The Hon. Chithral Fernando, Attorney-at-Law

¶ 01 Hon. Presiding Member, I am pleased to speak on the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill presented today to prevent corporal punishment of children. First, we thank the Government, because our objective and stance align: corporal violence against children is unnecessary—indeed, corporal punishment is unnecessary for anyone.

¶ 02 We are centuries late. Many countries acted long ago. This morning the Leader of the House noted Poland’s early abolition in 1783. Luxembourg did so in 1845, Russia in 1917, the Netherlands in 1920, Italy in 1928, and Spain—among larger countries—only by 1985. But if we look deeper into our own history, the Culavamsa clearly records that in the 13th century King Vijayabahu III set out his view on corporal punishment and moved to prohibit it. So our tradition predates Poland’s by far. Colonialism and the influence of Britain and other powers, and later monarchs, may have shifted that stance.

¶ 03 Therefore this step is welcome.

¶ 04 Another important factor is poverty. Poverty significantly correlates with administering corporal punishment. From personal observation, in very poor schools with 40–50 children, when children drift into drug abuse or other misbehaviour, some teachers feel compelled to beat them to “maintain order.” In my electorate there is the large settlement “Sirigampola Janapadaya.” I visited a school there last week. The poverty and suffering are stark. Children often skip school; some are intoxicated during the day. Parents told me so. Teachers punish them, and then the children drop out entirely. It becomes a vicious cycle. Poverty is a major driver.

¶ 05 As Hon. Ajith P. Perera said, while we argue against corporal punishment for children, we must also think about teachers. An incident near my home in my constituency comes to mind: a girl died after being forced to kneel in the midday sun and beaten. I wish to place her name for the record—to do justice to her memory. She was Ramesha Dinithi, of Grade 10. Such tragedies exist. Therefore I commend today’s effort, but we must also consider teachers.

¶ 06 We propose a constructive approach, Hon. Minister Sunil Watagala. We present it in good faith; please consider appropriate steps.

¶ 07 I also wish to respond to points made by the Hon. Minister of Women and Child Affairs in her detailed speech calling for second reading. She cited international laws and trends. I have in hand a research article: “School Corporal Punishment in Global Perspective: Prevalence, Outcomes, and Efforts at Intervention” by Elizabeth T. Gershoff. It shows when various countries banned corporal punishment in schools and what happened thereafter. For instance, Benin banned it in 2009, yet by 2017, 88% of students still reported its occurrence. Cameroon banned in 2000; by 2017, 97% of students reported it continued. Ethiopia banned in 2009; by 2017, 38% reported it persisted. I table this paper for the House and for the Library.

¶ 08 I also wish to address South Africa, which the Minister highlighted. Empirical studies show that although South Africa banned school corporal punishment in 1996 with its new Constitution valuing children’s rights, by 2017 about 50% of students still reported corporal punishment as a regular part of schooling. I quote from the article:

¶ 09 “Corporal punishment continues to occur in schools throughout the world, both in countries where it is legal and countries where it is banned, leading to estimates that millions of children are subject to legalized assault at their schools...”

¶ 10 And further:

¶ 11 “South Africa banned school corporal punishment when it transitioned to a new government and a new Constitution that valued the rights of children in 1996. However, students have reported that corporal punishment continues to be a regular part of education in South Africa...”

¶ 12 I cite this to correct the record; I have tabled the paper.

¶ 13 We also suggest training and education for teachers before rushing into legislation. Some countries have done this. If such preparatory steps were taken, perhaps this Bill would not need to be brought in this manner. Laws against assault already exist and are enforced; in the case I mentioned, action was taken against the two teachers, and courts acted accordingly. We should strengthen teacher training. I table another study from an Italian university showing how teacher training is designed to protect children and manage behaviour without anger or violence—using training that equips teachers to de-escalate and guide children.

¶ 14 It says, and I quote: “To be able to really recognize the child,... a training course with teachers is necessary, to raise awareness and help them see the signals that children send.”

¶ 15 I commend this to the House and to the Library.

¶ 16 We should not base discipline on punishment alone. The Minister also acknowledged this. Let us move beyond punishment.

¶ 17 Hon. Presiding Member, my time is up; please allow me one more minute.

¶ 18 In clause 49 of the Bill, which inserts new section 308B, illustration 4(a) reads:

¶ 19 “A, a teacher or principal, believing that B, a child, has stolen another child’s property, summons B to the school assembly stage and, in front of the student body, declares B a thief, thereby humiliating B. A has committed the offence of corporal punishment.”

¶ 20 This, Hon. Watagala, sounds more like how the NPP Government came into power. This is how you came to power. No further example is necessary—today even the Leader of the House raised his fists and called others “pallhoru” (scoundrels). How did you raise your hands and say such things? Before giving such illustrations, you should correct your own conduct.

¶ 21 In conclusion, we support the objective. Our proposed amendment is not to endorse corporal punishment; those provisions must go. But we must also consider the protection of teachers. Not all teachers are brutes, as Hon. Chanaka Madugoda recalled with the Jataka tale—many teachers lovingly dedicate themselves to children, as do many parents. Let us protect such teachers and parents while safeguarding children’s rights. Please accept our amendment.

¶ 22 Thank you.