What is Corporal punishment? Corporal or physical punishment is defined by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, which oversees the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light.” According to the Committee, this mostly involves hitting (smacking, slapping, spanking) children with a hand or implement (whip, stick, belt, shoe, wooden spoon or similar) 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 uncomfortable positions, burning, scalding or forced ingestion. Other non-physical forms of punishment can be cruel and degrading, and thus also incompatible with the Convention, and often accompany and overlap with physical punishment. These include punishments which belittle, humiliate, denigrate, scapegoat, threaten, scare or ridicule the child. In keeping with the provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, corporal punishment could be classified as physical punishment, mental harassment and discrimination. Perceptions on Corporal Punishment Punishing children is regarded as normal and acceptable in all settings – whether in the family or in institutions. It is often considered necessary in order that children grow up to be competent and responsible individuals. It is widely used by teachers and parents regardless of its evident lack of effectiveness, and potentially deleterious side-effects. Its very ineffectiveness tends to result in an escalation spiral which then leads to both a culture of rationalisation by those in authority and passive acceptance of the situation as evidence of ‘caring’ by children. So pervasive is the justification of corporal punishment that a child may not think her/his rights have been infringed upon. Even if the punishment hurts, the child does not feel the importance of reporting the incident. Therefore there are layers of beliefs and practices that cloak corporal punishment under the guise of love, care and protection, when it is actually an abuse of authority that harms the child. This follows from the belief that those in whose care children are entrusted in school or other institutions are ‘in loco parentis’ and will therefore always act in the interests of the child. This notion needs to be reviewed in the light of the widespread violence that exists in all institutions occupied by children. Corporal punishment of children and health Corporal or physical punishment of children is highly prevalent, both in homes and schools. Globally, an estimated 1.2 billion children aged 0–18 years are subjected to corporal punishment at home each year. In some countries, almost all students report being physically punished by school staff. The risk of being physically punished is similar for boys and girls, and for children from wealthy and poor households. Evidence shows corporal punishment harms children’s physical and mental health, increases behavioural problems over time, and has no positive outcomes. All corporal punishment, however mild or light, carries an inbuilt risk of escalation. Studies suggest that parents who used corporal punishment are at heightened risk of perpetrating severe maltreatment. Corporal punishment is linked to a range of negative outcomes for children across countries and cultures, including physical and mental ill-health, impaired cognitive and socio-emotional development, poor educational outcomes, increased aggression and perpetration of violence. Corporal punishment is a violation of children’s rights to respect for physical integrity and human dignity, health, development, education and freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The elimination of violence against children is called for in several targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development but most explicitly in Target 16.2: “end abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children”. Corporal punishment and the associated harms are preventable through multisectoral and multifaceted approaches, including law reform, changing harmful norms around child rearing and punishment, parent and caregiver support, and school-based programming. Source : WHO International Laws and Conventions Several international human rights treaties condemn corporal punishment. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) emphasizes the right of children to be protected from all forms of violence. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has consistently called for the abolition of corporal punishment in all settings, including schools. Indian Laws and Policies Article 21 of the Constitution of India which protects the right to life and dignity includes the right to education for children up to 14 years of age. Corporal punishment amounts to abuse and militates against the freedom and dignity of a child. It also interferes with a child’s right to education because fear of corporal punishment makes children more likely to avoid school or to drop out altogether. Hence, corporal punishment is violative of the right to life with dignity. Article 21A of the Constitution provides that “the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.” This fundamental right has been actualised with the enactment of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 Article 39(e) directs the State to work progressively to ensure that “… the tender age of children are not abused”. Article 39(f) directs the State to work progressively to ensure that “children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.” The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009, which has come into force with effect from 1 April 2010, prohibits 'physical punishment' and 'mental harassment' under Section 17(1) and makes it a punishable offence under Section 17(2). The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 is an important statute that criminalises acts that may cause a child mental or physical suffering. Some provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 can be used to prosecute an adult in the general category who inflicts corporal punishment upon a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe child. Affirmative Action in Schools Towards Positive Development of Children The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) and the State Commissions for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCRs) have been entrusted with the task of monitoring children’s rightto education under Section 31 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. Some Guidelines for Affirmative Action in Schools Towards Positive Development of Children is as follows. Some behaviours of children are perceived by schools and teachers as problematic and the prevalent practice is to respond to them with punishment of varying degrees. Some such situations that arise in schools that invite punishment are: Not keeping to time and cleanliness regulations – e.g., late to school, not coming in uniform etc. Academic related issues – e.g., incomplete home assignment, below expected academic performance, not taking a book to school, etc. Not meeting classroom expectations of school authorities – e.g., inattentive, talking in class, making noise in class, etc. Troublesome behaviour – e.g., disturbing other children in class, lying, stealing etc. Offensive behaviour, causing hurt or injury to others – e.g., bullying, aggression towards peers, stealing (violating rights of others), vandalising, etc. In the case of above situations, the concerned institutions should have a clear protocol to guide teachers about which situation needs assessment and intervention by a school counsellor and which one needs immediate intimation to higher authorities at school and the parents. If an attempt at resolving the problem is not satisfactory, parents could then be referred to a specialist (a child and adolescent psychiatristor a counsellor). Some simple but effective strategies when implemented consistently could be as follows. Arriving at a consensus with children about expected behaviour and consequences; Framing rules and guidelines in consensus with children; Focusing on every child’s positives and appreciating good behaviour; Using different strategies to encourage and promote positive behaviours; Never comparing one child’s performance with another; Setting limits and developing clarity on boundaries; Providing children an opportunity to explain before any other response; Giving a warning or chance before any response; Actively listening, remaining calm and ensuring the safety of other children while handling troublesome or offensive behaviour; Addressing perceived ‘severe or problematic behaviour’ through consultation with parents, child and counsellor/psychiatrist; Discussing (with children) and adopting time-out strategy as the last resort with children Source : NCPCR Guidelines for Eliminating Corporal Punishment in Schools Conclusion Eliminating corporal punishment in schools is a critical step towards creating a safe, supportive, and effective learning environment for all students. By understanding the harmful effects of corporal punishment and implementing alternative disciplinary approaches, schools can promote positive behavior, improve academic outcomes, and protect children's rights.