Summary of law reform necessary to achieve full prohibition

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

The Family Code recognises the right and duties of those with parental authority over children “to impose discipline on them as may be required under the circumstances” (article 20); the Child and Youth Welfare Code recognises the right of parents “to discipline the child as may be necessary for the formation of his good character” (article 45); the Muslim Personal Law states that in relation to their children parents have “the power to correct, discipline, and punish them moderately” (article 74); the Rules and Regulations on the Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse Cases state that “discipline administered by a parent or legal guardian to a child does not constitute cruelty provided it is reasonable in manner and moderate in degree and does not constitute physical or psychological injury as defined herein” (section 2). The near universal acceptance of corporal punishment in childrearing necessitates clarity in law that no level of corporal punishment is acceptable. These provisions should be repealed and the law should explicitly prohibit all corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment, in the home, schools and all settings where adults have parental authority over children.

Explicit prohibition should be enacted in legislation applicable to 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. A number of legal provisions constitute a legal defence for the use of corporal punishment in childrearing.

The Family Code (1987, amended 2004) states that the rights and duties of those exercising parental authority over children include “to impose discipline on them as may be required under the circumstances” (article 220). The Child and Youth Welfare Code (1974) states confirms the right of parents “to discipline the child as may be necessary for the formation of his good character” (article 45). The Muslim Personal Law confirms parents’ “power to correct, discipline, and punish [their children] moderately” (article 74). The Rules and Regulations on the Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse Cases state that “discipline administered by a parent or legal guardian to a child does not constitute cruelty provided it is reasonable in manner and moderate in degree and does not constitute physical or psychological injury as defined herein” (section 2).

As at October 2009, the Anti-Corporal Punishment Bill, which would prohibit corporal punishment in all settings including the home, is under discussion.

Schools

Corporal punishment is prohibited in public and private schools under article 233 of the Family Code, confirmed in the Public Schools Service Manual (1992) and the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools (section 75, article XIV) (1992).

Penal system

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a sentence for crime. It is not a permitted sanction under the Revised Penal Code and is explicitly prohibited in the Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law (Administrative Matter No. 02-1-18-SC) (2002) and the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act (2006) (section 61).

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a disciplinary measure in penal institutions under section 61 of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act.

Alternative care

Corporal punishment is prohibited in residential institutions under section 1.4 of the Standards in the Implementation of Residential Care Services (Administrative Order No. 141) (2002) and in day care centres by section 233 of Executive Order No. 209. We have been unable to ascertain the legality of corporal punishment in foster care.

Prevalence research

Large scale comparative research into the views and experiences of 3,322 children and 1,000 adults in 8 countries in Southeast Asia and the Pacific (Cambodia, Fiji, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Mongolia, Philippines, Republic of Korea and Viet Nam) was carried out by Save the Children in 2005. The research in the Philippines involved 139 children (69 boys, 70 girls) from urban areas and 78 adults (34 men and 44 women). Methods used included research diaries, body maps, attitude survey, sentence completion, and discussions. Physical punishments mentioned by children in Philippines included hitting, punishing, spanking, whipping, use of implements, hair pulling, ear twisting, and pinching. (Beazley, H., S. Bessell, et al., 2006, What Children Say: Results of comparative research on the physical and emotional punishment of children in Southeast Asia and Pacific, 2005, Stockholm, Save the Children Sweden)

Research into children’s experiences of child abuse found that the most abusive acts were those inflicted by parents in the name of discipline and included spanking, being beaten up or mauled (including when a parent uses a wooden stick, belt, bat or broom, incessant beatings, slaps on the face, and being burned with a flat iron), being scolded or punished when the child did nothing wrong, humiliating the child in public, and shouting and cursing at the child. (De la Cruz, T. et al., 2001, Trust and power: Child abuse in the eyes of the child and the parent, Manila: UP-CIDS Psychosocial Trauma and Human Rights Program, cited in International Save the Children Alliance, 2004, How to research the physical and emotional punishment of children: Resource handbook, Thailand: International Save the Children Alliance, Southeast, East Asia and Pacific Region)

A comparative study of 10,073 children aged 9-17 years across East Asia and the Pacific by UNICEF and Research International Asia (Thailand) in 2001 found that 24% of those surveyed in the Philippines reported having been beaten by their parents. (UNICEF, 2001, Speaking Out! Voices of Children and Adolescents in East Asia and the Pacific)

