Submitted by crinadmin on
Summary: As part of a panel discussion organised by the Children are Unbeatable Campaign, the Independent Expert leading the UN Study on Violence against children addresses British Parliament and explains why corporal punishment needs to be banned. I am so pleased to be able to bring details of the Study on Violence against Children to the very heart of the UK Parliament.  First, some brief background about the Study. It was proposed by the Committee on the Rights of the Child, following two General Discussion days on violence against children, which the Committee held in 2000 and 2001. The General Assembly responded with a resolution requesting the Secretary General to conduct "an in-depth study on the question of violence against children". Following further resolutions from the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights, I was appointed by Kofi Annan as his "independent expert" to lead the Study. UNICEF, the World Health Organisation and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights were identified as key agencies to support the Study. And from the beginning, NGOs have made a huge contribution. In fact, I am in London in order to attend the third meeting of the NGO Advisory Panel for the Study.  The Study process has involved a detailed questionnaire sent out to all governments – and I am pleased to say that we have had 123 replies, including a very detailed one from the UK. There have been more than 200 submissions from organisations, academic institutions and individuals. And nine regional consultations have been held between March and July this year, as well as various national ones – meaning that I have travelled around the world several times in slightly more than 80 days. I have been on many field visits and attended expert seminars. I am now engaged, with my Editorial Board and wider networks of advisers, in drafting a report with recommendations, to be presented to the General Assembly in autumn 2006, and a more substantial book to be published at the same time – together of course with child-friendly versions.  The involvement of children and young people in the Study has been fundamental and highly influential. I must confess that at the beginning of the process, I was not convinced that it would be possible to effectively involve children in this sort of UN and therefore quite bureaucratic process. But I was mindful that the Committee on the Rights of the Child concluded, after its discussion days, that – I quote - "In conceptualising violence, the Committee recommends that the critical starting point and frame of reference be the experience of children themselves...". I have been fully converted. Save the Children and other NGOs have helped with the conversion and supported meaningful participation by children, in particular at the regional consultations. Children and young people attended each consultation, often meeting on their own before the adults and developing their own declarations and recommendations. I made a point of meeting privately with them too and you can read the reports of these frank and valuable discussions on the website of the Children’s Rights Information Network – CRIN – which is faithfully recording the process of the Study.  These direct contacts with children have made me feel a very real and weighty responsibility – to make sure that the Study does achieve real change for children. For example, at the Middle East and North Africa consultation in Cairo, a young girl said to me: "I feel that all recommendations are only words and nothing will be done with them." Another said: "There are a lot of conferences around the world but when it comes to results, not much happens, it is only talking".  I have had to reassure children like these that I will do my best to ensure that this study will not be a big frustration for them all.  Many of the children were plainly already activists or were rapidly becoming activists. So at the European regional consultation in Ljubljana, one young delegate told me: "I was thinking about what I was going to do when I go back to Russia and thought that first I would tell my peers about this conference and also other people who come from the same organisation, and other childhood and youth organisations. Then I thought I would give interviews on radio and TV and disseminate information even further. I will tell everybody how issues are tackled or can be tackled. I will succeed."  Corporal punishment has been a preoccupation of children at all the regional consultations and in many of the submissions I have received. For example, in the East Asia and Pacific region, there was a statement to the whole conference by six girl delegates who had been voted to represent all the young people attending. It began: "Corporal punishment must be banned in homes, schools, and the justice system, children need to be treated the same as adults. Governments should support organisations that enable children to participate. The UN, governments and the community must share information and work together to prevent violence happening in the family…" .And it ended: "Our vision for the consultation: Build on unity - work together and cooperate".  On the other hand in Johannesburg, a young boy told me: "Some of us are Christian and in the Bible it says that if a child does something wrong, the child should be disciplined. We must differentiate between cruel treatment and punishment." Well, I told him I was brought up as a Catholic and I never read anything in the Bible that authorises corporal punishment. There is a mention of discipline, but discipline is not beating.  At the Ljubljana consultation, there was a wonderful exercise in which the young participants had a roving microphone and asked their high-level Government delegations – in front of the whole audience – what actions they intended to take when they got home. It was a bit of a disappointment that the UK government delegation were not in their seats at the time, because I think I could guess what question they would have been asked first…  The recommendations developed at every one of the nine consultations included the proposal that all corporal punishment must be prohibited, as did all the children’s declarations.  In my progress report, presented to the General Assembly in New York in October, I noted that I had identified a number of key areas that would be the focus of my work in the final year of the study. These include the continued legality and prevalence of corporal punishment against children in the home, schools and all other settings; the particular vulnerability of children in conflict with the law, as well as street children, to violence; and the pervasiveness of harmful traditional practices – not only female genital mutilation but the whole range of harmful practices that affect children in many states. I am also of course very aware of the underlying conditions, such as attitudes to violence against children, discrimination, inequality and poverty, the unequal status of women and girls, lack of access to quality education and denial of human rights generally, which exacerbate children’s vulnerability to violence.  