Court upholds BD50 fine for parent who verbally abused school employee

TDT | Manama

The Daily Tribune - www.newsofbahrain.com

Email: editor@newsofbahrain.com

The Court of Cassation has upheld a BD50 fine against a parent who verbally abused a school employee during a phone call.

The court ruled that the recorded phone conversation between the two parties served as sufficient evidence of the parent’s verbal assault and did not require a court order for its admissibility.

This ruling sets a precedent for the admissibility of recorded phone conversations in cases of verbal abuse. It acknowledges the common practice of recording calls by service providers and the implied consent of callers.

The school employee had filed a complaint alleging that the parent used abusive language during a phone call to the school.

The employee presented the recorded conversation as evidence.

Distress

The Public Prosecution charged the parent with insulting the employee and causing him distress through the use of telecommunications devices.

The prosecution issued a fine of BD50. The parent appealed the decision before the Lower Court, which overturned the fine. However, the Public Prosecution appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals, which reinstated the fine.

The parent then appealed to the Court of Cassation.

Court order

In his appeal, the parent argued that the recording of the phone conversation was inadmissible as it had not been authorised by a court order. He further argued that the call was made to the school’s phone, not his personal phone, and was recorded using a separate device.

Allegations

Finally, he claimed that there was no evidence to support the allegations of verbal abuse. However, the Court of Cassation ruled that the recording of the phone conversation did not constitute an illegal act of investigation requiring a court order.

The court emphasised that the recording of phone calls by service providers is a common practice and that individuals calling such services are aware of this.

The court concluded that the parent’s consent to the recording could be inferred. It also noted that the school employee was a member of the Ministry of Education, a service provider, and that the telephone call was made to the school’s phone. The court concluded that the recording of the conversation was valid based on the implied consent of the caller.