provisions violate guarantees such as due process, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, the right to education, and freedom of association, as well as the «legal reserve and protection of the essential content of fundamental rights».

In response to the criticisms, Education Minister María Paz Arzola defended the initiative and thanked Congress for its processing. “We need to shift the focus and rethink the benefits for those who commit crimes or incivilities. This law is a first step,” she asserted.

*Featured Image: NODAL.

La entrada Same Offense, Different Punishments: Opposition Warns that Protected Schools Bill Harms Students’ Right to Free Education se publicó primero en El Ciudadano.