2010 - Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children

Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of ChildrenSave the Children SwedenEnding legalised violenceagainst childrenGLOBAL REPORT 2010Inside: tables ofprogress in allregions – page 24Children in ZanzibarFollowing up the UN Secretary General’sStudy on Violence against Children“A legal ban on corporal punishment is not a crusade against parents: it is the definite push that societyneeds to start resorting to non-violent and more efficient forms of discipline.... The existence of a legaldefence for parents who ‘reasonably chastise’ their children effectively halts the evolution towards a societymore respectful of children’s rights and parents’ potential to improve their parental skills.”Maud de Boer-Buquicchio, Deputy Secretary General, Council of Europe

Center for Effective Child Discipline, USAChild Helpline InternationalChild Rights Network (CHIRN), NigeriaChild Welfare League of CanadaCoalition Camerounaise des ONG pour les Droits del’Enfant, CameroonComisión Andina de Juristas, PeruConsortium for Street ChildrenDefence for Children InternationalECPAT InternationalEurochildHong Kong Committee on Children’s RightsHuman Rights WatchInstituto Interamericano del Niño, la Niña y AdolescentesInternational Federation of Social Workers (IFSW)International Federation Terre des HommesInternational Foster Care AssociationInternational Society for the Prevention of Child Abuseand Neglect (ISPCAN)National Coalition for Children, JordanNational Education Association, USANational Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children,UKNGO Group for the Convention on the Rights of the ChildOMCT – World Organisation Against TorturePlan InternationalPromundo Institute, BrazilRed por los Derechos de la Infancia en MexicoSave the Children RomaniaSave the Children SpainSave the Children SwazilandSave the Children SwedenSave the Children UKParticipants in training on alternatives to corporal punishment in schools, SudanThe aims of the Global Initiative are supported by manyinternational and national organisations, including:Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child (SPARC),PakistanTrinidad and Tobago Coalition for the Rights of the ChildIndividual supporters include:Shirin Aumeeruddy-Cziffra, Ombudsperson for Children, MauritiusThe Honourable Mme. Justice Désirée Bernard, Judge of theCaribbean Court of Justice, Trinidad and TobagoRadhika Coomaraswamy, Special Representative to the UNSecretary General on children and armed conflictHis Holiness the Dalai LamaProfessor Doctor Yakin Ertürk, former Special Rapporteur onviolence against womenMålfred Grude Flekkøy, Norway’s and the world’s first Ombudsmanfor ChildrenThomas Hammarberg, Human Rights Commissioner, Council forEuropeReidar Hjermann, Ombudsman for Children, NorwayMs Moushira Khattab, former Vice-Chair, Committee on the Rightsof the ChildProfessor Yanghee Lee, seventh chair, Committee on the Rights ofthe ChildProfessor Vitit Muntarbhorn, Thailand, former UN SpecialRapporteur on the sale of childrenProfessor Manfred Nowak, Special Rapporteur on torture and othercruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishmentLisbet Palme, Sweden, former member, Committee on the Rightsof the ChildMrs Mary Robinson, former UN High Commissioner for HumanRightsThe Most Reverend Desmond M. Tutu, Anglican ArchbishopEmeritus of Cape TownFor a full list of all organisation and individualsupporters, see www.endcorporalpunishment.orgPUBLISHED 2010 BY:Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Childrenwww.endcorporalpunishment.orgSave the Children Sweden http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.seThis publication is partly financed by Sida (Swedish International DevelopmentCooperation Agency). Sida has not taken part in its production and does not assumeresponsibility for its content.CONTENTSMessages...........................................................................................2The human rights imperative to prohibit corporal punishment...........3Progress in 2010.................................................................................6Achieving law reform........................................................................ 10Active campaigns............................................................................. 18Working with religious communities.................................................22Legality of corporal punishment: state by state analysis..................24AcknowledgementsPhotos from Child Rights Institute, Sudan (inside front cover); Childline South Africa, projectfunded by Save the Children Sweden (p. 13); D. Davaanyam, Mongolia (back cover); InternationalYouth Rights (p. 21); Mats Lignell/Save the Children (p. 17); Plan West Africa (p. 18); Savethe Children (front cover, pp. 6, 9, 22); Visión Solidaria, Peru (p. 19); Zambia Civic EducationAssociation (p. 7).Designed by Simon ScottPrinted in the UK by The Russell Press Limited, NottinghamThe Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children is administered bythe Association for the Protection of All Children, APPROACH Ltd,a registered charity No. 328132.Registered office 94 White Lion Street, LONDON N1 9PF, UK.

MessagesProfessorYanghee LeeChairperson, UN Committeeon the Rights of the ChildTwenty years have passed since the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the firstlegal instrument devoted to children and their rights, entered into force. The CRC isrecognised by almost all UN member nations as the highest international standard forchildren. Much has been accomplished during the past twenty years, and yet, muchremains to be accomplished.The prevalence of corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms ofpunishment continues to be a concern for the Committee on the Rights of the Child.Successive reports from the Global Initiative and its briefings for the Committee andother human rights bodies have shown achievements in eradicating cruel and inhumanforms of punishment. Many countries have joined, and continue to join, the campaignfor a universal ban on corporal punishment. Sadly, there remain reports on how farwe are from achieving basic legal protection from deliberate adult assault, let aloneenabling children in reality to enjoy their childhoods free of violence.Changing long ingrained tradition is a difficult task. When it comes to changingtraditions that deliberately harm children and their status as rights-holders, we mustnot tolerate complacency any longer! This report documents substantial progress andactive campaigns in all regions: there is much to build on.Hitting and hurting a child is an act of violence – and it is no less violent simply for beinglawful. Children, like all people, have a right to live their lives free from violence, and theinternational human rights consensus on this could hardly be stronger. When the GlobalInitiative published its first global report in 2006 – the year the final report of the UN Studyon Violence against Children highlighted the shockingly widespread legal and socialacceptance of corporal punishment and recommended abolition as a matter of urgency – 16 states hadachieved prohibition of all corporal punishment of children in all settings. Today, almost twice as manyhave done so, with 29 states now fully prohibiting corporal punishment, including in the home. The rateof progress reflects the seriousness with which human rights treaty bodies, NGOs and governments nowtake the issue and an understanding that children are not possessions but human beings and holdersof human rights, including the right to respect for their human dignity and to equal protection fromassault under the law. But at the end of 2010, there are still 168 states where the law allows parents tohit children in the name of discipline, and more than 40 where children can be whipped or caned as asentence of the courts.We hope this report will help us to celebrate the progress that has been made and, moreimportantly, strengthen our resolve to continue advocating prohibition and elimination of corporalpunishment of children until it is achieved in every state.Marta Santos PaisSpecial Representative ofthe UN Secretary General onViolence against ChildrenProfessor PauloSérgio PinheiroThe Independent Expert who ledthe UN Secretary General’s Studyon Violence against Children andCommissioner and Rapporteuron the Rights of the Child, Inter-American Commission on HumanRights, OASLaw reform for the effective protection of children from all forms of violence is a strategicpriority for my mandate. Law reform is an indispensable component of the process ofimplementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is also an essentialdimension of any national strategy designed to prevent and address all forms of violenceagainst children. Legislation is the solemn expression of political commitment to worktowards violence prevention and response, and to protect children’s dignity and physicalintegrity at all times. Legislation encourages positive discipline and it safeguards theprotection of victims, as well as their redress, recovery and reintegration. Law reform isalso highly valuable when used in support of public information, social mobilisation andbehaviour change, opening avenues for the mobilisation of key actors and institutions,including religious leaders, local authorities and parliamentarians.Law reform for children’s protection from violence is gaining momentum. In a largenumber of countries, legislation has been adopted to prohibit specific forms of violence;across regions, there is an increasing commitment to adopt an explicit legal ban on allforms of violence, a prohibition that is applicable in all circumstances.With its periodic reports, the Global Initiative helps to capture this significant processof change, identifying positive developments and helping to promote progress towardsa universal ban on all forms of violence against children. With strong political will andwide social support this goal is within reach. I look forward to working with all partnersto make it a reality within the very near future.There are many good things in this report, but the most exciting is the long listidentifying the many immediate opportunities for achieving a complete ban on allcorporal punishment in states in all regions. I am particularly pleased that my owncountry, Brazil, is amongst them.We have to ensure that these opportunities are used fully and without anycompromises. It is not acceptable in 2010 for states to review their children’s or childprotection laws and leave in place legal provisions which justify violence against childrendisguised as discipline.I am working with the Global Initiative to establish a panel of eminent human rightsactivists, in the hope that we can encourage heads of state and parliaments to moveforward quickly to ban punitive violence against children.The vision of a world in which violent punishment of children is universally condemnedand prohibited is now within our grasp. We cannot let more generations of childrensuffer these obvious and deliberate violations of their rights. We must not keep childrenwaiting.The human rightsimperative to prohibitcorporal punishmentProhibiting and eliminating corporal punishmentof children is fundamentally a human rights issue.International human rights law protects the rights of allpersons, including children, to respect for their humandignity and physical integrity and to equal protectionunder the law. International and regional human rightsinstruments which are ratified by governments imposelegal obligations on those governments to ensure therights that are guaranteed in the instruments, includingthrough law reform and other measures. Complianceis monitored through the reporting process andexamination by monitoring bodies associated witheach treaty. Most instruments also provide forcomplaints to be made when governments violate therights of persons who they should be protecting. Thishuman rights framework establishes that prohibition ofcorporal punishment of children through law reform isan essential obligation of governments and providesan important means of ensuring that it happens.The most important human rights instrument forchildren is the UN Convention on the Rights of theChild, ratified by all states except the US and Somalia.It obliges governments to “protect the child from allforms of physical or mental violence while in the careof their parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other personwho has the care of the child” (article 19). States mustalso ensure that school discipline is “consistent withthe child’s human dignity and in conformity with thepresent Convention” (article 28.2) and that “no childshall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhumanor degrading treatment or punishment” (article 37).In monitoring compliance with the Convention, theCommittee on the Rights of the Child has consistentlyinterpreted it as requiring prohibition of all corporalpunishment of children in all settings, withoutexception, and has repeatedly made recommendationsto states that law reform should be accompaniedby social change through public education andawareness raising campaigns. The Committee’sGeneral Comment No. 8 on “The right of the child toprotection from corporal punishment and other cruelor degrading forms of punishment”, adopted in 2006,2 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 3