I agreed to talk this evening in particular about ending legalized violence against children, and because I am in the UK, that inevitably focuses on ending corporal punishment. The UK is in the forefront, I understand, of law reform to combat sexual exploitation, and I know that your latest law on female genital mutilation prohibits the practice extra-territorially as well.  I have to say I have been surprised at the controversy aroused in some quarters by my statement, made after the regional consultations, that the study report will certainly recommend a universal ban on all corporal punishment. Surely, it would be strange indeed if the "expert" leading a study on violence against children would suggest that it is OK to hit children?  My study is human rights based, and again it would be strange if I should contradict the Committee on the Rights of the Child, which has been telling states consistently for more than a decade that the Convention requires prohibition of all corporal punishment. I understand it has told the UK twice, in 1995 and again in 2002.  If I was conducting a study on violence against animals, would I be expected to defend smacking puppies and kittens? The fact is, I could not look those many children I have met around the world in the eyes and say that I had decided they were worthy of less legal protection from assault than myself or other adults. Really, it is absurd.  I have been particularly puzzled by this concept of "reasonable" chastisement or punishment, which I understand has its origins in ancient English law, but has found its way into the legislation of at least 70 countries worldwide. There is nothing reasonable about hitting children – full stop, as the NSPCC’s admirable campaign states.  Children have the same right to respect for their human dignity and physical integrity as the rest of us, and that respect must be reflected in the law. My friend Maud De Boer Buquicchio, the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in a recent speech to a Berlin conference organized by the German Government, stated: "For the Council of Europe, children are not mini-persons with mini-rights, mini-feelings and mini-human dignity. They are vulnerable human beings with full rights which require more, not less protection. It is therefore absolutely unacceptable that when it comes to the protection of their physical and psychological integrity, they should be worse off than adults".  She also quoted from the UK report which summarised research with young children on smacking, It hurts you inside. "A smack", said a seven-year-old, "is when parents try to hit you, but instead of calling it a hit, they call it a smack". Maud concluded: "These words are, in my view, a very apt description of what corporal punishment really is - a violent hypocrisy, which humiliates and hurts."  It is sad and ironic that children, the most vulnerable of people, should have had to wait until last for this basic protection. We cannot draw lines and try and define acceptable ways of hitting children. There can be no compromise, any more than we compromise in challenging all violence against women.  Fulfilling children’s right to equal protection under the law does not of course mean that parents should be dragged into court for minor assaults on their children. The first purpose of the law must be educational. I have seen the excellent reports which the Global Initiative to End Corporal Punishment submitted to the regional consultations, and they go into some detail on how the law should be implemented. Of course, prosecuting parents is very seldom in the interests of their children. Interventions should be supportive and only become formal when it is judged to be necessary to protect a child from significant harm, and in the child’s best interests.  Challenging corporal punishment, alongside challenging domestic violence against women, is no threat to the family. On the contrary, the promotion of non-violent, positive forms of discipline reinforces the family’s role in protecting children from all forms of violence. The Convention on the Rights of the Child upholds the family as the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well-being of all its members and particularly children, and requires the State to fully respect and support families.  Law reform to prohibit all corporal punishment is absolutely necessary, and is children’s right. But of course it is not sufficient. There must be awareness-raising of the law and children’s rights to protection and promotion of positive, non-violent forms of discipline.  I am very encouraged by the accelerating global progress on this issue and the particular progress in Europe, where 14 states have prohibited all corporal punishment explicitly and two others – Italy and Portugal – by Supreme Court decisions. And more states are on the way. I understand a Bill to prohibit is before the Parliament in the Netherlands now and the Greek Minister of Justice last week announced prohibition of corporal punishment in the family.  Globally, more than half the states have prohibited corporal punishment in schools and penal systems. In Latin America, four countries including my own, Brazil, have bills to prohibit all corporal punishment before their parliaments.  Last month, I presided at a hearing on ending corporal punishment before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, called for by the Andean Commission of Jurists and Save the Children. I am confident that this will lead to more human rights pressure for reform across the Americas.  High level courts in many states have echoed the Committee on the Rights of the Child in finding that the persisting legality and social approval of corporal punishment breaches fundamental rights. For example, in Fiji in 2002 an appeal court declared: "Children have rights no wit inferior to the rights of adults. Fiji has ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Our Constitution also guarantees fundamental rights to every person. Government is required to adhere to principles respecting the rights of all individuals, communities and groups. By their status as children, children need special protection…".  And in Nepal in January the Supreme Court declared null and void a section in the Children Act which allowed "minor beating" by parents and teachers.  I realise of course that this is not an easy issue for governments, that law reform has to go ahead of public opinion, with governments acting on the basis of their human rights obligations. But we know from the experience of Sweden and other countries that once the law is changed and linked to public education, attitudes and practice do very quickly change.  I very much hope that my Study and its report and follow up will act as a catalyst to speed this long-overdue reform for children. I hope the UK will very soon move to support the Council of Europe’s target of creating a corporal-punishment-free continent for children. We cannot make real progress in preventing all forms of violence while we tolerate this legalised violence against children, dressed up as "discipline". We certainly cannot look children in the eye while we continue to excuse and disguise this violence.
Belos is the transcript of his speech.