Thai court annuls 50-year-old rule on students’ hairstyles
The verdict leaves room for schools to establish their own regulations regarding students’ hairstyles and dress codes.PHOTO: THE NATION/ASIA NEWS NETWORK
BANGKOK – The longstanding dream of many secondary school students in Thailand may have come true on March 5 when the Supreme Administrative Court ruled to annul a Ministry of Education directive that banned students from wearing long hair and cosmetics at school.
The court ruled that the ministerial directive, dated Jan 6, 1975, was issued based on Coup Order No. 132, dated April 22, 1927. But it was found to violate Article 26 of the Constitution, leading to its immediate abrogation.
The verdict, however, appears to leave room for school administrations to establish their own regulations regarding students’ hairstyles and dress codes.
READ: Thai students rally over gender rights, uniforms and haircut rules
The lawsuit was brought by 13 students from a public school under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education. The plaintiffs named the school management and the Education Minister as the first and second defendants, respectively.
The students argued that the Jan 6, 1975 directive was unconstitutional as it infringed upon their human dignity and personal freedom to make decisions regarding their own bodies. They claimed that the rule was demeaning and violated their fundamental rights.
In its ruling, the court emphasized that Article 26 of the Constitution prohibits laws that unreasonably restrict individual rights and liberties, particularly when they undermine human dignity.
Additionally, the court deemed the 1975 directive to be outdated and unsuitable for the current social context.
It also highlighted that the rule was unnecessary, as Article 64 of the Child Protection Act (2013) already grants school administrations the authority to establish their own regulations regarding students’ attire to suit their identities and ages.
READ: Casual clothes, dyed hair: Bangkok schools ease uniform, hairstyle rules
The issue of hairstyles and uniforms has been a point of contention between students and the school authorities for many years.
School administrations often argue that short hair promotes discipline, while students say forced haircuts have no impact on academic performance, but instead lead to public humiliation.
The court acknowledged that the original coup order and directive aimed to instill obedience in students towards their parents, teachers and schools while fostering good behavior.
But it ruled that forcing secondary school students to wear extremely short hair or crew cuts was no longer appropriate for modern society and failed to consider the physical and identity development of adolescents aged 13 to 16.
Moreover, the court found that the directive conflicted with Article 26 of the Child Protection Act, which prohibits any action that causes physical or mental distress to children.