consolidated its position on the issue and provides aninvaluable tool for promoting and enforcing prohibition.The monitoring bodies of other internationalhuman rights instruments increasingly interpret themas requiring prohibition of all corporal punishment ofchildren. Such recommendations have been made tostates in recent years by the Committee on Economic,Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee on theElimination of Discrimination Against Women, theHuman Rights Committee and the Committee AgainstTorture. In addition, states are monitored on theiroverall compliance with international human rightslaw, including on the issue of corporal punishment ofchildren, by the Human Rights Council in the UniversalPeriodic Review process (see box).The Universal Periodic ReviewThe Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a process undertaken bythe Human Rights Council of reviewing the overall human rightsrecords of all UN member states once every four years. It wasestablished by the General Assembly in 2006, when the Councilitself was established, and enables each state to describe theactions they have taken to fulfil their international human rightsobligations. There is a process for the submission of informationby NGOs on states coming up for review (for details and deadlinessee www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/NewDeadlines.aspxor sign up to the Global Initiative newsletter, emailinfo@endcorporalpunishment.org).Following review of the national report of the state underconsideration and examination of government representatives,members of the Human Rights Council – an inter-governmentalbody of 47 UN member states – make recommendations to theparticular state aimed at improving compliance with its humanrights obligations. The state usually responds by accepting orrejecting the recommendations and providing further informationas necessary.Since the first UPR session in Aril 2008, the Human RightsCouncil has reviewed the human rights records of 143 states.The obligation to prohibit corporal punishment of children hasbeen raised as an issue in relation to over 70 states. At least 30of these have explicitly accepted or expressed their supportfor recommendations to prohibit: Algeria, Andorra, Armenia,Azerbaijan, Belize, Bolivia, Chad, Dominican Republic, El Salvador,Ghana, Honduras, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan,Lesotho, Mali, Mexico, Mongolia, Nicaragua, San Marino, SaudiArabia, Senegal, Serbia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Turkey, Vanuatu.These positive responses provide opportunities for NGOs toadvocate for law reform to prohibit corporal punishment (seepages 10 to 17). However, a minority of states are outspoken intheir defence of corporal punishment of children and explicitlyreject the recommendations concerning prohibition. To date 10states have done so, including Albania, the Bahamas, Barbados,Botswana, Ethiopia, Iran, Malta, Qatar and the UK. In these states,where governments actively oppose law reform, human rightsinstitutions, NGOs and other child rights advocates may need toconsider the use of legal action and international and regionalhuman rights complaint/communication mechanisms in pursuinglaw reform (see pages 16 and 17).Reflecting the international human rightsconsensus against corporal punishment of children,regional human rights instruments are also interpretedas requiring prohibition in all settings.AfricaStates which have ratified the African Charter on theRights and Welfare of the Child must ensure thatdiscipline by parents and at school respects the child’shuman dignity (articles 11 and 20), that children areprotected from all forms of torture and inhuman ordegrading treatment by parents and others caringfor the child (article 16) and that children in detentionare not subjected to torture or inhuman or degradingtreatment or punishment (article 17). The AfricanCommittee of Experts on the Rights andWelfare of the Child is now addressingthe issue of corporal punishment in itsexamination of state party reports.States which have ratified the AfricanCharter on Human and Peoples’ Rightsmust ensure that every person has equalprotection of the law (article 3), respect forpersonal integrity (article 4), respect forhuman dignity (article 5) and protection fromtorture and cruel, inhuman or degradingpunishment and treatment (article 5). Acomplaint in 2000 to the African Commissionon Human and Peoples’ Rights concerningjudicial corporal punishment of youngpeople in Sudan (Curtis Francis Doebber vSudan, 236/2000) led to recommendationsto the Government of Sudan to amend thelaw to abolish the penalty of lashes.EuropeThe European Committee of Social Rights,monitoring the European Social Charterand Revised Social Charter, repeatedlyconcludes that states which do not prohibitcorporal punishment of children in allsettings are in breach of the Charter. TheCommittee has also confirmed this in aseries of decisions on collective complaintsbrought under an Additional Protocol tothe Charters. In relation to the EuropeanConvention on Human Rights, the EuropeanCourt of Human Rights has progressivelyruled against corporal punishment ofchildren, and the Council of Europe runsan ongoing campaign to ensure that all47 member states achieve law reform toprohibit corporal punishment in all settings.Middle East and North AfricaThe obligation to prohibit all corporalpunishment of children is confirmedin the Cairo Declaration on theConvention on the Rights of the Childand Islamic Jurisprudence, adoptedat a 2009 conference co-sponsoredby the Organisation of the IslamicConference (OIC) in Cairo to mark the20th anniversary of the Convention. TheDeclaration includes a recommendationto all OIC member states to prohibitcorporal punishment in the family andother settings. The Arab Charter onHuman Rights protects all persons fromcruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment (article 8), protects the humandignity of children (articles 17 and 33) andprohibits “all forms of violence and abusivetreatment in the relations between familymembers, especially towards womenand children” (article 33). In June 2010,the League of Arab States co-sponsoreda technical workshop on law reform toprohibit all corporal punishment in theregion, attended by government and nongovernmentrepresentatives from memberstates.The AmericasIn 2008, the Inter-American Commissionon Human Rights (IACHR) asked theInter-American Court of Human Rights to issue anadvisory opinion on corporal punishment of childrenand the American Convention on Human Rightsand the American Declaration of Human Rightsand Duties. The Court responded by stating that anadvisory opinion is unnecessary because the existingjurisprudence of the Court and the obligations underother international instruments ratified by states in theregion, particularly the Convention on the Rights of theChild, are clear. The Court emphasised that children“have rights and are not just an object of protection”,that they have the same rights as all human beings,that the state must protect these rights in the privateas well as the public sphere, and that this requireslegislative as well as other measures.In August 2009, the office of the Rapporteur onthe Rights of the Child in the IACHR, Professor PauloPinheiro, published a thematic report (Report onCorporal Punishment and Human Rights of Childrenand Adolescents) which calls on OAS member states“to act immediately on the problem of corporalpunishment by placing explicit and absolute legal bansWorking with the treaty monitoring bodiesRatification of human rights instruments usually puts an obligationon states to report at regular intervals to the bodies overseeingthose treaties on how they are implementing them. Individualtreaty bodies then review these reports, question governmentrepresentatives on them, and make recommendations for furtheraction in order to improve compliance with the relevant treaty.Such examination and recommendations now typically payattention to the legality and practice of corporal punishment ofchildren. In monitoring the Convention on the Rights of the Child,for example, the Committee on the Rights of the Child routinelyurges states to prohibit corporal punishment in all settings, oftenreferring to specific legal provisions that must be repealed, andrecommends appropriate public awareness raising and educationcampaigns to support prohibition.Ensuring that treaty monitoring bodies are informed of currentnational situations regarding the legality, practice and toleranceof corporal punishment of children, for example throughsystematic briefing by the Global Initiative, plays an importantpart in keeping the issue of corporal punishment on the agendaof the treaty bodies. Briefings from national NGOs greatly addto the evidence on which these bodies can draw in order tomake strong recommendations to governments. In turn, theserecommendations provide strong advocacy tools for NGOs activelypromoting law reform.Information on submitting briefings concerning states comingup for examination by treaty monitoring bodies is included inthe Global Initiative newsletter and the Global Initiative is alwayspleased to give technical advice and assistance in the preparationof national briefings (for further information and to subscribeto the newsletter email info@endcorporalpunishment.org).Briefings submitted by the Global Initiative are available atwww.endcorpralpunishment.org.on its use in all contexts and, in parallel, by adoptingsuch preventive, educational, and other measuresthat may be necessary to ensure the eradication ofthis form of violence, which poses a serious challengeto the wellbeing of children in the Hemisphere”(para. 3). The report includes an analysis of stateresponsibility in the use of corporal punishment byprivate citizens and of corporal punishment in relationto those with parental authority and makes detailedrecommendations to member states concerning theactions they should take to achieve full prohibition. Itconcludes with a “commitment toward cooperatingwith States in the promotional activities they undertakeat the domestic and regional levels in order toeradicate corporal punishment as a way of discipliningchildren and adolescents” (para. 120).4 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 5

Number of states prohibiting corporal punishment of children in law180160140120100806040200Note: The total number of states included in the analysis is 197, comprising all those that have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights ofthe Child except Vatican City, plus Palestine, Somalia, Taiwan, the US and Western Sahara. Information as at November 2010.100%Home School Penal system (sentence)Penal system(disciplinary)Percentage of global child population protected in legislationfrom corporal punishmentAlternative care settingsProhibited 29 110 152 109 38Not prohibited 168 87 42 78 156Unknown 0 0 3 10 3The need to step up actionThe progress that has been achieved in many statesthrough legal prohibition of corporal punishmentis to be celebrated. But the figures also reveal thelack of progress in many states and the necessity ofcontinuing action to promote this most fundamentalright of children, respect for their human dignity.At the end of 2010, there remain a staggering168 states, across all regions, where the law allowsparents to hit children in their own home – the placewhere they should feel safest. Still, only 4.5% of allchildren in the world are supported by legislationprotecting them from punitive assaults by their parents.In 156 states, children who for whatever reason findthemselves in the care of people other than theirparents, in alternative care settings, are similarly leftlegally unprotected from punitive assaults by thosewhose duty it is to care for them. Far too many stateshave not yet prohibited corporal punishment in schools(87 states) or in institutions accommodating children inconflict with the law (78 states).Percentage of global child population legallyprotected from all corporal punishment4.5%Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh,Barbados, Bolivia, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam,Colombia, Dominica, Ecuador, Eritrea, Grenada,Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran,Kiribati, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia,Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine,Qatar, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent and theGrenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia,Singapore, Somalia, Swaziland, Tonga, Tuvalu,United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania,Vanuatu, Yemen and Zimbabwe.In the face of such blatant disregard for thehuman dignity of children, it is clear that child rightsadvocates must resort to stronger forms of advocacy.There are opportunities in all regions for promoting lawreform (see pages 12 to 16), an ever-growing bank ofresources to support the promotion of law reform andits implementation, and active campaigns from whichto learn in all regions, including CRIN’s new globalcampaign against inhuman sentencing of children (seepages 18 to 21).90%80%70%60%50%40%30%95.5%Children fully protected from corporal punishment by lawChildren not fully protected by law20%10%0%Home School Penal system (sentence)Penal system(disciplinary)Alternative care settingsProhibited 4.5% 60.3% 60.1% 43.1% 6.3%Not prohibited 95.5% 39.7% 39.8% 56.0% 93.6%Unknown 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 1.0% 0.2%Perhaps most shocking is that there are still over40 states where children found by the courts to havecommitted an offence can lawfully be sentenced tobe caned or whipped. The following states have yetto enact legislation to prohibit all judicial corporalpunishment of persons under 18, including undercustomary, traditional, indigenous, religious andinformal systems of justice:Note: Child population figures (2008) from UNICEF (www.unicef.org, accessed March and November 2010) (except Cyprus, Montenegro,Serbia and Western Sahara from World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision, http://esa.un.org/unpp, 2010 figures for 0-19 population,and Taiwan (2005, Children Bureau, Ministry of Interior))Marta Santos Pais speaking at the opening of the Middle Eastand North Africa law reform workshop, Beirut, 20108 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 9

