Summary of law reform necessary to achieve full prohibition

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

We have been unable to establish whether or not legislation explicitly confirms a “right” of parents to administer “reasonable chastisement” or similar, but legal provisions against violence and abuse are not interpreted as prohibiting all corporal punishment in childrearing. Explicit prohibition should be enacted of all corporal punishment by parents and others with children in their care.

Provisions authorising corporal punishment in schools in the National Corporal Punishment Regulations should be repealed, and explicit prohibition enacted in relation to all education settings, public and private. All legal provisions for judicial corporal punishment should be repealed, including those in the Corporal Punishment Ordinance, the Minimum Sentences Act, the Sexual Offences (Special Provisions) Act, the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code. Laws allowing corporal punishment in penal institutions, including article 33 of the Prisons Act, should also be repealed, and explicit prohibition should be enacted in relation to disciplinary measures in all institutions accommodating children in conflict with the law. 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.

Children have limited protection from violence and abuse under the Penal Code (1945, amended 1998), the Juvenile Courts Rules (1944, amended 1958) and the Children and Young Persons Ordinance. As at December 2007, a law relating to children was under consideration, but we have no further details.

Schools

Corporal punishment is lawful in schools under the National Corporal Punishment Regulations (1979) pursuant to article 60 of the Education Act (1978). Government guidelines in 2000 reduced the number of strokes from six to four and stated that only the heads of schools are allowed to administer the punishment, with penalties for teachers who flout these regulations. The Ministry of Education in Zanzibar has adopted a policy against corporal punishment in schools, but there is no prohibition in legislation.

Penal system

Corporal punishment as a sentence for crime is lawful under a number of laws, including the Corporal Punishment Ordinance (1930), the Minimum Sentences Act (1963), the Sexual Offences (Special Provisions) Act (1998), the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code (1985). The Minimum Sentences Act amends the Corporal Punishment Ordinance (article 12) to allow for administering corporal punishment in instalments. Under article 8 of the Ordinance, juveniles may be given up to 12 strokes (up to 20 for adults) and the punishment may be inflicted in the open courtroom. The Minimum Sentences Act does not apply to females or to juveniles under the age of 16 years (articles 2 and 3).

In Zanzibar, the Children and Young Person Act establishes a special procedure for dealing with offenders under the age of 16 years and states that the treatment of children in conflict with the law must be consistent with the promotion of the child’s sense of dignity and worth. In August 2004, the Attorney General announced the intention of the Zanzibar government to abolish caning as a punishment for crime and stated that amendments would be tabled in the House of Representatives. We have been unable to obtain further information on the progress of this proposal.

Corporal punishment is lawful as a disciplinary measure in penal institutions, e.g. under article 33 of the Prisons Act (1967), which allows the senior prisons officer to punish any prisoner guilty of a major prison offence with a cane.

Alternative care

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

Prevalence research

None identified in the last ten years.

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

“The Committee notes with satisfaction that some concerns and recommendations (CRC/C/15/Add.156) made upon the consideration of the State party’s initial report (CRC/C/8/Add.14/Rev.1) have been addressed through legislative measures and policies. However, recommendations regarding, inter alia, legislation, coordination, corporal punishment, child labour and juvenile justice, have not been given sufficient follow-up. The Committee notes that those concerns and recommendations are reiterated in the present document.

“While noting various initiatives undertaken by the State party in campaigning against corporal punishment, including the establishment of two non-corporal punishment pilot schools in Zanzibar, the Committee deeply regrets that corporal punishment is still lawful in schools and in the penal system where. The Committee is further concerned that corporal punishment is lawful in the family and alternative-care institutions.

“Taking into account its general comment No. 1 on the aims of education (CRC/GC/2001/1) and general comment No. 8 on the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment (CRC/GC/2006/8), the Committee urges the State party:

1. to explicitly prohibit all forms of corporal punishment in the family, schools, the penal system and other institutional settings and alternative-care systems as a matter of priority;
2. to sensitize and educate parents, guardians and professionals working with and for children by carrying out public educational campaigns about the harmful impact of corporal punishment; and
3. to promote positive, non-violent forms of discipline as an alternative to corporal punishment.

“The Committee urges the State party ensure the full implementation of juvenile justice standards, in particular articles 37, paragraph (b), 40 and 39 of the Convention, as well as the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules) and the United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (the Riyadh Guidelines), and in the light of the Committee’s day of general discussion on the administration of juvenile justice. In this regards, the Committee recommends that the State party:...

c) prohibit all forms of corporal punishment for persons under the age of 18 years in penal institutions; ...”

(21 June 2006, CRC/C/TZA/CO/2, paras. 6, 33, 34 and 70)

“The Committee notes with regret that the law does not prohibit the use of corporal punishment as a sentence for children and youth in the juvenile justice system. Concern is also expressed that this type of punishment continues to be practised in schools, families and care institutions.

“The Committee recommends that the State party take legislative measures to prohibit all forms of physical and mental violence, including corporal punishment within the juvenile justice system, schools and care institutions as well as in families. The Committee encourages the State party to intensify its public awareness campaigns to promote positive, participatory, non-violent forms of discipline as an alternative to corporal punishment at all levels of society.

“The Committee recommends that the State party:

e) abolish corporal punishment as a sentence within the juvenile justice system….”

(9 July 2001, CRC/C/15/Add.156, Concluding observations on initial report, paras. 38, 39 and 67)

Human Rights Committee

“The Committee notes with approval the Nyalali Commission’s recommendation to abolish corporal punishment as a judicial sentence; such penalty should also be precluded for offences against prison regulations and children should no longer be subjected to corporal punishment in schools (art.7).”
(18 August 1998, CCPR/C/79/Add.97, Concluding observations on third report, para. 16)