Summary of law reform necessary to achieve full prohibition

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

The Family Code and the Civil Code confirm the right of parents, teachers and others with parental authority to “moderately” correct children. Laws against violence and abuse prohibit only corporal punishment which causes injury. Children have a right to protection from all corporal punishment. The near universal social acceptance of corporal punishment in childrearing necessitates clarity in law that no degree of corporal punishment is acceptable or lawful, however light. The legal defences of “moderate correction” should be repealed and explicit prohibition should be enacted of all corporal punishment, in the home and all other settings where adults have parental authority.

Explicit prohibition should be enacted of all corporal punishment (not only that understood to cause injury) in all schools, public and private, and 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. Under article 319 of the Family Code (1994) those with parental authority over children have a duty and power “to reasonably and moderately correct them”, and there is a similar provision in article 443 in relation to guardians/tutors. The Civil Code also recognises the right of guardians to “reasonably and moderately” correct the child or adolescent in their care (article 188). The Family Code (article 501) and the Criminal Code (2007, article 198) protect children from corporal punishment which causes physical injury but do not prohibit all corporal punishment. Other legal provisions against violence and abuse in the Family Code, Law No. 38 on Domestic Violence and Abuse of Children and Adolescents (2001), the Criminal Code and the Constitution (1972) are not interpreted as prohibiting all corporal punishment.

Schools

Corporal punishment is lawful in schools under the right of correction (see above, information unconfirmed).

Penal system

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a sentence for crime under the Penal Code and Law No. 40 on the special regime of criminal responsibility regarding adolescents (1999).

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a disciplinary measure in penal institutions. It is explicitly prohibited in article 144 of Law No. 40 on the Special regime of criminal responsibility regarding adolescents. Law No. 55 (2003) provides for respect of human rights within the penitentiary system.

Alternative care

Corporal punishment is lawful in alternative care settings under the right of correction in the Family Code and the Civil Code (see above).

Prevalence research

A report on juvenile detention centres in Panama found that the young people were regularly subjected to very severe corporal punishment including beatings, the use of tear gas, being shot with rubber bullets and threatened with rifles. Other cruel and degrading punishments included the denial of family visits and imprisonment in very small cells with little water. The report was based on visits to four detention centres, which together housed 268 juvenile detainees, approximately 82% of the total population of the juvenile detention system. (Harvard International Human Rights Clinic, Alianza Ciudadana Pro Justicia & Asamblea Ciudadana de Panamá (2011), Preventable Tragedy in Panama: Unnecessary Deaths and Rights Violations in Juvenile Detention Centers, report submitted to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child for its 57^th session)

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

“The Committee is concerned that the law does not expressly prohibit corporal punishment in the home and in schools. Furthermore, the Committee is concerned that the Family Code (1994, art. 319) and the Civil Code (art. 188) confer the right of parents and guardians in alternative care settings to “correct” children “reasonably and moderately” and that the Family Code (art. 443) authorizes guardians to “moderately correct” their wards.

“The Committee reiterates its recommendations to explicitly prohibit in the State party’s legislation all forms of corporal punishment of children and to promote alternative forms of discipline. In this sense the Committee recommends that articles 319 and 443 of the Family Code and article 188 of the Civil Code be revised taking into account the Committee’s General comment number 8 (2006)  on the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment.”
(6 October 2011, CRC/C/PAN/CO/3-4 Advance Unedited Version, Concluding observations on third/fourth report, paras. 45 and 46)

“While welcoming the prohibition of corporal punishment and other forms of violence against children by the adoption of the Law 38 on domestic violence and mistreatment of children and adolescents, which allows for the removal of the alleged perpetrator of violence against the child from the home, the Committee is concerned at the lack of specific measures for its full implementation.

“The Committee recommends that the State party takes the necessary measures:

1. for the full implementation of the Law 38, inter alia, through public education campaigns about the negative consequences of ill-treatment of children in order to change attitudes about corporal punishment, and promote positive, non-violent forms of discipline in the family, the schools and other institutions as an alternative to such punishment;
2. to strengthen complaints mechanisms for children in institutions to ensure that complaints of ill-treatment are dealt with effectively and in a child-sensitive manner by an independent body;
3. to ensure sufficient financial and other resources for the effective implementation of this law.

“The Committee reiterates the following recommendation to the State party:

1. that effective public awareness campaigns be developed and that measures be adopted to provide information, parental guidance and counselling with a view, inter alia, to preventing violence against their children, including the use of corporal punishment.”

(30 June 2004, CRC/C/15/Add.233, Concluding observations on second report, paras. 33, 34 and 40)

“The Committee is concerned by the persistence of violence against children within the family, including the use of corporal punishment. In the light of article 17 of the Convention, the Committee is also concerned about the need for further measures to protect children from media information and material injurious to their well-being.

“The Committee recommends that effective public awareness campaigns be developed and that measures be adopted by the State party to provide appropriate assistance to the family in the performance of its child-rearing responsibilities, including parental guidance and counselling, with a view, inter alia, to preventing domestic violence and to prohibiting the use of corporal punishment as well as to preventing early pregnancies. It also recommends that the State party reinforce existing measures to protect children from harmful information.”
(24 January 1997, CRC/C/15/Add.68, Concluding observations on initial report, paras. 16 and 30)

Universal Periodic Review

Panama was examined in the first cycle of the Universal Periodic Review in 2010. The Government accepted recommendations to prohibit corporal punishment of children (17 February 2011, A/HRC/16/6/Add.1, Report of the Working Group: Addendum).