As part of the World Studies of Abuse in the Family Environment (WorldSAFE) cross-national project, researchers looked at incidence rates for corporal punishment as self-reported by mothers covering the period of the previous 6 months. In the Philippines, “severe physical punishment” was reported as follows: hitting the child with an object not on the buttocks 21%, kicking 6%, beating 3%, threatening with a knife or gun 1%, choking 1%. “Moderate physical punishment” was reported as: spanked buttocks with hand 75%, pinching 60%, hit with object on buttocks 51%, twisted ear 31%, pulled hair 23%, slapped face or head 21%, shook child 20%, hit with knuckles 8%, forced to kneel/stand in uncomfortable position 4%, put hot pepper in mouth 1%. (Reported in Krug, E. G. et al., eds, 2002, World report on violence and health, Geneva: World Health Organization)

In another study, parents questioned about their behaviour towards their children revealed that two thirds of them reported whipping their children, and 45% confirmed that they had hit, kicked or beaten them. (Hahm, H. & Guterman, N., 2001, “The emerging problem of physical child abuse in South Korea”, Child Maltreatment, vol.6, pp.169-179, cited in Krug, E. G. et al., eds, 2002, World report on violence and health, Geneva: World Health Organization)

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

“The Committee urges the State party to make every effort to address the previous recommendations that have been partly, insufficiently or not implemented at all, including those relating to the minimum age of sexual consent, discrimination against children born out of wedlock, child pornography, the prohibition of torture and the prohibition of corporal punishment and other forms of violence in the home, schools, in public and private institutions and in the alternative care system....

“While noting a number of legislative initiatives in the State party, the Committee remains concerned at the lack of legislation with regard to the prohibition of corporal punishment, the prohibition of torture and the status of children born out of wedlock...

“The Committee recommends that the State party take all necessary measures to ensure the full and effective implementation of its domestic laws in order to better protect the rights of the child and to harmonize its legislation fully with the provisions and principles of the Convention, including through the expeditious adoption of the Anti-Corporal Punishment Act (Bill No. 682)....

“While noting that the Anti-Corporal Punishment Bill which prohibits corporal punishment in all settings is currently under discussion, the Committee reiterates its concern that corporal punishment in the home is not explicitly prohibited by law and that a provision on corporal punishment is not included in the Child and Youth Welfare Code. The Committee also expresses its concern at the prevalence of corporal punishment against children in society, in particular in the home and regrets that no comprehensive study on this issue has been undertaken, as recommended by the Committee in its previous concluding observations (CRC/C/15/Add.25, para. 42).

“The Committee urges the State party to:

a) enact the Anti-Corporal Punishment Bill to explicitly prohibit by law corporal punishment in all settings, including in the home, schools, alternative childcare, places of work and places of detention;

b) intensify its awareness-raising campaign to sensitize and educate parents and families, guardians and professionals working with and for children on the harmful effect of such practices, promote the use of alternative and non-violent forms of discipline in a manner consistent with the child’s dignity and in accordance with the Convention, especially article 28, paragraph 2;

c) undertake a comprehensive study on the nature and extent of corporal punishment in different settings; and

d) 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 or degrading forms of punishment (CRC/C/GC/8).”
(2 October 2009, CRC/C/PHL/CO/3-4 Advance unedited version, Concluding observations on third/fourth report, paras. 10, 11, 12, 42 and 43)

“While noting the State party’s efforts to prohibit the use of corporal punishment in schools, prisons, institutions and forms of childcare by implementing various relevant provisions, the prevalence of corporal punishment in society gives cause for serious concern. The Committee is concerned that a provision for corporal punishment is not included in the Child and Youth Welfare Code and regrets that corporal punishment in the home is not explicitly prohibited by law.

“In the light of its general comment No.1 (2001) on the aims of education and the recommendations adopted by the Committee on its day of general discussion on violence against children within the family and in schools (see CRC/C/111), the Committee reiterates that corporal punishment is not compatible with the provisions of the Convention and it is inconsistent with the requirement of respect for the child’s dignity, as specifically required by article 28, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the State party prohibit by law all forms of corporal punishment in the home, in schools and in private and public institutions, in the juvenile justice system and the alternative care system.

“The Committee recommends to the State party that it conduct a comprehensive study to assess the nature and extent of corporal punishment in different settings, including the home environment. Furthermore, the Committee recommends that the State party sensitize and educate parents, guardians and professionals working with and for children by carrying out public education campaigns about the harmful impact of violent forms of ‘discipline’ and promote positive, non-violent forms of discipline as an alternative to corporal punishment.”
(21 September 2005, CRC/C/15/Add.259, Concluding observations on second report, paras. 41, 42 and 43)