Achieving law reformLegal reform must be based on a clear understanding of the law as it is now and how it should be amended toprohibit all corporal punishment of children. Prohibition is achieved by reviewing existing law and then reformingit by drafting new legislation and promoting law reform through national strategies which make the most ofopportunities for working with government and parliament to influence national laws. It is also valuable toencourage regional bodies to support and promote prohibition among their member states.UNIVERSAL PROHIBITION NOT YET IN PLACEDo any laws authorise/regulate the use of corporalpunishment in any setting?Does the law provide a defence forthe use of corporal punishment bythose with authority over a child, e.g.“reasonable chastisement” or “a rightof correction”?Reviewing the lawA comprehensive review of existing legislation relevantto corporal punishment in all settings, including thehome, provides the foundation for promoting lawreform. In some states governments have issuedpolicies, guidance or circulars stating that corporalpunishment should not be used, for example inschools, but these do not amount to prohibition, whichrequires enforceable legislation passed by parliament.The review should identify:• all legal defences and justifications for corporalpunishment, such as confirmation in legislationor common (case) law of a “right to discipline”children or a right to administer “reasonableReforming the lawOnce the law has been reviewed, new legislationshould be drafted which would repeal (remove) alldefences and authorisations of corporal punishment.This will ensure that laws on assault apply equally toassaults against children. But to send a clear messagewhich provides a firm legal framework for publiceducation and awareness raising and promotion ofpositive, non-violent discipline the law should alsoexplicitly prohibit corporal punishment. No legalloopholes should be left which could be construed asallowing corporal punishment in any setting.Because corporal punishment has been almostuniversally accepted in all regions as a disciplinarymeasure in childrearing, it is still not generallyperceived as harmful, abusive or even violent.Some even argue that it is a necessary element ofchildrearing, “in the child’s best interests”. For thisreason, laws which prohibit “violence” or “inhumanor degrading treatment”, or which protect “physicalintegrity” or “human dignity”, tend to be interpretedas prohibiting only corporal punishment whichreaches a certain threshold. But children have a rightto protection from all corporal punishment, withoutexception. The definition of corporal punishmentadopted by the Committee on the Rights of the Childprovides a useful reference point for ensuring that newlegislation really does achieve full prohibition:chastisement” (as originally in English commonlaw, and incorporated through colonialism in thelaw in many states across the world)• all laws which explicitly authorise or regulatecorporal punishment, such as those definingwho may administer corporal punishment inschools, or how judicial corporal punishmentmust be carried out• laws which are “silent” on the issue but whichshould include explicit prohibition, such aseducation laws which do not prohibit corporalpunishment.The Committee defines “corporal” or “physical”punishment as any punishment in which physicalforce is used and intended to cause somedegree of pain or discomfort, however light.Most involves hitting (“smacking”, “slapping”,“spanking”) children, with the hand or with animplement – a whip, stick, belt, shoe, woodenspoon, etc. But it can also involve, for example,kicking, shaking or throwing children, scratching,pinching, biting, pulling hair or boxing ears,forcing children to stay in uncomfortablepositions, burning, scalding or forced ingestion(for example, washing children’s mouths out withsoap or forcing them to swallow hot spices). Inthe view of the Committee, corporal punishmentis invariably degrading. In addition, there areother non-physical forms of punishment that arealso cruel and degrading and thus incompatiblewith the Convention. These include, forexample, punishment which belittles, humiliates,denigrates, scapegoats, threatens, scares orridicules the child.(Committee on the Rights of the Child,General Comment No. 8, 2006, para. 11)YesRepeal all provisionsrelating to corporalpunishmentNo, the lawis silentEnact legislation relating to all settings, including thefamily, to explicitly prohibit of all forms ofcorporal punishmentLegislation clearly prohibits all corporalpunishment in all settings+NoIn common(case) lawPROHIBITION ACHIEVEDIn legislationRepeal all legalprovisions whichrecognise or refer to thedefenceEnact legislation explicitly statingthat the defence can no longer beusedLaws on assault apply equally to childrenand adultsMaking the most of opportunities for promoting prohibitionKey opportunities for promoting law reform arisewhen governments review legislation, for exampleto harmonise national laws with the Convention onthe Rights of the Child and other treaties, and whennew laws relevant to children are being drafted. Thefollowing tables highlight some of the law reformprocesses currently under way in states in all regions.All of these can be used to promote prohibition ofcorporal punishment – whether for the first time or toconfirm already existing prohibition – and to mobiliseopposition to proposals for laws which would allowcorporal punishment.Other opportunities to advocate for law reformcan be provided by media reporting of severe casesof corporal punishment which generates interest in theissue, the publication of new relevant research, andnew recommendations made to the government bytreaty monitoring bodies.The following tables list opportunities forpromoting law reform which exist in all regions. Webelieve that the information is accurate as at November2010, but the situation can change quickly: please letus know of any necessary updates or corrections atinfo@endcorporalpunishment.org. Further informationon bills is included in the table of legality on pages24 to 32, where governments which have made acommitment to prohibition in all or some settingsare also identified. For detailed information, see theindividual country reports on the Global Initiativewebsite, www.endcorporalpunishment.org.10 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 11

Opportunities for prohibiting corporal punishment in Africa include ...Opportunities for prohibiting corporal punishment in the Caribbean include ...AlgeriaAngolaDraft child law under discussionLaws being harmonised with UNCRC; Penal and Civil Codes and legislation on juvenilejustice and domestic violence under review/discussionAntigua and BarbudaBahamasChild Care and Adoption Bill, Juvenile Justice Bill and Domestic Violence Bill, draftedby the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), under considerationConstitution under reviewBotswanaDomestic Violence Bill under discussion and customary laws under reviewBelizeDraft Education Rules under discussionBurkina FasoCriminal Code under review and draft decrees for regulating nurseries, orphanages,foster homes and adoption under discussionDominicaChild Care and Adoption Bill, Juvenile Justice Bill and Domestic Violence Bill, draftedby the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), under considerationBurundiDraft Code of Judicial Protection of the Child and draft law amending Code of CriminalProcedure under discussionGrenadaChild Care and Adoption Bill, Juvenile Justice Bill and Domestic Violence Bill, draftedby the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), under considerationCameroonChadEquatorial GuineaDraft Child Protection Code, draft Family Code, Bill to amend Criminal Code and Bill onviolence against women under discussionDraft Family Code, draft Child Protection Code and draft amendments to CriminalCode under discussionDraft Children’s Code and draft amendments to Civil Code under discussionGuyanaProtection of Children Bill and Education Bill under discussionJamaica Draft Bill to repeal Flogging Regulation Act (1903) and Crime (Prevention of) Act (1942)under discussionSt Kitts and NevisChild Care and Adoption Bill, Juvenile Justice Bill and Domestic Violence Bill, draftedby the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), under considerationGuinea-BissauLaws being harmonised with UNCRC and African Charter; draft domestic violence lawunder discussionSt LuciaChild Care and Adoption Bill, Juvenile Justice Bill and Domestic Violence Bill, draftedby the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), under considerationLesothoLiberiaChild Protection and Welfare Bill and Education Bill under discussionChildren Bill under discussionSt Vincent and the GrenadinesChild Care and Adoption Bill, Juvenile Justice Bill and Domestic Violence Bill, draftedby the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), under considerationMalawiMarriage, Divorce and Family Relations Bill proposed and Education Act under revisionMaliDraft Family Code under discussionMozambiquePenal Code under revision and draft domestic violence law under discussionNamibiaDraft Child Care and Protection Bill under discussionNigerFamily Code and Children’s Code being draftedNigeriaConstitution under review and Domestic Violence Bill under discussion; Criminal LawBill under discussion in LagosRwandaDraft Child Bill and draft Penal Code under discussionSouth AfricaTraditional Courts Bill under discussionSudanDraft Education Bill under consideration in Southern SudanSwazilandLaws being harmonised with UNCRC; Child Protection and Welfare Bill underconsiderationUgandaDraft amendments to Children Act and Domestic Violence Bill under discussionUnited Republic of TanzaniaChildren’s Bill under discussion in ZanzibarZambiaLaws relating to children under review; draft Constitution and Education Bill underdiscussionZimbabweConstitution under review and Education Bill under discussion“Talk to them” Childline South Africa poster12 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 13

Opportunities for prohibiting corporal punishment in Europe and Central Asia include ...Opportunities for prohibiting corporal punishment in the Middle East include ...AlbaniaBosnia and HerzegovinaDraft Law “On Measures for Prevention of Violence in Family Relations” and legislationon child rights under discussionFamily Law and Law on Protection from Domestic Violence being draftedBahrainIranNew child protection legislation under discussionDraft Penal Code, Bill for Establishment of Children and Juveniles Courts and Bill forInvestigation of Offences of Children and Juveniles under discussionCzech RepublicProhibition under considerationJordanDraft Child Rights Act and draft regulations for licensing nurseries under discussionEstoniaDraft legislation which would prohibit under discussionKuwaitDraft Children’s Code and draft Bill to amend Penal CodeFranceKyrgyzstanLithuaniaMontenegroSerbiaSlovakiaBill which would prohibit under discussionDraft juvenile justice law and amendments to other child laws under discussionBill amending Law on the Fundamentals of Protection of the Rights of the Child underdiscussionLaw on protection from family violence under discussionAmendments to Family Act under considerationNew Family Code being draftedLebanonLibyan Arab JamahiriyaPalestineQatarSaudi ArabiaPenal Code and Law 422 on Juvenile Justice under review; Child Protection Bill underdiscussionDraft Penal Code under discussionDraft Constitution, draft Social Affairs Law, draft amendments to Child Law, draftPenal Code and draft Juvenile Justice Law under discussionChildren Bill under discussion and Prisons Act under reviewLaws being harmonised with UNCRC; draft legislation on domestic violence and childprotection under considerationSloveniaFamily Code Bill under discussionSyrian Arab RepublicDraft Child Protection Law and Civil Code under discussionSwitzerlandTajikistanDraft Code of Criminal Procedure and draft Federal Act on Juvenile Criminal Procedureunder considerationLaw on children being draftedUnited Arab EmiratesYemenDraft legislation on child protection and juvenile justice under discussionDraft amendments to Penal Code, Children’s Rights Act and Juvenile Welfare Actunder discussion; Constitution and Criminal Code under reviewUzbekistanBill on children’s rights under discussionOpportunities for prohibiting corporal punishment in Latin America include ...ArgentinaBill to amend Civil Code, draft National Education Bill and draft juvenile justicelegislation under consideration.Opportunities for prohibiting corporal punishment in North America include ...CanadaBill to amend Criminal Code under discussion; Alberta Education Act under reviewUSBills to prohibit in schools at federal and state levels under discussionBrazilEcuadorGuatemalaNicaraguaParaguayPeruBill to amend Code on Children and Adolescents under discussionLaws being harmonised with UNCRC; Education Bill and draft laws on indigenousjustice under discussionIntegral Protection for Marriage and the Family Bill under discussionDraft Family Code under discussionBill to amend Code on Children and Adolescents under discussionBill to amend Code on Children and Adolescents under discussionOpportunities for prohibiting corporal punishment in South Asia include ...BangladeshBhutanIndiaMaldivesChildren Bill under discussion and laws relating to juvenile justice under reviewChild Care and Protection Bill under discussionPrevention of Offences Against the Child Bill under discussionDraft Penal Code and Education Bill under discussion; new Children’s Act, juvenilejustice laws and children’s home regulations being draftedNepalPakistanSri LankaChild Rights Bill, Education Bill, draft Criminal Code and draft Civil Code underdiscussion; new Constitution plannedChild Protection Bill and Prohibition of Corporal Punishment Bill under discussion;reform of Frontier Crimes Regulation plannedAmendments to Children and Young People’s Ordinance and draft Juvenile JusticeProcedure Code under discussion14 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 15

