Teacher suspended for misconduct loses appeal at top court

The Court of Final Instance (TUI) has dismissed the appeal filed by a teacher who had been suspended for 240 days as a result of a disciplinary action, the office of the president of the TUI informed in a statement.
According to the statement, the TUI ruled in favor of the school regarding an investigation that found that the teacher had failed in his duties by insulting and performing indecent acts upon students.
The teacher was accused of behaving disrespectfully and improperly with several primary school students between 2012 and 2015.
The list of transgressions included insults, kissing students on the cheek, and the inappropriate touching of female students on the neck, shoulders, hips and waist.
The ruling from the TUI held that the teacher had violated the general duties of civil servants as well as the specific duties contained within the code by the Education and Youth Affairs Bureau (DSEJ), which is applicable to all teaching staff.
For this reason, the director of the DSEJ decided to apply a sanction of suspension from all duties for a period of 240 days. The teacher appealed his penalty to the courts.
Following an appeal to the Court of Second Instance (TSI), which upheld the original punishment, the teacher then appealed to the TUI.
In his appeal, the teacher claimed that the disciplinary procedures were imposed incorrectly, claiming that the accusations against him were not sufficiently specific and concrete, and that during his sentencing he was never heard and never had a chance to defend himself from the accusation or explain the facts.
Regarding the last appeal, the TUI said that all the facts pleaded by the defendant had already been addressed and sufficiently justified by the TSI and since he had not presented any new facts or allegations establishing the unfairness of the penalty that he had been subjected to, his appeal was considered unfounded.
The TUI also considered that the description of the acts performed by the teacher and that led to the disciplinary procedure was sufficient to allow him to present a proper defense.