The Supreme Administrative Court's decision to abolish a controversial regulation that restricted students' hairstyles is welcome news.
In its ruling on March 5, the court said the regulation, which originated in 1972 with the aim of "cultivating students into model citizens," violated children's bodily rights as guaranteed by the constitution and the Child Protection Act of 2003.
Under the old directive, boys were required to have a crew-cut hairstyle and were prohibited from having beards or moustaches, while girls had to keep their hair at earlobe length and were not allowed to wear makeup.
Strict enforcement of these hairstyle and uniform rules had long been a contentious issue among schools, students, and parents -- particularly when some teachers went too far, imposing harsh punishments, including excessive hair-cutting intended to embarrass students and cause them mental distress, all in the name of discipline.
This has indeed been a long fight. More than a decade ago, then-student activist Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal issued a wake-up call for the removal of this outdated rule, arguing that schools should prioritise students' overall development rather than their hairstyles.
He insisted students were capable of thinking for themselves and that schools must respect their rights. Following this, Bad Student, a group of high school students campaigning for education reform under the banner of "Education for the Liberation of Siam," also pushed for an end to the hairstyle rule as part of their broader demand for greater freedom in schools.
The group lodged a legal complaint in July 2020, urging the Supreme Administrative Court to abolish the outdated regulation.
In recent years, there have been positive changes, with the Education Ministry becoming more open to the issue and encouraging schools to respect students' rights. Some schools have embraced greater freedom, easing uniform regulations.
However, many still maintain draconian rules, with severe punishments -- including physical assault -- rooted in an authoritarian culture. While human rights advocates praised the March 5 ruling, it does not guarantee absolute freedom for students.
The ruling still allows individual schools to set their own rules regarding hairstyles, and some may not fully embrace the decision.
However, at the very least, teachers can no longer violate students' rights or impose severe punishments that cause embarrassment under the guise of discipline.
The March 5 ruling reflects growing awareness of rights protection in society. It is essential the Education Ministry and schools abide by the ruling. The time has come for the government, educators, and relevant authorities to change their attitudes and be more receptive to children's rights -- not only in terms of self-expression but also their engagement in pro-democracy activities.
Protests and demonstrations must be recognised as a legitimate part of a democratic society. Ideally, the Education Ministry should ensure that schools listen to students' voices when implementing rules that affect them. Ultimately, all stakeholders must prioritise serving the best interests of children.