> Shallowly, first, the authority is not absolute and cannot be. There will always be opportunities for a bully to bully; trying to forbid this only makes it more appealing. A sufficiently interested bully won't let themself be avoided, and they find the appearance of vulnerability interesting because they're out for a good time and not a fight.
As someone bullied in high school, I would counter this by saying "how about we start by punishing adults that openly participate in the bullying?". Surely that isn't so much to ask? Because this was a definite problem. Sudden unexplainable extremely pedantic test corrections, teachers shouting at you when you get bullied. Teachers treating the bullied kid as a problem instead of the bullying, and, although that was often so badly done it almost helped, teachers attempting to bully you directly.
I learned to do tests absolutely correctly, leave absolutely no opportunity for the teacher to deduct points. A SINGLE spelling error in a verb in a history test? -20%. Use of "advanced" mathematics in a physics exam? -50% (I used a derivative because of a book on physics I got from the library, and the physics teacher (of 10th grade, in US terms) did not understand derivatives, or what they have to do with physics. After all, due to state legislation, we have a physics teacher that had a "license" (master's degree) in history ... and a history teacher that had a license in physics. Technically they could switch, but their tenure would reset to zero if they did, with consequences for pay and apparently if the school had to shrink they'd get fired sooner. Both chose against doing this). Asking physics questions in history class definitely led to bullying.
But can we start by actually punishing abuse of adult authority for bullying, and give some opportunity for kids to prove such bullying.