Does the school, through its authorized representative, have jurisdiction to investigate over an alleged misconduct committed outside the school premises and beyond school hours?

A college or any school for that matter, has a dual responsibility to its students. One is to provide opportunities for learning and the other is to help them grow and develop into mature, responsible, effective and worthy citizens of the community. Discipline is one of the means to carry out the second responsibility.

Thus, there can be no doubt that the establishment of an educational institution requires rules and regulations necessary for the maintenance of an orderly educational program and the creation of an educational environment conducive to learning. Such rules and regulations are equally necessary for the protection of the students, faculty, and property. The power of school officials to investigate, an adjunct of its power to suspend or expel, is a necessary corollary to the enforcement of such rules and regulations and the maintenance of a safe and orderly educational environment conducive to learning.

The general rule is that the authority of the school is co-extensive with its territorial jurisdiction, or its school grounds, so that any action taken for acts committed outside the school premises should, in general, be left to the police authorities, the courts of justice, and the family concerned. 

However, this rule is not rigid or one without exceptions. It is the better view that there are instances when the school might be called upon to exercise its power over its student or students for acts committed outside the school and beyond school hours in the following:

a) In cases of violations of school policies or regulations occurring in connection with a school sponsored activity off-campus; or 

b) In cases where the misconduct of the student involves his status as a student or affects the good name or reputation of the school.

Common sense dictates that the school retains its power to compel its students in or off-campus to a norm of conduct compatible with their standing as members of the academic community. Hence, when as in the case at bar, the conduct complained of directly affects the suitability of the alleged violators as students, there is no reason why the school can not impose the same disciplinary action as when the act took place inside the campus.

The power of the school over its students does not cease absolutely when they leave the school premises, and that conduct outside of school hours may subject a student to school discipline if it directly affects the good order and welfare of the school or has a direct and immediate effect on the discipline or general welfare of the school. (Angeles vs. Sison, G.R. No. L-45551, February 16, 1982)