Zimpapers Logo

Lienot Chowari – Harare – “Corporal punishment should be discarded. Most parents and teachers don`t administer corporal punishment with the necessary reproach.
“I have read of a story where a child died after being beaten for something as small as 20 cents.
“We welcome this ruling. Orphans are the most affected when it comes to such beatings. This other time I went to Banket and I saw a disabled child being flogged.
“I urge authorities to give us numbers we can call to report when we see such abuse taking place.”

Christopher Charamba Features  Correspondent
Last week, the High Court of Zimbabwe issued a historic ruling outlawing the beating of children in schools and at home. High Court Judge Justice David Mangota held that parents and teachers must not lay their hands on children even if they misbehave.

The court application filed by constitutional lawyer Tendai Biti at the High Court in June last year, was on behalf of a parent whose child was beaten by a teacher at Belvedere Primary School in Harare.

The ruling has received mixed views from across sections of society. Those raised on the spare the rod, spoil the child mantra believe that this is a retrogressive ruling as it takes away a means of disciplining a child.

On the other hand, those who believe corporal punishment to be a form of abuse with lasting negative effects have applauded the ruling and deemed it progressive.

The matter is still to be sent to the Constitutional Court for confirmation but in the meantime the debate rages on as to whether corporal punishment is an effective way of disciplining a child and what alternatives can be employed by parents and teachers in the absence of the cane.

Corporal punishment can be described as any physical action that hurts a child in the name of discipline.

This includes but is not limited to hitting, slapping, pinching, pushing, shaking and kicking; as well as depriving the child of food or rest or movement; forcing chillies, washing liquid or other irritating substances in a child’s mouth or anywhere on his or her body; and/or forcing them to sit or stand for any length of time.

The most common form, however, remains a beating. Parents and teachers alike have been known to use their hands, belts, canes, branches, rubber tubes and a whole host of other instruments to exact discipline.

For many it has been a regular method of discipline both in homes and in schools. The old adage, it takes a village to raise a child, applied practically in some communities, meant that any adult; parent, relative, family friend, neighbour or educator had some authority to carry out a form a discipline when they believed a child to be misbehaving.

Those who subscribe to Christianity in their advocacy for corporal punishment will quote Proverbs 13:24 which states, “Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.”

Louise and Jonathan – Visiting Danish couple – Corporal punishment has been abolished in Denmark since the 1990s.
“Contrary to fears held by many, cases of indiscipline have actually gone down after the abolishment.
“We think it`s a good thing that its abolished and we would support that legislation especially in the education environment it has to be controlled. It yields nothing.

Their concern is that without this method of reprimanding children, parents and educators are left powerless, opening an avenue for children to grow without discipline. For many the stick is the corrective measure they were raised on and they see it as an effective form of disciplining a child.

The belief is that the fear of a hiding will deter a child from misbehaving.

A worry for educators is that they will no longer be able control their pupils. Many teachers find themselves in a situation where the teacher-to-student ratio is as high as 1:70. Gaining control of such a large class can be difficult and the threat of a cane was their avenue to achieving it.

With technological advancements and the various resources that children have access to, there is a concern that children have numerous influences and without effective disciplinary methods they can be easily corrupted.

Corporal punishment particularly in the home is seen as such an effective tool to disciplining a child. Parents who advocate for it state that the child is their responsibility and they know how best to raise the child.

Rather than outlaw corporal punishment, particularly in schools, there have been calls to standardise what can be used to beat a child and how many strokes of the cane, for example, they can receive. It is argued that a list of offences for which corporal punishment can be administered should also be drawn up as well.

On the flip side of the argument, there are those who say that corporal punishment is barbaric and celebrate its outlawing.

This school of thought says that there is no concrete evidence to suggest that corporal punishment is an effective means of disciplining a child. The belief is that it can actually be a traumatic experience and have lasting negative effects on the child.

The maxim, violence begets violence, is applied here as advocates against corporal punishment state that a society which is for this disciplinary method inadvertently promotes violence. They link corporal punishment to other forms of violence such as domestic violence as children are said to learn from what they see and experience.

Another argument is that corporal punishment takes the focus away from the wrongdoing and turns it to the beating. The effectiveness of the method is brought into question particularly after a certain age or on a child who has received numerous beatings.

The question thus becomes what are alternative methods of disciplining and how can these be communicated to parents and educators alike?

The law on corporal punishment in Zimbabwe has been under review in the past few years as the method is said to contravene Section 53 of the new Constitution which came into effect in 2013.

It states that “no person may be subjected to physical or psychological torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.

A report by the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children explains the position of the law on corporal punishment in Zimbabwe.

Article 7 of the Children’s Act 1972 punishes ill-treatment and neglect of children and young persons but states: “(6) Nothing in this section shall be construed as derogating from the right of any parent or guardian of any child or young person to administer reasonable punishment to such child or young person”.

The Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act 2004 states in article 241(2)(a) that “a parent or guardian shall have authority to administer moderate corporal punishment for disciplinary purposes upon his or her minor child or ward”.

Subparagraph (6) states: “In deciding whether or not any corporal punishment administered upon a minor person is moderate for the purposes of this section, a court shall take into account the following factors, in addition to any others that are relevant in the particular case:

(a) the nature of the punishment and any instrument used to administer it; and (b) the degree of force with which the punishment was administered; and (c) the reason for the administration of the punishment; and (d) the age, physical condition and sex of the minor person upon whom it was administered; and (e) any social attitudes towards the discipline of children which are prevalent in the community among whom the minor person was living when the punishment was administered upon the minor person.”

In November 2013, the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education, in line with the new Constitution changed its policies and outlawed corporal punishment in schools.

In December 2014, a High Court review judgment stated that corporal punishment by parents, guardians and persons in loco parentis might now be unconstitutional, but this was focused on judicial corporal punishment.

The ruling is set to be reviewed by the Constitutional Court, but in October 2015 the court postponed the hearing indefinitely and stated that when it does hear the case it will only consider judicial corporal punishment.

Justice Mangota’s ruling which held that parents and teachers inflicting corporal punishment on children were in breach of the 2013 Constitution which protects people’s right to dignity and physical integrity is the latest ruling on the matter. Like the previous ruling, it is likely to end up in the Constitutional Court.

Whatever the outcome, it is clear is that there needs to be a comprehensive national discussion on what constitutes effective discipline.