Lawfulness of corporal punishment

Home

Corporal punishment is prohibited in the home. In 2000, the Supreme Court ruled against all violence in childrearing (Natalie Bako v The State). The “reasonable chastisement” defence was removed from criminal law the same year. Another Supreme Court judgment ruled that corporal punishment is an illegitimate and unsound method of punishment (Criminal Case 511/95 State of Israel v Jane Doe, 97 (3) Takdin-District Ct. 1898). Judge Dorit Beinish, in a majority decision, stated (section 29 of verdict): “The child is not his parents’ property; he may not serve as a punching bag even if the parent honestly believes that he is implementing his obligation and right to educate his child. The child depends on his parent, needs his love, his protection and his soft touch. Using punishment that causes pain and degradation violates his rights as a human. It violates his body, his feelings, his dignity and his normal course of development.”

Other protection from violence and abuse is given by the Penal Code (1977 with subsequent amendments), the Ordinance of Torts (1968), the Youth (Care and Supervision) Law (1960), the Prevention of Violence in the Family Law and the Prevention of Abuse of Minors and the Helpless Law (1989). The Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty (1992, amended 1994) states that “[t]here shall be no violation of the life, body or dignity of any person as such” (article 2) and that “[a]ll persons are entitled to protection of their life, body and dignity” (article 4).

Schools

Corporal punishment is prohibited in schools under Ministry of Education administrative guidelines for state schools and the Students’ Rights Law (2000), which states: “It is every student’s right that discipline in the educational institution be applied in a dignified manner, including the right that no corporal or degrading means of punishment will be used against him.” A Supreme Court ruling in 1994 declared that “corporal punishment cannot constitute a legitimate tool in the hands of teachers or other educators” (The State of Israel v Alagani), applicable to both state and private schools.

Penal system

Corporal punishment is prohibited as a sentence for crime and as a disciplinary measure in penal institutions. Juvenile justice is governed by the Treatment and Supervision of Youth Law (1960, amended 1995) and the Adjudication, Punishment and Treatment of Youth Law (1971). The Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty (see above) applies.

Alternative care

Corporal punishment is prohibited in day care settings by clause 6 of the Regulations of Supervision of Daycare Institutions (1965, 1968), and it is prohibited in residential institutions and other forms of childcare. The Supreme Court rulings (see above) apply.

Workplace

 Corporal punishment is prohibited.

Prevalence research

Interviews with 273 parents of at least one child under the age of 18 (Jewish immigrants from the Former Soviet Union) were carried out in 1999 using a semi-structured questionnaire and vignettes. Two of the vignettes showed two situations in which different methods of physical punishment were used on 8-year-old children, slapping the face of a girl and hitting a boy with a belt. When asked which methods parents could use to hit their children, 75% described specific acceptable methods, including hitting with the hand (85%) and hitting with an object, mainly a belt (15%); 63% felt it acceptable to physically punish boys, 41% girls.
(Shor, R., 1999, “Inappropriate child rearing practices as perceived by Jewish immigrant parents from the Former Soviet Union”, Child Abuse & Neglect, vol. 23, no. 5, pp.487-499)

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

“The Committee welcomes:

c) the prohibition of corporal punishment in homes, schools and other institutions….

“The Committee welcomes the many efforts of the State party to prevent and combat all forms of violence and abuse within the family, in schools and in other institutions which care for children, but is concerned at the apparently limited impact of these efforts owing to, among other things, the lack of a comprehensive strategy and adequate resources.

“The Committee recommends that the State party establish a national and comprehensive strategy to prevent and combat violence and abuse within the family, in schools and other institutions caring for children, which should include, among other things:

1. establish a national and comprehensive strategy to prevent and combat violence and abuse within the family, in schools and in other institutions caring for children, which should include, among other things, a study to assess the nature and extent of ill-treatment and abuse of children, and design policies and programmes to address these practices;
2. carry out public education campaigns about the negative consequences of ill-treatment of children and promote positive, non-violent forms of discipline as an alternative to corporal punishment….”

(9 October 2002, CRC/C/15/Add.195, Concluding observations on initial report, paras. 3(c), 38 and 39 (a and b))