Opportunities for prohibiting corporal punishment in Southeast Asia and Pacific include ...CambodiaFijiIndonesiaMalaysiaMongoliaPapua New GuineaPhilippinesRepublic of KoreaSingaporeTimor-Leste, DRDraft Juvenile Justice Law and draft Criminal Code under discussionDomestic Violence Bill under considerationDraft Criminal Code under discussionChild Act under reviewDraft amendments to Family Code under discussion; Criminal Code and Law on theProtection of the Rights of the Child under reviewFamily Protection Bill and draft Juvenile Justice Act under discussion; laws beingharmonised with CEDAWAnti-Corporal Punishment Bill under discussionChild Welfare Act under review and draft Student Rights Bill under discussionChildren and Young Persons Act under reviewNew Children’s Code, Penal Code and Civil Code under considerationUsing international and regional human rights mechanismsThere are complaints/communications proceduresattached to international and regional humanrights instruments which may be used to challengeviolations of children’s rights – including the persistinglegality and use of corporal punishment. Thereare mechanisms associated with the InternationalCovenant on Civil and Political Rights, the UNConvention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumanor Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the UNConvention on the Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination against Women and the UN Conventionon the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. A complaintsprocedure is being developed for the Conventionon the Rights of the Child. For further informationsee www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/petitions/ andwww.crin.org/petitions/petition.asp?petID=1007.Regional instruments with complaints/communications mechanisms include the AfricanCharter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, theAfrican Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, theEuropean Convention for the Protection of HumanRights and Fundamental Freedoms, the EuropeanSocial Charter and the American Convention onHuman Rights.These mechanisms can be used providedthat the particular state has accepted their use byratifying the relevant optional protocol or making theappropriate declaration. They usually require that anypossible use of national legal systems to challengethe human rights violation has been tried and hasfailed – the process known as “exhausting domesticremedies”. In most, the complaint/communicationmust be made by or on behalf of a victim or groupof victims of the violation. For further details contactinfo@endcorporalpunishment.org.VanuatuFamily Protection Bill under discussionTaking legal actionWhere governments are refusing or actively opposinglaw reform, international human rights law and nationallaw can be used to “force” them to accept theirobligations to realise children’s rights.The Convention on the Rights of the Child(UNCRC), like other instruments (see pages 3 to 5), ispart of international human rights law. In some states,on ratification the UNCRC automatically becomespart of (is incorporated into) national domestic lawand takes precedence over domestic law, so can beused in courts to claim the rights guaranteed by it.In other states, incorporation is not automatic butrequires an action of parliament. In some, the statusof the UNCRC will only be established when a case istaken to court. But in all cases, governments should bereminded that the UNCRC imposes legal obligationsunder international law, including to enact legislationprohibiting all corporal punishment of children.Most states have provisions in constitutionsor other basic laws that conflict with legislationauthorising or justifying corporal punishment, suchas laws protecting people’s human dignity andphysical integrity, prohibiting cruel or degradingpunishment or treatment, or stating everyone’s rightto equal protection under the law. These national legalprovisions can also be used to challenge corporalpunishment in all or some settings. The complaint isagainst the state, and the final authority in the casedepends on the national legal system.When there is no progress towards prohibition, ora government is actively resistant, it can be useful toobtain a legal opinion from a lawyer who believes inchildren’s rights and is fully supportive of the humanrights imperative to prohibit all corporal punishmentof children. This is an essential first step towardschallenging the legality of corporal punishment in thecourts. It can provide a basis for considering use ofinternational and/or regional human rights mechanisms(see page 17) and can be useful in supportingcampaigns for prohibition.The Global Initiative publishes on its websitedetailed reports on individual states in all regions.These include regularly updated information onthe legality of corporal punishment in all settings,research on the issue, and relevant extracts fromthe recommendations of human rights treatymonitoring bodies. Special “legal action” reportsare being prepared for some states, to provoke andsupport legal action where there is no progresstowards prohibition. For further informationcontact info@endcorporalpunishment.org. Fordetails of national high-level court judgments seewww.endcorporalpunishment.org.Child campaigning in AfghanistanResources to support law reformMany resources to support the promotionof law reform are freely available atwww.endcorporalpunishment.org, includingdetailed country reports, global and regional tablessummarising progress towards prohibition, factsand figures relating to prohibition across the world,information on states which have achieved fullprohibition, and links to online resources.Global Initiative publications freely available onlineinclude:Campaigning for law reform to prohibit corporalpunishment (2009), a series of seven summarybriefings, in English, Arabic and French:1. Understanding the need for prohibition2. Reviewing current law3. Drafting prohibiting legislation4. Building a national strategy5. Working with Government and Parliament6. Using legal action and regional andinternational human rights mechanisms7. Key resources to support campaigningProhibiting corporal punishment of children: A guideto legal reform and other measures (2009), in English,French and Spanish, and supported by onlineresourcesProhibiting all corporal punishment of children:Frequently Asked Questions (2009), in adult and childfriendlyversions in English, French and Spanish16 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 17

Active campaignsIn many states in all regions, active campaigns are working towards law reform. Both adults and children cantake part in campaigning, and in an increasing number of countries adults, children and young people areworking in partnership for children’s right to equal protection from violence. Campaigns take a variety of formsand can be co-ordinated by individual organisations or networks of individuals, human rights institutions or local,national and international NGOs. The following pages give examples of just some of the many campaigns whichare active worldwide.AfricaGhana hosted the Regional Youth Forum onViolence Against Children in Accra in September2010. It was attended by more than 80 childrenfrom countries in West Africa, who shared theirexperiences, focussing on school violence includingcorporal punishment, and spoke with governmentand UN officials. The forum was a part of the VACProject (vac.plan-childrenmedia.org), co-ordinatedin 5 communities. It has also published materialspromoting non-violent teaching and positive discipline.In Tanzania, the Caucus for Children’s Rightslaunched the 50% Campaign (www.ccr-tz.org), a threeyear initiative which aims to make violence againstchildren socially unacceptable, including throughprohibition of corporal punishment. Save the Childrenco-ordinated a consultation with children on the newZanzibar Children’s Bill. More than threequartersof the 500 children who took part inthe consultation agreed that the bill shouldexplicitly ban corporal punishment in schools.In Namibia the Legal Assistance Centre(www.lac.org.na) published a report, CorporalPunishment: National and InternationalPerspectives, containing information onresearch and the legal situation in Namibia,and developed comics and a poster sheetto promote positive discipline. In Uganda,Raising Voices (www.raisingvoices.org)launched a national competition in November2009 calling on the public to share their viewson corporal punishment. Over 600 individualsMs Agnes Aidoo, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, submitted essays, poems, drama skits,responding to children’s questions digital recordings, songs, drawings and paintings.Adult and child winners were presented with theirby Plan International and Save the Children in West prizes at an award ceremony in April 2010 attended byAfrica, and closely linked to the International NGO Mr Araali Kusemererwa, Principle Education OfficerAdvisory Council, which supports effective followupto the UN Secretary General’s Study on Violence quoted in his speech the Constitutional provision forfrom the Ministry of Education and Sports, whoAgainst Children. The VAC Project aims to help children’s “right to be educated without humiliating andyoung people in West African countries (Benin, degrading treatment”. Proposals have been made toBurkina Faso, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, amend the Children Act to explicitly prohibit corporalGhana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, punishment in schools. Representatives from NorthSenegal, Sierra Leone and Togo) become more African countries participated in a regional workshopinvolved in violence prevention. In Cameroon, EMIDA on law reform (see Middle East, page 20).(www.emida-cameroon.org) campaigns againstcorporal punishment in the family and schools. In2010, in collaboration with local partners, EMIDAprovided training for parents, teachers and childrenCaribbeanRISE St. Lucia Inc (www.risesaintlucia.com) held apeaceful protest against corporal punishment on 21September 2010, the UN International Day of Peace,using the slogan “A Total Ban on the Striking Hand!”Information was circulated to schools and homesand there was wide media coverage. In Trinidadand Tobago, the T&T Coalition Against DomesticEurope and Central AsiaIn Italy Save the Children Italy (www.savethechildren.it)is calling for a ban on all physical punishment andcollecting signatures on their Manifesto for a Non-Violent Upbringing. Corporal punishment was ruledunlawful by the Supreme Court in 1996, but thisis yet to be confirmed in legislation. In Ireland,the Irish Society for the Prevention of Crueltyto Children (www.ispcc.ie) called in June for acomplete ban on physical punishment following thepublication of new research on parents’ attitudesto physical punishment. The Ankara Child RightsPlatform (www.ankaracocukhaklari.org) in Turkey iscampaigning for full prohibition, including througha conference and lobbying parliament. In Theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, theLatin AmericaIn Paraguay the first major study on family violenceagainst children was published by UNICEF Paraguayin September 2010. It involved over 800 children andyoung people and highlighted the extent of corporalpunishment they experienced. Following publication,a new media and awareness-raising campaign waslaunched – “Sin Violencia Si Educa Mejor” (“A NonviolentUpbringing is Best”, www.sinviolencia.com.py).In Brazil, “Não Bata, Eduque!” (“Don’t Beat,Educate!”), a network of about 200 institutionsand individuals (www.naobataeduque.org.br) coordinatedby the Instituto Promundo, has been activelycampaigning for prohibition of corporal punishmentand Gender Based Violence (www.ttcadv.net) iscampaigning for an end to all corporal punishment.In Guyana, Help and Shelter (www.hands.org.gy),which runs a shelter for women and children who haveexperienced domestic violence, advocates for an endto all violence against children.First Children’s Embassy in the World Megjashi(www.childrensembassy.org.mk) submitted twoalternative reports to the Committee on the Rights ofthe Child. One was created by 62 children and youngpeople working with seven NGOs, who carried outresearch with over 2,000 children on their perceptionsof their rights, discrimination and exposure to violence.The other was prepared by the National Alliancefor Children’s Rights, a coalition of 21 civil societyorganisations. Both reports highlighted violence,including corporal punishment, in schools and thefamily as violations of children’s rights. The Committeerecommended that corporal punishment in the homebe prohibited as a matter of urgency.for some years. The network is supporting a bill whichwould ban all corporal punishment, introduced in Julyby the then President Lula da Silva, in celebrationof the 20th anniversary of the Brazilian Code onChildren and Adolescents. The Instituto Promundo(www.promundo.org.br), together with partnersSave the Children Sweden and the Bernard Van LeerFoundation, has published a manual, Ending Corporaland Humiliating Punishment, available online inEnglish, Spanish and Portuguese. In Peru the “AdiosAl Castigo” coalition (“Goodbye to Punishment”,adiosalcastigo.blogspot.com), is working for law reformand promoting a “pedagogy of tenderness”. Thecoalition includes NGOs such as Save the Children,Terre des Hommes and Plan International and acoalition of children and young people against corporalpunishment has been formed.Children campaigning in Peru18 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 19

