Malta has prohibited corporal punishment in all forms in the home and alternative care settings, eliminating a potential ambiguity in the process which existed in the previous law.

As things stood before the new law was enacted, Maltese law did not categorically state that corporal punishment inflicted by parents on their children was not to be tolerated, despite corporal punishment having been illegal. In fact, until some weeks ago, it was perfectly normal and permissible for a parent to inflict a punishment on a child as long as it is within the parameters of “reasonable chastisement”.

But the words ‘bounds of reasonable chastisement’, which were considered in the British legal system – from where the term originates – to mean to allow some moderate degree of corporal punishment, raised questions, particularly on the part of the Human Rights Council of the United Nations, which reviews Malta’s respect for human rights periodically.

Contacted and asked what, in the eyes of the law, exceeds the bounds of moderation, Parliamentary Secretary Owen Bonnici replied that this government deemed it necessary to eliminate this potential ambiguity by legislating on the matter after the UN raised questions about it, referring to the phrase which was included in the previous law, that of “reasonable chastisement”.

“Proper respect for human rights and, in particular, for the rights of the child requires that children should not be disciplined by being beaten”, said Mr Bonnici. 

“Traditionally, the ‘bounds of reasonable chastisement’ were considered in the British legal system, allowing corporal punishment to be implemented to a certain degree, but following the new legislation this is no longer acceptable.

“Maltese law does not allow corporal punishment but the use of that phrase gave rise to doubts, particularly within the Human Rights Council of the United Nations.

“As a result, this government took immediate action and legislated on the matter,” he said.

By definition, corporal punishment is the intentional infliction of physical pain as a method of changing behaviour and may include abusive methods such as hitting, slapping, punching, kicking, pinching, shaking, and the use of various objects – paddles, belts, sticks, or others – or painful body postures. 

In Malta, this became unlawful in homes and in alternative care settings after Article 339 of the Criminal Code was amended by Act III of 2014.

The amendment to the Criminal Code was made in order to ensure that the corporal punishment of minors, in any form, will be considered a criminal offence. The amendment exposes the parent to criminal sanction in all cases of corporal punishment, irrespective of whether it was minor or serious. The added “sanction” of deprivation of parental authority would also apply in the case of corporal punishment exceeding the bounds of reasonable chastisement.

The amendment to the Criminal Code stipulates that: ‘Provided that, for the avoidance of any doubt, corporal punishment of any kind shall always be deemed to exceed the bounds of moderation’.

It now reads: “Every person is guilty of a contravention against the person who being authorised to correct any other person, exceeds the bounds of moderation, provided that, for the avoidance of any doubt, corporal punishment of any kind shall always be deemed to exceed the bounds of moderation”.

Before the amendment to the Act was made, by allowing corporal punishment in the home and in alternative care settings, Malta was in violation of the European Social Charter.  In 2004, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child in 2000 and the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had called on Malta to correct the situation. Both had expressed concern about Malta’s “reasonable chastisement” provision that allowed corporal punishment, and both had called on Malta to explicitly prohibit corporal punishment in the family.

In her speech during the Universal Periodic Review, held in Geneva in October 2013 on Corporal punishment of minors, Minister Helena Dalli had said that “an amendment to the Criminal Code was drafted in order to ensure that corporal punishment of any form on minors is considered as a criminal offence ensuring that such punishment will be sanctioned without any reservation.

“The amendment to the Criminal Code will expose the parent to criminal sanction in all cases of corporal punishment, irrespective whether it is minor or grave. The added ‘sanction’ of deprivation of parental authority will also apply in the case of corporal punishment exceeding the bounds of reasonable chastisement.

Asked to define “alternative care” settings, and whether it referred to schools, Dr Bonnici said that the power of the courts to authorise the placing of a child in alternative care is found in Article 134 of the Civil Code which is one of the articles in a sub-title of the Code On The Effects of Parental Authority in Regard to Minors.

“Alternative care is envisaged after the removal of the child from the family by court authorisation and although this would be done for the better discipline and education of the child it is difficult to envisage a situation where such alternative care would consist exclusively of schooling even though education is one of the main aims of such care.”