Summary of law reform necessary to achieve full prohibition

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

There appears to be no defence of “reasonable chastisement” or similar in existing legislation but the near universal acceptance of corporal punishment in childrearing necessitates clarity in law that no level of corporal punishment is acceptable. Explicit prohibition should be enacted of all corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment, in the home and all other settings where adults have authority over children.

Explicit prohibition should be enacted of corporal punishment 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. Provisions against violence and abuse in the Law on Protection of Children (2000), the Criminal Code (2004), the Family Law (2004) and the Constitution (1991) are not interpreted as prohibiting all corporal punishment in childrearing.

Mr Gjorgje Ivanov, President of the Republic, has signed up to the Council of Europe campaign against corporal punishment of children. To our knowledge there have been no moves towards law reform to achieve prohibition.

Schools

Corporal punishment is prohibited in schools in the Law on Elementary Education (1995) and articles 64 and 128 of the Law on Secondary Education (1995).

Penal system

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a sentence for crime. It is not available as a sentence under the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Law on Execution of Sanctions (2006), the Law on Misdemeanours (2006), the Law on Offenses (2006) or the Law on Juvenile Justice (2007).

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a disciplinary measure in penal institutions. It is not among permitted disciplinary measures in the Law on Execution of Sanctions and the Law on Juvenile Justice protects the rights of children in conflict with the law, but there appears to be no explicit prohibition.

Alternative care

There is no explicit prohibition of corporal punishment in alternative care settings.

Prevalence research

According to statistics from UNICEF on violence in the family, 69% of children aged 2-14 experienced physical punishment and/or psychological aggression in 2005-2006: 42% experienced physical punishment and psychological aggression, 15% experienced psychological aggression only and 12% experienced physical punishment only. In total, 54% of children experienced physical punishment, while only 7% of mothers and caregivers believe that physical punishment is necessary in childrearing. 12% of disabled children aged 2-9 were hit on the face, head or ears, hit repeatedly or hit hard, 20% of non-disabled children. Of girls and women aged 15-49, 21% 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 )

In a 2009 survey of 662 adults, 65.3% said they believed that corporal punishment should never be used, compared with 42.8% in a similar 2005 survey of 519 adults. In 2009, 1.5% said that corporal punishment was acceptable “if the parent believes that it will be effective”, compared with 14.5% in 2005. (BRIMA (2009), Overview of the perception about the corporal punishment of the children in Republic of Macedonia and comparative analysis between the research results from 2005 and 2009 year. Part of  the Childhood Without Abuse project, which includes studies carried out in Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, and Ukraine in 2005 and 2009)

In a 2009 survey of 208 teachers in primary schools in Skopje, 73% said they believed that corporal punishment is humiliating for the child and 70% believed it meant that “the parents are not good at rearing children”. Sixty-eight per cent felt that the use of “spanking” as a punishment would justify intervention by a third party. In an identical survey of a similar sample in 2005, 62% believed this. On average, respondents in 2009 estimated that 30% of children in Macedonia experience spanking as punishment, compared with an average estimate of 52% in 2005. (Nobody’s Children Foundation et al. (2009), Skopje teachers’ attitudes toward child abuse. Part of  the Childhood Without Abuse project, which includes studies carried out in Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, and Ukraine in 2005 and 2009)

The First Children’s Embassy in the world-Megjashi, carried out research on children’s rights, discrimination and violence in 2009, involving over 2,200 students. According to the report, 56% of children named hitting/beating as a form of violence that happens in schools, and 57% said they knew a child who had been beaten by a teacher or headteacher, including slapping (63%), caning (34%), and kicking (15%). (First Children’s Embassy in the world-Megjashi (2009), Perception of Children’s Rights, Discrimination and Children’s Exposure to Violence)

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

“While welcoming the strengthening of anti-torture provisions through amendments of the Criminal Code and the amending of the Law on the Ombudsman in 2009 to bring the institution in line with the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture, the Committee is deeply concerned about allegations of solitary confinement, corporal punishment and use of batons in the Educational-Correctional Institution.

“The Committee recommends that the State party take immediate measures to remove batons and to abolish the use of corporal punishment in the Educational-Correctional Institution. In line with article 37(c), the State party should review or limit as much possible the use of solitary confinement in the Institution.

“While noting the prohibition of corporal punishment in schools and in the penal system, the Committee is concerned that applicable law is not interpreted as prohibiting corporal punishment in the home and about the high prevalence of physical punishment and aggression in the family.

“The Committee recommends that the State party:

1. prohibit corporal punishment in the home as a matter of urgency;
2. undertake a review of current legislation with a view to identifying protection gaps and ending the use of corporal punishment in all areas, including in schools, in the home, in the penal system, and in alternative care settings;
3. take due account of the Committee’s General Comment No. 8 on the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel and degrading forms of punishment (CRC/C/GC/8).”

(11 June 2010, CRC/C/MKD/CO/2 Advance Unedited Version, Concluding observations on second report, paras. 38, 39, 40 and 41)

“Recognising the State party’s efforts to end corporal punishment practices in schools, the Committee is nevertheless concerned that such practices have not been entirely ended in schools and also continue outside of the school context.

“The Committee urges the State party to continue its efforts to end corporal punishment practices in schools, to monitor and record the use of corporal punishment against children in all contexts, and to make every effort to prevent the practice of corporal punishment including through its prohibition by law. The Committee further encourages the State party to undertake campaigns to raise the awareness of parents, in particular, of the harmful effects of corporal punishment.”
(23 February 2000, CRC/C/15/Add.118, Concluding observations on initial report, paras. 23 and 24)

Committee Against Torture

“The Committee notes that corporal punishment of children is not explicitly prohibited in all settings and it is a common and accepted means of childrearing.

The State party, taking into account the recommendation in the UN Secretary General’s Study on violence against children, should adopt and implement legislation prohibiting corporal punishment in all settings, supported by the necessary awareness-raising and public education measures.”
(15 May 2008, CAT/C/MKD/CO/5 Advance Unedited Version, Concluding observations on second report, para. 21)

Universal Periodic Review

The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was examined under the Universal Periodic Review process in 2009. The Government accepted the recommendations to prohibit all corporal punishment of children.