Middle EastA regional workshop for the Middle East and NorthAfrica was held in Beirut in July, by Save the Childrenin partnership with the League of Arab States, theGlobal Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment ofChildren and the Higher Council for Childhood inLebanon. Participants from NGOs and governmentsin Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco,Mauritania, the occupied Palestinian territories,Qatar, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, United ArabEmirates and Yemen prepared strategies for achievinglaw reform. A report of the workshop is availableat www.endcorporalpunishment.org. In Iraq theNational Institute for Human Rights is campaigningfor an end to all corporal punishment and educatingparents and teachers about alternatives. In theNorth AmericaIn the USA, The Hitting Stops Here(www.thehittingstopshere.com) and Parentsand Teachers Against Violence in Education(www.nospank.net) campaign for a ban on schoolcorporal punishment, and this year have beensupporting the Ending Corporal Punishment in SchoolsAct, which would prohibit corporal punishment inschools at the federal level. The bill was introducedin June by New York Rep. Carolyn McCarthy andreferred to the House Subcommittee on Healthyoccupied Palestinian territories Save the ChildrenUK and the Tamer Institute for Community Education(www.tamerinst.org), completed an action researchproject begun in 2006. The project used the results ofresearch on the violence experienced by over 1,700children in 19 West Bank and Gaza schools to changeschool discipline policies and advocate for an end toviolence against children. In Yemen Seyaj Associationfor Childhood Protection (www.seyaj.org) produceda documentary, Discrimination and Abuse againstChildren in Schools. The Association is a member ofthe National Network to Protect the Rights of the Child,which works to protect children from violence insideand outside the home.Families and Communities in October. The Centerfor Effective Discipline (www.stophitting.com) coordinatesEPOCH-USA, which focuses on endingcorporal punishment, including in the home, throughlegal reform and education. In Canada, the Repeal43 Committee (www.repeal43.org), a national groupof professionals including lawyers, doctors and socialworkers, is advocating for repeal of section 43 of theCriminal Code, which provides a legal defence forparents who assault their children.Southeast Asia and PacificA new campaign for prohibition ofcorporal punishment in all settings waslaunched in Japan. The Initiative forEnding Violence against Children Japan(www.kodomosukoyaka.net or emailcontact@kodomosukoyaka.net) held itsfirst meeting in December 2009. In theRepublic of Korea, 33 education-relatedgroups are supporting a draft StudentsRights Bill which would prohibit all schoolcorporal punishment. InternationalYouth Rights, a youth-led organisationformed in 2009, held a conference in Junein Suzhou, China, which was attendedby young people from China, South Koreaand Singapore. The theme was CorporalPunishment at Home and in School, and areport and recommendations (available atwww.endcorporalpunishment.org/children)were developed. Recommendations includedthat states must “recognise [the] human rightsof children as equal, to protect their physicalintegrity and human dignity”.Participants at International Youth Rights 2010 conference, ChinaCRIN’s campaign to end inhuman sentencingof childrenOn 14 October, the Child Rights Information Network(www.crin.org) launched its new global campaign againstthe sentencing of child offenders to the death penalty, lifeimprisonment and corporal punishment. CRIN is developingdetailed country reports on states which still authorise suchinhuman sentencing, including the 42 states in which lawssanction judicial caning, whipping, flogging and amputation(see page 9). The aim is to ensure that states comply withthe very clear international human rights consensus againstsuch punishments, including through law reform.In building a strong context for progress on the issue, CRINhas made a commitment to providing:South AsiaIn 2010, the South Asian Initiative to End ViolenceAgainst Children (SAIEVAC) was formed to create anew institutional framework for ending violence againstchildren throughout the region (www.saievac.info).Members include the eight South Asian governments,UNICEF and other UN agencies, and NGOs suchas Plan International, Save the Children, Terre desHommes and ECPAT International. A meeting inJune was attended by ministers and children fromall countries. In November, a workshop on lawreform in Kathmandu included two days specificallyfocussed on corporal punishment and was attendedby government and civil society representativesfrom all countries. Representatives from each ofthe eight countries developed a national actionplan to prohibit all corporal punishment, to fulfiltheir governments’ commitments to do so. Save theChildren produced a new report, Stepping Up ChildProtection, which provides a comprehensive analysisof violence against children, relevant legislation andchild protection systems in South Asia. In Pakistan,the Society for the Protection of the Rights of theChild (www.sparcpk.org) has been campaigning foran end to all corporal punishment for some yearsand has recently renewed calls for an end to schoolcorporal punishment. In July 2010, Bangladesh LegalAid and Services Trust (www.blast.org.bd) and Ain oSalish Kendra (www.askbd.org) filed a writ petitionwith the High Court in Dhaka challenging the failureof the government to take action on school corporalpunishment. Responding to a directive from the Court,the government issued a circular which orders schoolsto stop using corporal punishment, stating that it isprohibited, that it constitutes misconduct and thatmeasures will be taken against perpetrators. This is yetto be confirmed by prohibition in law.New on the Global Initiative website(www.endcorporalpunishment.org)• New research on the prevalence of andattitudes to corporal punishment in allregions• New newsletter focussing onAfrica, available in English andFrench – to subscribe emailvohito@africanchildforum.org• New section on research in countrieswhich have prohibited all corporalpunishment• Revised and updated section oncampaigns worldwide• Updated website on children’sparticipation in campaigning, aimed atchildren and those who work with them(www.endcorporalpunishment.org/children).• a section of the CRIN website dedicated to thecampaign and continually updated• comprehensive information on relevant internationaland regional human rights standards• engagement with international human rights bodiesand activists in the campaign• information on using legal action and human rightsmechanisms when governments continue to resistreform• an advocacy toolkit for developing andimplementing national campaigns for prohibitionand elimination of inhuman sentencing• access to experienced child rights advocates fordetailed advice and support• details of successful campaigns and key courtjudgments and decisions• advice and support on using treaty reportingprocedures and the Universal Periodic Review toincrease pressure on governments.For further information seewww.crin.org/violence/campaigns/sentencing.20 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 21

Working with religiouscommunitiesThe significance of religious communitiesIt is widely acknowledged that religion has a powerfulinfluence on culture and traditions and on people’severyday lives, including on how children are nurtured.Five billion people are said to profess a religious faithand many of their leaders carry immense influencethroughout their extensive local, national and globalnetworks. Their ability to connect with all sectionsof the community puts religious leaders in a uniqueposition to address corporal punishment of children.They have the capacity to challenge attitudes andtraditions which condone corporal punishment and themoral authority to mobilise communities to take actionto end it.There has been much faith-based action tosupport legal reform in recent years. In statementsof support, religious leaders have emphasised theirreligion does not condone corporal punishment ofchildren. Universal values of compassion, equity andjustice, together with a shared consensus acrossdifferent religious traditions on the inherent humandignity of the child, have enabled people from differentreligious communities to work together to promotechildren’s right to equal protection under the law.Yet there are many who continue to use their faithChildren Advisory Board elections, Zanzibarand sacred texts to justify, condone and advocatecorporal punishment of children in families, schools,religious institutions and justice systems. This poses aserious challenge for child rights activists and much isstill to be done to build broader religious support andaction towards legal reform.Ending corporal punishment of children – Ahandbook for working with religious communitiesThis soon to be published handbook recognises the key rolereligious leaders and their communities can play in taking actiontowards ending legalised violence against children. It providesinformation, tools, practical examples, action points and keyresources for NGOs and others wishing to work with religiouscommunities towards achieving legal reform. It can also be used byfaith-based groups as a resource for inter-religious cooperation.The handbook includes the following sections:The global problem of corporal punishment and the importance oflegal reform, with examples of positive action taken by religiousleadersReligious perspectives, including teachings of the major worldreligions on children and corporal punishment and discussion ofreasons for faith-based opposition to law reformWorking with religious communities to achieve reform, discussing theimportance of forming partnerships and engaging with religiousgroups at every level, outlining the opportunities for religiousleaders to take action through their existing roles and functions,exploring ways of developing multi-religious support andhighlighting the importance of children’s participationResponding to faith-based opposition, including suggestions foraction and answers to frequently asked questions.The handbook will be published by the Global Initiative toEnd All Corporal Punishment and the Churches’ Networkfor Non-violence early in 2011. For further information emailinfo@churchesfornon-violence.org.“Even as we have not fully livedup to our responsibilities inthis regard, we believe thatreligious communities must bepart of the solution towardseradicating violence againstchildren. We commit ourselves totake leadership in our religiouscommunities and in broadersociety.... We call upon ourgovernments to adopt legislationto prohibit all forms of violenceagainst children, including corporalpunishment, and to ensure the fullrights of children consistent withthe Convention on the Rights ofthe Child.”A Multi-Religious Commitment toConfront Violence against Children (TheKyoto Declaration), Kyoto, Japan, 28August 2006Working with religious communitiesReligious leaders can be agents for change andinfluential advocates for children. Many providedirect services to children through child and familyorganisations and have contact with people at differentlife stages. Many also have long-standing links witheducation and youth networks and are involved incharitable work and service provision. Through theirdiverse roles – as pastors and spiritual guides, leadersof faith-based organisations, teachers and theologians,preachers and leaders of worship, community leadersand activists – religious leaders can use their moralstanding to raise awareness and challenge communityattitudes and harmful traditions which condonecorporal punishment.Religious leaders have a responsibility for thewelfare and protection of children in their communities.They have the authority to influence policy and practicewithin their religious organisations and institutions andto promote the study and interpretation of religioustexts to highlight respect for children and non-violence.They can guide their communities by modellingrespect for children and ensuring that children withintheir communities have a voice and are protected fromphysical punishment and other humiliating treatment.Human rights institutions, NGOs and other childrights advocates can encourage religious leaders toplace the prohibition of corporal punishment at theforefront of concern and initiate actions to eliminate it.This requires a multi-faceted approach and NGOs andothers should engage with faith-based supporters atan early stage of the planning process.Shared values of compassion, justice, equityand non-violence transcend theological and culturaldifferences and can form a common purpose forworking with religious communities towards eliminatingcorporal punishment of children.New resources to support working with faith groupsCorporal Punishment: National and International perspectives,Gender Research and Advocacy Project, Legal Assistance Centre, Windhoek,Namibia 2010This new report has a substantial section on religion and corporal punishment,including multi-religious resources and a commentary on biblical passages oftenused to justify corporal punishment. Available at www.lac.org.na.From Commitment to Action – What religious communities can do to eliminateviolence against children, Religions for Peace & UNICEF, 2010This publication is intended to guide discussion, planning and action aroundchild protection issues within religious communities and in larger social settingsand includes specific references to ending corporal punishment. Available athttp://religionsforpeace.org/resources/toolkits/what-religious-communities.html.Other multi-religious resources are available atwww.churchesfornon-violence.org.22 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 23

