(a) I refer to my letter on the issue of the abolition of corporal punishment in schools under the control and management of the State published in your issue of September 23, 2012 in which I declared that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child does not affect the rights of parents and guardians to resort to corporal punishment as a disciplinary measure in the home. The prohibition by the Convention applies only to schools under the control and management of the State.
In my opinion, there is another aspect of this matter that must be considered with the inclusion of the fundamental rights guarantees in the Constitution.
Since 1961 with the introduction of internal self government in this country the issue to be considered is whether corporal punishment in schools in Guyana constitutes inhuman and degrading punishment under the Constitution and, therefore, applies to all educational institutions in Guyana.
In my opinion, the constitutional provision has that effect. Human rights activists will have no hesitation in deeming corporal punishment as inhuman and degrading punishment and, therefore, unconstitutional. Guyana cannot, at this late stage, after ratifying the Convention which has entered into force for Guyana, enter reservations to it as a result of the outcome of the current consultations sponsored by the Ministry of Education.
In a letter published in your issue of September 24, 2012 Mr. Mike Persaud advocated that Guyana should adopt the Singapore model on corporal punishment which provides for caning boys for serious offences, the punishment to be administered by the Principal or Vice Principal or a specially designated and trained Discipline Master.
It must be noted, however, that Singapore has made reservations to the Convention preserving the right to resort to corporal punishment in certain circumstances. I have concerns about Singapore’s reservation since they seem, in my opinion, to be contrary to the purpose of the Convention.
(b) In your issue of September 23, 2012 I had expressed my opinion on the matter of the illegal reproduction (piracy) of works enjoying copyright protection pursuant to the existing international and regional agreements with the presentation of President Donald Ramotar before the present session of the UN General Assembly calling for consideration to be given to examining the existing international agreement governing the protection of works enjoying copyright protection with a view to providing some concessions to developing countries in making available copyright works for educational purposes. The Guyanese public should be made aware that, in recognition of the educational needs of the people of developing countries, the international covenants governing copyright protection were relaxed since 1971 by the Paris Convention the effect of which was intended to enable the developing countries to reproduce for educational purposes materials enjoying copyright protection, but under certain conditions.
For example, the implementation of the concession is to be monitored by the publishers of the copyright material on behalf of the owners of the copyright. The Government of Jamaica, for example, has utilised this facility. At the CARICOM level, the European Partnership Agreement and the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (“TRIPS”) include provisions intended to protect the intellectual property rights of the nationals of the Parties.
Yours faithfully,
Brynmor T.I. Pollard,
C.C.H., S.C.
