THE DOMESTIC LAWS

Although many states have ratified the ICCPR, the ECHR and the CRC, yet, there are differing domestic laws regarding CP (5). While many states have abolished CP when it comes to adults, there are also states which have not and some still legalise CP on children and youthful offenders.

For example (6), in Bahamas, the Penal Code provides for whipping of boys under the age of 18 with a “light cane”. Both the Singaporean and the Malaysian Criminal Procedure Code allows boys under the age of 16 to caned with a “light rattan”. Those who are 16 years or older can be whipped like an adult.

Amnesty International observes that the Pakistan Penal Code allows children who have reached puberty to be sentenced with public flogging (7). In Sri Lanka, the courts are empowered to impose whipping as an additional punishment for certain offences for boys (8).

In the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada (9), a challenge to the validity of section 43 of the Criminal Code was dismissed. Section 43 justifies use of reasonable force by parents and teachers by way of correction of a child/pupil.

These domestic laws are among the many which illustrate that in spite of international human rights provisions which seek to prohibit CP on children, the same is not happening in individual states. There are some states which have completely abolished CP on children in whatever situations , these countries remain in the minority.

________________________
(5) This website http://www.corpun.com/ has a list of countries showing the laws regarding CP.
(6) ibid
(7) http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engASA040011998
(8) ibid
(9) Canadian Foundation For Children, Youth & The Law v Attorney General & Ors (30.1.2004)
(10) Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Austria, Cyprus, Croatia, Latvia and Germany. The Supreme Courts in Rome, Namibia and Israel had recently ruled that CP is unlawful (source: Peter Newell’s article Ending Corporal Punishment of Children – see note 16 below)