Legality of corporalpunishment:state by state analysis (November 2010)Please note: The following information has been compiled from many sources, including reports to and by the UnitedNations human rights treaty bodies. Information in square brackets is unconfirmed. We are very grateful to governmentofficials, UNICEF and other UN agencies, NGOs and human rights institutions, and many individuals who have helped toprovide and check information.Please let us know if you believe any of the information to be incorrect: info@endcorporalpunishment.org.StateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureProhibited inalternativecare settingsBrazil 10 ✘ 11 ✘ 12 ✓ ✘ 13 ✘ 14Czech Republic 15 ✘ ✘ ✓ ✓ 16 ✘Estonia 17 ✘ ✓ 18 ✓ ✓ 19 ✘Ireland 20 ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ SOME 21Lithuania 22 ✘ ✓ 23 ✓ ✓ 24 ✘Maldives 25 ✘ 26 ✘ 27 ✘ 28 ✘ 29 ✘ 30Pakistan 31 ✘ 32 ✘ 33 SOME 34 SOME 35 ✘ 36Peru 37 ✘ ✘ 38 ✓ ✘ ✘States with full prohibition in legislationThe following 29 states have prohibited corporal punishment in all settings, including the home:Austria (1989); Bulgaria (2000); Costa Rica (2008); Croatia (1998); Cyprus (1994);Denmark (1997); Finland (1983); Germany (2000); Greece (2006); Hungary (2004);Iceland (2003); Israel (2000); Kenya (2010); Latvia (1998); Liechtenstein (2008);Luxembourg (2008); Netherlands (2007); New Zealand (2007); Norway (1987); Poland (2010);Portugal (2007); Republic of Moldova (2008); Romania (2004); Spain (2007); Sweden (1979);Tunisia (2010); Ukraine (2003); Uruguay (2007); Venezuela (2007)Prohibition under autonomous government within stateAll corporal punishment is prohibited by law in Southern Sudan (2008)Prohibition by Supreme Court rulingIn the following states, corporal punishment is prohibited in all settings, including the home, bySupreme Court ruling, not yet reflected in legislation: Italy (1996); Nepal (2005)States committed to full prohibitionIn each of the following states, corporal punishment is still permitted by law in one or more settings but thegovernment has made a public commitment to enacting full prohibition.StateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureProhibited inalternativecare settingsAfghanistan 1 ✘ ✓ ✘ 2 ✘ ✘Bangladesh 3 ✘ ✘ 4 ✘ ✘ ✘Bhutan 5 ✘ 6 ✘ 7 ✓ ✘ 8 ✘ 91 Commitment to prohibition in all settings, including the home, made at July 2006 meeting of the South Asia Forum, following 2005 regional consultationof the UN Secretary General’s Study on Violence against Children2 Lawful under Shari’a law3 Commitment to prohibition in all settings, including the home, made at July 2006 meeting of the South Asia Forum, following 2005 regional consultationof the UN Secretary General’s Study on Violence against Children4 Following a High Court directive in August 2010, government circular states that corporal punishment should not be used but no explicit prohibition in law5 Commitment to prohibition in all settings, including the home, made at July 2006 meeting of the South Asia Forum, following 2005 regional consultationof the UN Secretary General’s Study on Violence against Children)6 Child Care and Protection Bill would prohibit some but possibly not all corporal punishment7 Code of Conduct and ministerial directive state that corporal punishment should not be used but no prohibition in law; see previous note8 See note 69 See note 6Serbia 39 ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘Slovakia 40 ✘ ✓ 41 ✓ ✓ 42 [ ✓ ]Slovenia 43 ✘ 44 ✓ ✓ ✓ 45 SOME 46Sri Lanka 47 ✘ ✘ 48 ✓ SOME 49 ✘Taiwan 50 ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘ 5110 In July 2010, former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, before leaving office, submitted a bill to Congress which would prohibit in all settings11 Bill which would prohibit under discussion (2010)12 See previous note13 See note 1114 See note 1115 Government committed to prohibition; prohibition was due to be considered by the Council for Human Rights in 200816 But no explicit prohibition17 Government committed to prohibition and draft legislation which would prohibit in all settings was due to be submitted to government in April 201018 But no explicit prohibition19 But no explicit prohibition20 Government has stated long-term commitment to prohibition but given no indication of timing21 Prohibited in pre-school settings except for childminders caring for children of relatives, children of same family or up to three children from differentfamilies; guidance advises against its use in foster care and residential care services but no prohibition in legislation22 Government stated intention to prohibit to Committee on the Rights of the Child in 2006; bill which would prohibit by amending Law on theFundamentals of Protection of the Rights of the Child submitted to parliament in June 201023 But no explicit prohibition24 But no explicit prohibition25 Commitment to prohibition in all settings, including the home, made at July 2006 meeting of the South Asia Forum, following 2005 regional consultationof the UN Secretary General’s Study on Violence against Children26 Draft Penal Code introduces justification of the use of force by parents, teachers and others for purposes of prevention and punishment of misconduct27 Ministry of Education advises against the use of corporal punishment but no explicit prohibition in legislation and draft Penal Code would introduce ajustification for the use of corporal punishment by teachers28 Draft Penal Code authorises judicial corporal punishment29 See note 2630 See note 2631 Commitment to prohibition in all settings, including the home, made at July 2006 meeting of the South Asia Forum, following 2005 regional consultationof the UN Secretary General’s Study on Violence against Children32 Child Protection Bill would possibly prohibit (2010)33 Prohibition of Corporal Punishment Bill would prohibit34 2000 Juvenile Justice System Ordinance prohibits corporal punishment of children in custody but application to children not given a custodial sentenceunclear and the law not applicable in all areas35 Prohibited in 2000 Juvenile justice System Ordinance but this not applicable in all areas and other laws not amended/repealed36 Prohibition of Corporal Punishment Bill would prohibit37 Congress has pledged all party support for prohibition (2007), and bill which would prohibit by amending Code on Children and Adolescents underdiscussion (2009)38 Decree states that corporal punishment should not be used but no explicit prohibition in legislation39 Government stated commitment to prohibition in 200740 Government stated commitment to full prohibition in 2005, expected to be included in new Family Code41 But no explicit prohibition42 But no explicit prohibition43 Government stated intention to prohibit in 2004 during drafting of domestic violence law44 Family Code Bill would prohibit (2009)45 But no explicit prohibition46 Prohibited in day care centres and residential schools47 Commitment to prohibition in all settings, including the home, made at July 2006 meeting of the South Asia Forum, following 2005 regional consultationof the UN Secretary General’s Study on Violence against Children48 Ministerial circular states that corporal punishment should not be used but no prohibition in law49 Prohibited in prisons, but lawful in other penal institutions50 Government stated commitment to prohibition in August 200551 But law prohibiting in schools possibly applies to day care centres and cram schools24 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 25

Legal reform in progress but no explicit commitment to full prohibitionIn the following states, bills are under discussion in parliament which would achieve full prohibition in law butthe government has not publicly committed to full prohibition.StateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureProhibited inalternativecare settingsCanada ✘ 52 ✓ 53 ✓ ✓ SOME 54Mongolia ✘ 55 ✓ ✓ ✘ ✘ 56Nicaragua ✘ 57 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘Philippines ✘ 58 ✓ ✓ ✓ SOME 59South Africa ✘ 60 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓Prohibition incomplete and no commitment to reformIn these states, corporal punishment is permitted by law in some or all settings and there is as yet nopublic commitment to full prohibition.StateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureAlbania ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ 61 ✘Algeria ✘ ✓ ✓ [ ✘ ] ✘Andorra ✘ ✓ 62 ✓ ✓ 63 ✘Angola ✘ ✘ [ ✓ ] 64 ✘ ✘Antigua & Barbuda ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘Argentina ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ 65 ✘Armenia ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ 66 ✘Prohibited inalternative caresettingsAustralia ✘ 67 SOME 68 ✓ SOME 69 SOME 70Azerbaijan ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘Bahamas ✘ ✘ ✓ [ ✓ ] ✘Bahrain ✘ ✓ ✓ ?? ✘StateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibition incomplete and no commitment to reformProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureProhibited inalternative caresettingsBarbados ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ [SOME] 71Belarus ✘ ✓ 72 ✓ ✓ 73 SOME 74Belgium ✘ ✓ 75 ✓ ✓ SOME 76Belize ✘ ✓ 77 ✓ SOME 78 SOME 79Benin ✘ ✘ 80 ✓ [ ✓ ] ✘Bolivia ✘ 81 ✘ 82 SOME 83 ✘ 84 ✘ 85Bosnia & Herzegovina ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘Botswana ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘Brunei Darussalam ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘Burkina Faso ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ 86 SOME 87Burundi ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Cambodia ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘ 88Cameroon ✘ 89 ✓ ✓ [ ✓ ] ✘Cape Verde ✘ ✘ 90 ✓ ✘ [ ✓ ]Central African Republic ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Chad ✘ ✓ ✓ ✘ ✘Chile ✘ ✘ 91 ✓ ✓ ✘China ✘ 92 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘Colombia ✘ ✘ 93 SOME 94 ✘ 95 ✘Comoros ✘ ✘ [ ✓ ] 96 ✘ ✘Congo, Republic of ✘ [ ✓ ] ✓ ✘ ✘Cook Islands ✘ ✓ ✓ ✘ ✘Côte d’Ivoire ✘ ✘ 97 ✓ ✓ 98 ✘52 Bill S-204 which would repeal section 43 of the Criminal Code allowing the use of force “by way of correction” was introduced to parliament in March2010 and had its second reading in June 2010; 2004 Supreme Court ruling upheld parents’ right to administer corporal punishment to children aged 2-12years, but not using objects and not involving slaps or blows to the head53 2004 Supreme Court ruling limited use of force by teachers to restraint and removal and excluded corporal punishment; as at March 2010, this notconfirmed in legislation relating to private schools, or to any schools in Alberta and Manitoba; Alberta Minister for Education has stated prohibition will beconsidered when Education Act is reviewed54 Prohibited in state provided care in Alberta, British Colombia and Manitoba; in Ontario prohibited in provincially-licensed childcare programmes andfoster homes and for all children receiving services from a child protection agency or other service provider licensed or approved by the province; inQuebec no right of correction under the Civil Code but right of correction in Federal Criminal Code applies55 Draft amendments to Family Code would prohibit (2010)56 Draft amendments to Family Code would prohibit in care institutions (2010)57 Proposals to include prohibition in draft Family Code under discussion (2009)58 Anti-Corporal Punishment Bill which would prohibit under discussion (2010)59 Prohibited in residential institutions and day care centres, lawful in other care settings; see previous note60 Efforts to prohibit corporal punishment by parents through the legislature failed in 2007; a national advocacy campaign continues to promote law reform61 But no explicit prohibition62 But no explicit prohibition63 But no explicit prohibition64 Prohibited for persons under 16 years; prohibition for 16 and 17 year olds unconfirmed65 2009 standards state that corporal punishment should not be used, but no explicit prohibition in law66 But no explicit prohibition67 In 2003, Law Reform Institute in Tasmania recommended abolition of reasonable correction defence from criminal and civil law but as at November 2010,no changes in the law had been made; 2002 law in New South Wales prohibits force to head or neck of child and to any part of the body where likely tocause harm lasting more than a short period68 Prohibited in Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Tasmania and Victoria; South Australian government proposed prohibition in bill due to beintroduced to parliament in 2009 but as at April 2010 law reform had not been achieved69 Prohibited in all states and territories except Australian Capital Territory and Western Australia70 Prohibited in all states and territories in child care centres except Northern Territory, Tasmania and Australian Capital Territory, and in residential centresand foster care except Northern Territory, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia and Australian Capital Territory71 Prohibited in state-arranged foster care and pre-school settings, and in day care centres and children’s residential centres run by Child Care Board, butlawful in private foster care72 But no explicit prohibition73 But no explicit prohibition74 Considered unlawful in boarding institutions, but there is no explicit prohibition; not prohibited in foster care75 But no explicit prohibition76 Prohibited in institutions and foster care by decrees in some communities; not prohibited in non-institutional childcare77 But repeal of legal defences unconfirmed and prohibition is yet to be implemented; draft Education Rules under discussion (2010)78 Prohibited in “Youth Hostel” detention centre but lawful in prisons and by law enforcement officials79 Prohibited in residential care facilities and in day care centres80 Government circular advises against the use of corporal punishment in formal education, but no prohibition in law81 Legislation prohibits only corporal punishment which is considered harmful82 See previous note83 Prohibited in state laws, lawful in indigenous and tribal justice systems84 See note 8185 See note 8186 But possibly no explicit prohibition87 Prohibited in institutions, lawful in foster care88 Minimum standards state that corporal punishment should not be used, but no prohibition in legislation89 Draft Family Code would confirm right to discipline (2010)90 Ministry of Education guidelines advise against the use of corporal punishment, but no prohibition in law91 Legislation prohibits only corporal punishment resulting in injury92 But corporal punishment of girls prohibited in Shenzhen Special Economic Zone93 Legislation prohibits only corporal punishment resulting in injury94 Prohibited in laws of the Republic, but under Constitutional case law permitted among indigenous Indian communities95 See note 9396 Possibly lawful under Shari’a law and in traditional justice systems97 Ministerial circular states that corporal punishment should not be used, but no prohibition in law; prohibition expected to be enacted in 201098 But no explicit prohibition26 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 27

