Summary of law reform necessary to achieve full prohibition

Prohibition is still to be achieved in the home, penal institutions, alternative care settings and possibly schools.

The Civil Code (article 231) and the Family Code (article 191) state that parents have the authority “to reprimand and adequately and moderately correct their children”. The near universal social acceptance of corporal punishment in childrearing necessitates clarity in law that no level of corporal punishment is acceptable. The “moderate correction” defence in the Civil and Family Codes should be repealed and the law should explicitly prohibit all corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment, in the home and all other settings where adults have parental authority.

Explicit prohibition should be enacted of corporal punishment in all education settings, public and private, as a disciplinary measure in all institutions accommodating children in conflict with the law, and in all alternative care settings, including public and private day care, residential institutions, foster care, etc.

Current legality of corporal punishment

Home

Corporal punishment is lawful in the home. The Civil Code (1906, article 231) and the Family Code (1984, article 191) both confirm the authority of parents “to reprimand and adequately and moderately correct their children”. Article 24 of the Code on Children and Adolescents (1996) protects a child from “all inhuman, violent, terrorizing, humiliating or destructive treatment, even when it is supposedly done for disciplinary or corrective measures, regardless of who commits it” (article 24) but also confirms that paternal relationships are governed by the Family Code (article 57). Provisions against violence and abuse in the Criminal Code (1983), the Law Against Domestic Violence (1997) and the Constitution (1982) are not interpreted as prohibiting all corporal punishment in childrearing.

Schools

Corporal punishment was explicitly prohibited in schools by article 134 of the Public Education Code (1923) and the General Public Education Act, but we have yet to establish that these laws are still in force. The prohibitions are not reiterated in more recent laws. Article 24 of the Code on Children and Adolescents (see above) applies, and article 35 stipulates that the reciprocal respect and dignified treatment between educator and student must be ensured at every level of education. In the Statute of the Honduran Teacher (1997), educators’ obligations include respect for dignity, physical, psychological and moral integrity of the students (article 9).

Penal system

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a sentence for crime. Article 68 of the Constitution prohibits cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.

There is no explicit prohibition of corporal punishment as a disciplinary measure in penal institutions. Article 24 of the Code on Children and Adolescents (see above) applies, and article 199 states that children in detention centres have the right to “receive an appropriate treatment on the part of authorities responsible for their custody, who will seek to avoid the use of force or any type of weapon in carrying out their responsibilities” but does not categorically prohibit corporal punishment. Article 282(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure states: “It is unlawful to commit or to encourage or permit any act of torture, mistreatment or other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment either at the time of arrest or during detention.” Article 68 of the Constitution protects the human dignity of persons deprived of their liberty.

Alternative care

Corporal punishment is lawful in alternative care settings.

Prevalence research

According to statistics from UNICEF relating to the period 2001-2007, of girls and women aged 15-49, 16% think that a husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife under certain circumstances. (UNICEF (2009), Progress for Children: A report card on child protection, NY: UNICEF)

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

“The Committee is concerned that article 191 of the Family Code seems to authorize corporal punishment in the home and that there is no explicit prohibition of corporal punishment in alternative care settings.

“The Committee recommends that the State party, taking into account the Committee’s general comment No. 8 on the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment (2006), introduce – and enforce where applicable - legislation explicitly prohibiting all forms of corporal punishment of children in all settings, including the home. The State party should also conduct awareness-raising and public-education campaigns against corporal punishment and promote non-violent, participatory methods of child-rearing and education.”
(3 May 2007, CRC/C/HND/CO/3, Concluding observations on third report, paras. 54 and 55)

Universal Periodic Review

Honduras was examined in the first cycle of the Universal Periodic Review in 2009. The Government accepted a recommendation to “make efforts to incorporate into national legislation the prohibition of all forms of corporal punishment of children”, stating that it considers this is already implemented or in the process of being implemented (A/HRC/WG.6/9/L.8, Draft report of the Working Group, para. 82(4)). Examination in the second cycle is scheduled for 2015.