The teacher confiscated my mobile phone and refused to give it to me, because I played it during self-study, so I made a mistake first. After waiting for a six-day holiday, the teacher said it depends

The teacher confiscated my mobile phone and refused to give it to me, because I played it during self-study, so I made a mistake first. After waiting for a six-day holiday, the teacher said it depends on the mood. ... Strictly speaking, teachers have no right to confiscate students' property or "keep it for them" without their consent. Confiscation is the deprivation of personal ownership, and only the competent authorities can impose such punishment on the illegal and criminal acts of the relative person under the explicit provisions of the law. In addition, no one may infringe upon the property ownership of others. Teachers are no exception. By the same token, "custody on behalf of the parties" without the consent of the parties is a forcible transfer of possession of property and an infringement on the legitimate property ownership of individuals. Teachers are used to confiscating or "keeping" students' belongings. In fact, the concept inertia of absolute expansion of administrative power in the planned economy period has no legal basis in a society ruled by law. Ownership is the basis of most rights, and it can almost be regarded as the king of rights. In a right society, it is very important to establish the consciousness of sacred ownership. Therefore, you can actively claim your legal rights to the teacher. However, although there is no legal basis for teachers to confiscate or forcibly "keep it for them", it is mostly for the purpose of caring for students and expecting their students to study hard and master more skills to adapt to this cruel competitive society. The so-called doting is harmful, and loving them is responsible. Although you may not understand the teacher's love, as a person who should be older than you, I hope you can understand the teacher's intention. Therefore, we can negotiate with the teacher to solve the return problem with respect for the teacher and a responsible attitude towards our future. I believe the teacher will not be too hard on you. You know, not everything depends on the law, and the law cannot solve everything! Moreover, the law is facing a cold and unfamiliar world, but our life needs more warm human feelings.

The school's behavior is an act of ignoring students' property rights, which is illegal. Article 75 of General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that citizens' lawful property is protected by law, and it is forbidden for any organization or individual to occupy, plunder, open chest or illegally seal up, detain, freeze or confiscate it. In order to maintain normal teaching order, schools usually take some management measures. Some schools will search students' personal belongings or temporarily detain students' mobile phones and game machines. In some schools, teachers even impose fines on students. In the eyes of some teachers, this is a normal way of management. In fact, this behavior infringes on students' property rights. First, schools have no right to confiscate or detain students' belongings. Confiscation and seizure of property belong to the category of administrative punishment, but schools as educational institutions obviously do not have this right. The implementation of administrative punishment measures must have the corresponding subject qualification. According to the administrative punishment law promulgated by China 1996, there are three types of subjects who enjoy the power of administrative punishment: 1. An administrative organ that enjoys the power of administrative punishment according to law. Article 15 of China's Administrative Punishment Law stipulates: "Administrative punishment shall be implemented by administrative organs with the power of administrative punishment within the scope of statutory functions and powers." 2. Organizations authorized by laws and regulations. Article 17 of the Administrative Punishment Law stipulates: "Organizations authorized by laws and regulations with the function of managing public affairs may impose administrative penalties within the scope of legal authorization." 3. Organizations entrusted by administrative organs. Article 18 of the Administrative Punishment Law stipulates: "In accordance with the provisions of laws, regulations or rules, organizations that meet the conditions stipulated in Article 19 of this Law may be entrusted to impose administrative punishment within their statutory authority. The administrative organ shall not entrust other organizations or individuals to implement administrative punishment. The entrusting administrative organ is responsible for supervising the administrative punishment behavior of the entrusted organization and bearing legal responsibility for the consequences of this behavior. The entrusted organization implements administrative punishment in the name of the entrusted administrative organ within the scope of entrustment; No other organization or individual may be entrusted to implement administrative punishment. " Article 19 of the law stipulates: "The entrusted organization must meet the following conditions: (1) a legally established institution for managing public affairs; (2) Having staff who are familiar with relevant laws, regulations, rules and business; (3) If it is necessary to conduct technical inspection or technical appraisal for illegal acts, it may organize corresponding technical inspection or technical appraisal. " Second, the legal remedies for the infringement of students' property rights by schools Personal rights and property rights are two basic rights enjoyed by citizens. There is no doubt that students enjoy legal property rights to personal items such as mobile phones, and no organization or individual can arbitrarily deprive them. For acts such as confiscation, withholding, destruction of students' property and fines, students can seek legal relief according to China's education law. Paragraph 4 of Article 42 of the Law stipulates: "Educated people have the following rights: if they are dissatisfied with the punishment given by the school, they can appeal to the relevant departments; If a school or teacher infringes on his personal rights, property rights and other legitimate rights and interests, he may lodge a complaint or bring a lawsuit according to law. " 1. Complaint refers to the system in which citizens lodge a complaint with the relevant authorities for reasons and request review and handling when their legitimate rights and interests are damaged. Specifically, students can raise the issue of infringement of their property rights by schools or teachers to the higher authorities of schools, namely the Education Bureau. 2. Litigation is another remedy. Students can request the court to order the school to return the property through litigation. If a student's property is lost or damaged due to confiscation or sealing up, he may ask the school for compensation. There is no conflict between appeal and litigation, that is, if a student's property right is infringed by a school or a teacher, he can choose one or both parties to seek legal relief. Third, how to solve the contradiction between school management and students' property rights. On the one hand, the original intention of the school to confiscate or temporarily detain students' property is out of management needs. Students' use of mobile phones in class will really affect the teaching order. As some teachers said: "When a phone call comes in class, the whole class will be affected;" When the teacher is in class on the podium, he finds that the students are texting below, saying no, not saying no, and the atmosphere of the lecture will be destroyed. "On the other hand, as the personal property of students, mobile phones should of course be protected by law. As a modern and popular communication tool, mobile phone is gradually becoming an important tool for parents to keep in touch with their children. Therefore, schools should try to avoid using rough management methods in teaching management, and should solve the contradiction between school management rights and students' property rights in strict accordance with the law. For example, in the case of prohibiting students from using mobile phones, schools can completely return their mobile phones to their parents instead of simply confiscating or detaining them.

Therefore, in the legal sense, schools have no right to confiscate students' personal property, let alone teachers. So what you said has no legal basis. It is illegal for teachers to confiscate students' property.

I hope I can satisfy you.