Prohibition incomplete and no commitment to reformProhibition incomplete and no commitment to reformStateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureProhibited inalternative caresettingsStateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureProhibited inalternative caresettingsCuba ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Dem. People’s Rep. of Korea ✘ ✘ 99 [ ✓ ] [ ✓ ] ✘Democratic Republic of Congo ✘ ✓ ✓ ✘ ✘Djibouti ✘ [ ✓ ] [ ✓ ] ✘ ✘Dominica ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ SOME 100Dominican Republic ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ SOME 101Ecuador ✘ ✓ SOME 102 ✓ SOME 103Egypt ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ 104 ✘El Salvador ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘Equatorial Guinea ✘ ✘ ?? ?? ✘Eritrea ✘ ✘ 105 ✘ 106 ?? ✘Ethiopia ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ SOME 107Fiji ✘ 108 ✓ 109 ✓ ✓ ✘France ✘ 110 ✘ 111 ✓ ✓ 112 ✘ 113Gabon ✘ ✓ ?? ?? ✘Gambia ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Georgia ✘ ✓ 114 ✓ ✓ 115 [SOME] 116Ghana ✘ ✘ 117 ✓ SOME 118 ✘Grenada ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ SOME 119Guatemala ✘ ✘ SOME 120 ✓ ✘Guinea ✘ ✓ [ ✘ ] ?? ✘Guinea-Bissau ✘ ✓ ✓ [ ✓ ] ??India 123 ✘ 124 ✓ 125 SOME 126 SOME 127 SOME 128Indonesia ✘ ✘ SOME 129 ✘ ✘Iran, Islamic Republic of ✘ ✓ ✘ [ ✓ ] ✘Iraq ✘ ✘ ✓ SOME 130 ✘Jamaica ✘ SOME 131 ✓ 132 ✓ ✓Japan ✘ 133 ✓ 134 ✓ ✘ ✘Jordan ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ [ ✘ ]Kazakhstan ✘ SOME 135 ✓ ✓ SOME 136Kiribati ✘ ✓ 137 ✘ 138 ✘ ✘Kuwait ✘ [ ✓ ] ✓ ✘ ??Kyrgyzstan ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ SOME 139Lao People’s Democratic Rep. ✘ [ ✓ ] ✓ ✓ 140 ✘Lebanon ✘ ✘ 141 ✓ [ ✓ ] ✘Lesotho ✘ ✘ 142 ✘ 143 ✘ ✘Liberia ✘ 144 ✘ ✓ ✘ 145 ✘Libyan Arab Jamahiriya ✘ ✓ ✘ ?? ??Madagascar ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Malawi ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ SOME 146Malaysia ✘ ✘ ✘ 147 ✘ 148 ✘Mali ✘ 149 ✓ ✓ ✓ 150 ✘Malta ✘ ✓ 151 ✓ [ ✓ ] ✘Marshall Islands ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✘Guyana ✘ ✘ ✘ 121 ✘ 122 ✘Haiti ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓Honduras ✘ ✓ ✓ ✘ ✘199 Policy states that corporal punishment should not be used, but no prohibition in law100 Prohibited in early childhood education facilities101 Prohibited in institutions102 Prohibited in state law but permitted under traditional law in indigenous communities; draft laws on indigenous justice under discussion (2009)103 Prohibited in institutions but lawful in other childcare settings104 But possibly permitted in social welfare institutions105 Policy states that corporal punishment should not be used, but no prohibition in law106 Lawful under Transitional Penal Code but prohibited in Draft Penal Code107 Prohibited in institutions by Constitution, but “reasonable chastisement” defence available108 In 2006, prime minister and other high level offices called for prohibition, but as at November 2010 prohibition not enacted109 But some legislation still to be repealed110 Private members bill which would prohibit in all settings (Bill 2244) submitted to National Assembly in January 2010111 1889 High Court ruling allowed “right to correction” for teachers; 2000 ruling stated that habitual and non-educational corporal punishment not coveredby this; see also previous note112 But no explicit prohibition; see also note 110113 See note 110114 But no explicit prohibition115 But no explicit prohibition116 Prohibited in institutions (information unconfirmed)117 Ministerial directive possibly advises against using corporal punishment, but no prohibition in law118 Prohibited in prisons; no explicit prohibition in borstal institutions and industrial institutions119 Prohibited in child care homes by licensing requirements120 Unlawful in state laws but permitted in traditional justice systems121 Prohibited for under 17s but lawful for 17 year olds122 See previous note123 Government committed to prohibition outside the home124 Prevention of Offences Against the Child Bill would prohibit only corporal punishment of a certain degree of severity (2010)125 But prohibition not extended to the state of Jammu and Kashmir; see previous note126 Prohibited in state laws, but used in traditional justice systems; see note 124127 See note 124128 Prohibited in care institutions except in Jammu and Kashmir; lawful in non-institutional forms of care; see note 124129 Prohibited in Criminal Code but permitted under Shari’a law in Aceh province and other areas130 Prohibited in prisons and detention centres, possibly lawful in other institutions accommodating children in conflict with the law131 Prohibited in schools for children up to the age of 6 years; prohibition in all schools under discussion (2010)132 But as at July 2009 some legislation still to be repealed133 But prohibited in Kawasaki City by local ordinance134 Prohibited in 1947 School Education Law but 1981 Tokyo High Court judgment stated that some physical punishment may be lawful in somecircumstances135 Prohibited in regular schools but not in military schools136 Prohibited in children’s villages, youth homes and other institutions, but no prohibition in foster care or kinship care137 Statutory provisions allowing for corporal punishment repealed but no explicit prohibition in legislation138 Government committed to prohibition (2006)139 Prohibited in residential institutions140 But no explicit prohibition141 Government committed to law reform (2006)142 Education Bill would prohibit (2009)143 Child Protection and Welfare Bill would prohibit (2008)144 Children Bill would ensure “domestic discipline” respects dignity but provide for “justifiable correction” (2010)145 Children Bill would prohibit (2010)146 Prohibited in institutions but possibly lawful in non-institutional case147 Government committed to prohibition (2007)148 See previous note149 Draft Family Code would remove right of correction but not explicitly prohibit corporal punishment (2009)150 But no explicit prohibition151 But no explicit prohibition28 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 29

