There were no handcuffs.
There was no autopsy.
There was no arrest inside the school.
And yet, the imprint remained.
The refutation of the Hellenic Police came quickly and categorically, with the language of administrative precision, no arrests, no application of self-incrimination, no image of police intervention inside the school premises.
The persons involved were taken to the competent Police Station for preliminary investigation, some in a service vehicle, others voluntarily.
The reports, it was said, created false impressions.
But impressions are not born out of nothing.
And fear doesn't need handcuffs to settle in.
The incident in Nea Ionia, a verbal altercation, a call to Direct Action, a complaint for threats and insult, is no exception.
It's a symptom. It is a symptom of a school that increasingly operates without institutional protection, exposed to social tensions, parental pressure and legal threats that turn the act of education into a potential criminal offence.
Teachers are not so much afraid of arrest as they are of constant precariousness. The sense that every word can be misinterpreted, every decision can be criminalized, every conflict can result in a lawsuit. That their role is shifting dangerously, from educators and education officials to persons who must constantly be held accountable.
The school, however, is not a place of police management. It is a place of relationships. And relationships cannot afford to operate under fear. When the teacher thinks of the lawyer first and the student second, then pedagogy has already given way. Not because teachers don't want to take responsibility, but because the system leaves them exposed.
The intervention of the Panhellenic Scientific Union of Directors did not express a guild angst. It raised a profound institutional question. Who protects the teacher when the state is absent? Who defines the boundaries between administrative responsibility and criminal targeting? And who guarantees that a school conflict does not automatically turn into a police case?;
The need for institutional and legal support for teachers is neither a privilege nor an evasion. It is a necessary condition for public schools to function. A clear legal framework is needed to protect principals and teachers in the exercise of their duties. Provision for effective legal cover in cases of abusive lawsuits. Clear rules separating pedagogical and administrative functions from criminal prosecution.
Today, too often, none of this is a given.
The state asks the school to absorb social tensions, to manage inequalities, to act as a last mound of cohesion. But when conflict arises, it withdraws. And the burden shifts entirely to the teacher, with no shield, no institutional support, no legal cover.
The result is a school that operates defensively.
A school cautious, fearful, locked into self-protective practices.
And this is not a school that educates; it is a school that simply endures.
The police denial restored the formal truth. But it did not answer the essential question, how to ensure that educational practice is not dragged to the limits of the criminal process every time the state fails to support its own system?;
The handcuffs may have been non-existent.
But fear is present.
And as long as the school remains without institutional and legal shield,
fear will continue to silently erode educational practice.
If we want schools to be open, democratic and vibrant, we must first protect those who keep them standing.
