The new Minister of Education Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine has declared that he is against corporal punishment in all its forms.
During a recent interview, Roopnaraine told Stabroek News that he believes the only lesson “corporal punishment teaches a child is that in some circumstance violence is acceptable.” A better method for addressing indiscipline and violence in school, according to the minister, is through a comprehensive counselling programme.
Corporal punishment in schools has for some years been a hot button issue. In fact, the National Assembly in 2012 set up a Special Select Committee to determine, among other things, “the attitude of Guyanese, especially parents and children, to corporal punishment and its possible abolition.”
Minister Roopnaraine, who was a member of the special select committee, said he is “proud to be completely against corporal punishment in all its forms.”
“There are alternative ways of dealing with indiscipline and we must explore them,” the minister said, while explaining that he “would like to see an increase of counsellors in schools. These counsellors should be trained so as to find and address the source of delinquent or antisocial behavior.”
The minister stressed that corporal punishment “has deterred nothing. In fact, with corporal punishment we have seen a rise in violent behaviour. There are many systems around the world where there is no corporal punishment and they don’t have an excess of delinquent behaviour.”
“I’ve managed to bring up two children who have never been hit or spanked for anything and I have not brought up delinquents,” he proudly declared.
The select committee was, in part, a response to calls from both local and international human rights activists for Guyana to make necessary changes to its laws so that it would be in compliance with its international regulations and specifically those relevant to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
The Government of Guyana ratified the CRC in January, 1991. Article 19 of the convention states, in part, “States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse.” The administering of corporal punishment, which is defined as a form of physical punishment that involves the deliberate infliction of pain in order to punish, is therefore considered to be a practice that is in contravention of the requirements of the convention.
The government has, however, not yet legally prohibited the use of corporal punishment in schools. In fact, the 2002 Ministerial Guidelines allow for “corporal punishment to be administered by the head teacher, deputy head teacher or designated senior teacher for certain offences including fighting and use of indecent language.” According to the guidelines, “boys should be punished on their hands or buttocks, girls on their hands; the punishments should be inflicted with a cane or strap no longer than 24 inches and not in the presence of other learners, and all punishments should be recorded in the Misdemeanours Book.”
Local and international activists have for years called for an abolition of corporal punishment.
At a forum discussing corporal punishment in 2010, activist Vidyaratha Kissoon referred to corporal punishment as “state sanctioned violence against children.” He called for the list of alternative disciplinary methods developed in 2001 by the Ministry of Education to be updated, introduced into the school system, monitored and supported.
Kissoon’s pronouncement came more than nine years after the launch of the ‘Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children.’ At the April, 2001 launch of the initiative, then United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson stated, “physical punishment is a practice that sends the wrong message to children. It usually demonstrates the inability of adults to educate and, when necessary, discipline children by other means, such as dialogue and discussion. It also shows adult ignorance of the capacity of children to understand and distinguish right from wrong, with proper guidance. The use of violence is a practice that can hamper the child’s development of his or her communication ability; it can encourage aggressive behaviour and can destroy the child’s self-confidence and internal value system. Physical punishment generates a destructive relationship based on force, between the adult and the young person; a relationship that can hinder trust within the family. Research shows that the use of physical punishment risks perpetuating the use of violence by successive generations.”
She further noted that “the recourse to physical punishment by adults reflects a denial of the recognition, by the Convention on the Rights of the Child, of the child as a subject of human rights. If we want to remain faithful to the spirit of the Convention, strongly based on the dignity of the child as a full-fledged bearer of rights, then any act of violence against him or her must be banned, in accordance with articles 19 and 28.2 of the Convention.”
Despite consultations on corporal punishment, the former government’s Education Bill, as tabled in the National Assembly in June, 2014, does not prohibit corporal punishment in schools.
Schedule III of the Bill – Manual of Guidelines for the Maintenance of Order and Discipline in Schools – does not include corporal punishment among the disciplinary measures addressed, and article 49 of the Bill states that “the principal and staff of a public school shall ensure that order and discipline prevail in accordance with the Manual.” This Manual also does not explicitly prohibit corporal punishment.
Further article 123 of the Bill provides for the Minister to make regulations in relation to corporal punishment for public and private schools.