Prohibition incomplete and no commitment to reformStateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureMauritania ✘ ✘ 152 ✘ ✘ ✘Mauritius ✘ ✓ ✓ ✘ ✘Mexico ✘ 153 ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Micronesia, Federated States ✘ [ ✓ ] ✓ ✘ ✘Monaco ✘ ✓ 154 ✓ ✓ 155 ✘Montenegro ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ 156 ✘Morocco ✘ ✘ 157 ✓ ✓ ✘Mozambique ✘ ✘ 158 ✓ ✓ ✘Myanmar ✘ ✘ 159 ✓ 160 ✘ ✘Prohibited inalternative caresettingsNamibia ✘ ✓ ✓ 161 ✓ 162 SOME 163Nauru ✘ [ ✘ ] [ ✓ ] ✘ ✘Niger ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Nigeria ✘ ✘ SOME 164 ✘ ✘Niue ✘ ✘ ✓ ?? [ ✘ ]Oman ✘ ✓ ?? ✘ ✘Palau ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Palestine ✘ SOME 165 [ ✘ ] 166 [ ✘ ] 167 ✘Panama ✘ 168 ✘ 169 ✓ ✓ ✘ 170Papua New Guinea ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ SOME 171Paraguay ✘ ✘ 172 ✓ ✓ ✘Qatar ✘ ✘ 173 ✘ ✘ ✘Republic of Korea ✘ ✘ 174 ✓ ✓ 175 [SOME] 176Russian Federation ✘ ✓ 177 ✓ ✓ 178 ✘StateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibition incomplete and no commitment to reformProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureProhibited inalternative caresettingsRwanda ✘ 179 ✘ 180 ✓ ✘ 181 ✘ 182Saint Kitts & Nevis ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘Saint Lucia ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Saint Vincent & Grenadines ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘Samoa ✘ ✓ ✓ [ ✘ ] ✘San Marino ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ 183 ✘Sao Tome & Principe ✘ [ ✓ ] SOME 184 ?? ✘Saudi Arabia ✘ ✘ 185 ✘ ✘ ✘Senegal ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ 186 ✘Seychelles ✘ ✘ 187 ✓ [ ✓ ] [ ✓ ]Sierra Leone ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Singapore ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ SOME 188Solomon Islands ✘ ✘ ✓ ✓ ✘Somalia ✘ 189 SOME 190 SOME 191 SOME 192 SOME 193Sudan (Northern) ✘ ✘ 194 [ ✓ ] 195 ✘ ✘Suriname ✘ [ ✓ ] ✓ ✓ ✘Swaziland ✘ ✘ 196 ✘ 197 ✘ 198 ✘ 199Switzerland ✘ 200 ✓ 201 ✓ ✓ ✓Syrian Arab Republic ✘ ✘ 202 ✓ ?? ✘Tajikistan ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘Thailand ✘ ✓ ✓ 203 ✓ 204 ✘TFYR Macedonia ✘ ✓ ✓ ✓ 205 ✓152 Ministerial Order states that corporal punishment should not be used, but no prohibition in legislation153 But “right of correction” removed from the Civil Code of the Federal Territory154 But no explicit prohibition155 But no explicit prohibition156 But possibly no explicit prohibition157 Ministerial direction advises against the use of corporal punishment, but no prohibition in law158 Government directive advises against the use of corporal punishment, but no prohibition in law159 Government directive advises against the use of corporal punishment, but no prohibition in law160 But some legislation still to be amended/repealed161 But some legislation still to be repealed162 See previous note163 Prohibited in state institutions but some legislation still to be repealed; Child Care and Protection Bill would prohibit in all care settings (2009)164 Prohibited in 2003 Child Rights Act, but this not enacted in all states and other legislation not amended; lawful in some areas under Shari’a law165 Prohibited in UNRWA schools and in East Jerusalem; in public schools, Ministerial direction advises against using corporal punishment, but noprohibition in law166 Possibly unlawful in the West Bank167 Possibly unlawful in East Jerusalem168 Legislation prohibits only corporal punishment which results in injury169 See previous note170 See note 168171 2009 Lukautim Pikinini (Child) Act prohibits corporal punishment of children “in the care of the Director”, but no prohibition in relation to forms of care runby non-government bodies and private care arrangements172 Legislation protects dignity but does not explicitly prohibit corporal punishment173 Ministerial Decree states that corporal punishment should not be used, but no explicit prohibition in legislation174 Draft Student Rights Bill would prohibit (August 2010)175 But no explicit prohibition176 Possibly prohibited in institutions177 But possibly no explicit prohibition178 But no explicit prohibition179 Draft Child Protection Bill would possibly prohibit (2010)180 Draft Child Protection Bill would prohibit (2010)181 See previous note182 See note 180183 But no explicit prohibition184 Prohibited for persons under the age of 17 years, but possibly lawful for 17 year olds185 Ministerial circulars advise against the use of corporal punishment, but no prohibition in law186 But no explicit prohibition187 Policy states that corporal punishment should not be used, but no prohibition in law188 Prohibited in child care centres189 But possibly prohibited in Somaliland190 Prohibited in Somaliland191 See previous note192 See note 190193 Prohibited in Somaliland but possibly not in all alternative care settings194 2010 Child Act prohibits cruel punishment but no explicit prohibition of all corporal punishment195 Possibly lawful under Shari’a law196 Proposals to prohibit in draft legislation under discussion (2008)197 See previous note198 See note 196199 See note 196200 2003 Federal Court ruling stated repeated and habitual corporal punishment unacceptable, but did not rule out right of parents to use corporalpunishment; draft legislation to prohibit rejected by parliament in 2008201 Prohibited by federal law pursuant to cantonal legislation; 1991 Federal Court ruled it permissible in certain circumstances, but this consideredimpossible under current legislation202 Ministry of Education advises against its use but no explicit prohibition in law203 But some legislation still to be amended204 See previous note205 But no explicit prohibition30 Ending legalised violence against children Global Report 2010 31

Prohibition incomplete and no commitment to reformStateProhibited inthe homeProhibited inschoolsProhibited in penal systemAs sentence forcrimeAs disciplinarymeasureProhibited inalternative caresettingsGlobal Initiative website:www.endcorporalpunishment.orgTimor-Leste, Democratic Rep. ✘ ✘ 206 ✓ ✓ ✘ 207Togo ✘ 208 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓Tonga ✘ ✓ ✘ 209 ✘ ✘Trinidad & Tobago ✘ ✘ ✓ ✘ ✘ 210Turkey ✘ ✘ ✓ ✓ 211 ✘Detailed information on all aspects of prohibiting corporal punishmentis available on the Global Initiative website:Turkmenistan ✘ 212 [ ✓ ] 213 ✓ [ ✓ ] 214 ✘ 215Tuvalu ✘ ✘ SOME 216 ✘ ✘Uganda ✘ ✘ 217 ✓ ✓ ✘United Arab Emirates ✘ ✓ 218 ✘ ✘ ✘United Kingdom ✘ 219 ✓ ✓ ✓ 220 SOME 221United Republic of Tanzania ✘ ✘ ✘ 222 ✘ ✘United States of America ✘ SOME 223 ✓ SOME 224 SOME 225Uzbekistan ✘ ✓ [ ✓ ] ✓ ✘Vanuatu ✘ ✓ SOME 226 ✓ 227 ✘Viet Nam ✘ ✘ ✓ ✓ ✘Western Sahara ✘ [ ✘ ] [ ✓ ] [ ✓ ] [ ✘ ]Yemen ✘ 228 ✓ ✘ ✓ ✘ 229Zambia ✘ ✘ 230 ✓ 231 ✓ 232 ✘Zimbabwe ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘206 Government committed to prohibition (2005)207 Policy advises against the use of corporal punishment in child care centres, orphanages and boarding houses, but no prohibition in law208 Possibly prohibited in Children’s Code 2007209 2010 Court of Appeal ruling stated that whipping provisions in criminal law are likely to be unconstitutional but did not categorically declare corporalpunishment unconstitutional210 Policy advises against using corporal punishment in health care and psychiatric institutions, but no prohibition in law211 But possibly no explicit prohibition212 2002 Rights of the Child (Guarantees) Act prohibits only corporal punishment considered to be harmful213 See previous note214 See note 212215 See note 212216 Unlawful under Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure, but lawful under separate laws for Island Courts217 Ministerial circular advises against using corporal punishment in state schools, but no prohibition in law; draft amendments to Children Act would prohibit(2010)218 But no explicit prohibition in relation to private schools219 Scotland: 2003 Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act restricts common law defence by introducing concept of “justifiable assault” of children and definingblows to head, shaking and use of implements as unjustifiable; England and Wales: 2004 Children Act maintains “reasonable punishment” defence forcases of common assault; similar provision introduced in Northern Ireland by the 2006 Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Northern Ireland) Order220 But no explicit prohibition in secure training centres221 Prohibited in residential care institutions and foster care arranged by local authorities or voluntary organisations, and in day care institutions andchildminding in England and Wales and Scotland; guidance advises against the use of corporal punishment in day care institutions and childminding inNorthern Ireland, but no prohibition in law; not prohibited in private foster care222 But possibly prohibited in Zanzibar223 Prohibited in public and private schools in Iowa and New Jersey, in public schools in a further 28 states and District of Columbia; bill to prohibit at federallevel (Bill HR 5628) under discussion (2010)224 Prohibited in 32 states225 Prohibited in all alternative care settings in 30 states and in some settings in other states and the District of Columbia226 Used in rural areas for punishment of young boys and girls found to have broken village or custom rules227 But no explicit prohibition228 Proposals to restrict but not prohibit under discussion (2008)229 See previous note230 Education Bill which would prohibit under discussion (2010)231 But some legislation still to be amended232 See previous note32 Ending legalised violence against childrenHuman rights, law and corporal punishment– details of international and regional humanrights standards, the work of the Committeeon the Rights of the Child and other treatymonitoring bodies and briefings submitted tothem by the Global Initiative, and national highlevel court judgmentsGlobal progress – reports on the legality ofcorporal punishment and progress towardsprohibition in every state worldwide, detailedinformation on states which have achievedprohibition in all settings including the home,and useful facts and figuresResearch – research on prevalence, children’sviews and experiences, the effects of corporalpunishment and on the experiences of stateswhich have achieved full prohibitionResources – internet and other resources to support thepromotion of positive discipline for parents, teachers andcarers, downloads of useful reportsReform – details of legislative and other measures to supportlaw reform, information on international, regional and nationalcampaigns for law reform, online resources to support thepromotion of law reform (designed to supplement the GlobalInitiative legal reform handbook)Website for childrenKeep up to dateThe Global Initiative publishes a regular global e-newsletter withnews of progress towards prohibition worldwide, new researchand resources to support law reform, human rights monitoringand more (to subscribe email info@endcorporalpunishment.org).The Global Initiative and The African Child Policy Forumjointly publish an African e-newsletter (to subscribe emailvohito@africanchildforum.org).

Hitting people is wrong – and children are people too. Corporalpunishment of children breaches their fundamental rights torespect for their human dignity and physical integrity. Its legalitybreaches their right to equal protection under the law. Urgentaction is needed in every region of the world to respect fully the rights ofall children – the smallest and most fragile of people.This fifth Global Report reviews progress towardsprohibition of corporal punishment and deliberatehumiliation of children throughout the world, in thecontext of follow-up to the UN Secretary General’sStudy on Violence against Children, and highlights realopportunities for achieving law reform.The Global Initiative was launched inGeneva in 2001. It aims to act as a catalystto encourage more action and progresstowards ending all corporal punishment inall continents; to encourage governmentsand other organisations to “own” theissue and work actively on it; and tosupport national campaigns with relevantinformation and assistance. The contextfor all its work is implementation of the Convention on the Rights ofthe Child. Its aims are supported by UNICEF, UNESCO, human rightsinstitutions, and international and national NGOs.Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children:www.endcorporalpunishment.orgemail: info@endcorporalpunishment.orgChild in MongoliaFor informationabout the UN SecretaryGeneral’s Study on Violenceagainst Children, seewww.unviolencestudy.orgSave the Children Sweden hasmade a significant contribution tothe UN Study on Violence againstChildren, including advocating theprohibition of corporal punishment in all settings, including the home,and has supported children and young people to consolidate andadvocate this key message. The work has raised Save the Children’sprofile as a key agency addressing violence against childrenworldwide. In 1979 Save the Children Sweden contributed to Swedenbecoming the first country to explicitly ban corporal punishment. Itis currently working to highlight the issue in many other countriesand cooperating with organisations to put the issue of corporalpunishment on the political agenda around the world.Save the Children Sweden:http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se email: info@rb.se