Summary of law reform necessary to achieve full prohibition

Corporal punishment is prohibited in all settings, including the home.

Current legality of corporal punishment

Home

Corporal punishment is prohibited in the home. Article 11(2) of the Child Protection Act (2000) states: “Every child has a right to protection against all methods of upbringing, that undermine his or her dignity, against physical, psychical or other types of violence; against all forms of influence, which go against his or her interests.” The Regulation on the Implementation of the Child Protection Act (in force 2003) defines violence against children as “any act of physical, mental or sexual violence, neglect, commercial or other exploitation, entailing an actual or likely damage to the health, life, development or dignity of children, which may occur in any of the family, school or social environment” (article 1); physical violence is described as “the infliction of bodily injury, including pain or suffering, without damage being caused to health”.

Schools

Corporal punishment is unlawful in schools. Articles 128 and 129 of the Regulation on the Implementation of the National Education Act state that a teacher “may not violate the rights of children and students, degrade their personal dignity, or apply any forms of physical or mental violence against them”. Similar provisions are made in the Regulation on Educational Boarding Schools and the Regulation on Social and Pedagogical Boarding Schools.

Penal system

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a sentence for crime and is not available as a sanction in the Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code (2005) and the Sentence Enforcement Act (amended 2002).

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a disciplinary measure in penal institutions, but we have yet to identify prohibiting legislation.

Alternative care

Corporal punishment is unlawful in alternative care settings. The Rules of the Homes for Raising and Educating Children Deprived of Parental Care (2001) prohibit physical, psychological and religious coercion. The Regulation on the Structure and Functioning of Homes for Temporary Placement of Minors and Young Persons and the Regulation on the Structure and Activities of Homes for Children Deprived of Parental Care include provisions banning the violation of children’s rights and any forms of physical and mental violence derogatory to a child’s dignity.

Prevalence research

One in two respondents (49.9%) in a 2009 survey of 1,000 adults believed that corporal punishment should never be used. This was a slight increase compared to an identical 2005 survey of 994 adults, when 47.2% said that corporal punishment should never be used. Over a third of respondents (34.8%) in 2009 said corporal punishment “should not be used in general but in certain situations it is justifiable”; 10.9% felt that corporal punishment was acceptable “if the parent believes that it will be effective”. (Vitosha Research (2009), Physical Punishment in Child-Rearing in Bulgaria. Part of  the Childhood Without Abuse project, which includes studies carried out in Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, and Ukraine in 2005 and 2009)

A 2009 survey of 202 teachers in primary schools in Sofia found that 82% believed that corporal punishment is humiliating for the child and 74% believed that it meant that “the parents are not good at rearing children”; 41% felt that the use of “spanking” as a punishment would justify intervention by a third party. In an identical survey of a similar sample in 2005, only 30% believed this. Forty-six per cent of respondents in 2009 believed that more than 50% of children in Bulgaria experience “spanking”. In 2005, 51% of respondents believed this. (Nobody’s Children Foundation et al (2009), Sofia teachers’ attitudes toward child abuse. Part of  the Childhood Without Abuse project, which includes studies carried out in Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, and Ukraine in 2005 and 2009)

Regional research in 2005 and 2006 found that 28% of teachers in Bulgaria were in favour of punishing children by beating them. (Regional study carried out in Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Poland, Ukraine and Moldova, reported in the second/third report by the Government of Moldova to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2008, para. 217)

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

“While noting that corporal punishment is unlawful in the home, schools, the penal system, alternative care settings, and in situations of employment, the Committee is concerned that children are still victims of corporal punishment in all the above mentioned settings.

“The Committee urges the State party, to take into account its General Comment No. 8 on the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment (CRC/GC/2006/8), to enforce the ban of corporal punishment by:

1. undertaking public and professional awareness raising;
2. promoting non-violent, positive, participatory methods of childrearing and education and reinforcing knowledge among children of their right to protection from all forms of corporal punishment; and
3. bringing offenders before the competent administrative and judicial authorities.”

(23 June 2008, CRC/C/BGR/CO/2, Concluding observations on second report, paras. 31 and 32)

“In the light of articles 19, 34 and 37 (a), the Committee strongly recommends that the State party take all appropriate measures to prevent and combat corporal punishment, sexual abuse and exploitation and ill-treatment of children, including in institutions and in detention centres. The Committee suggests that corporal punishment be prohibited by civil legislation and that appropriate legal measures be taken to combat sexual abuse and exploitation of children….”
(24 January 1997, CRC/C/15/Add.66, Concluding observations on initial report, para. 30)

Human Rights Committee

“While  welcoming the fact that corporal punishment is unlawful in the home, schools, the penal system, alternative care settings, and in situations of employment, the Committee is concerned that children are still victims of such practices, and that no information is available on  the judicial prosecution of such practices (articles 7 and 24).

The State party should take practical measures to put an end to corporal punishment in all settings. It should encourage non-violent forms of discipline as alternatives to corporal punishment, and should continue with public information campaigns to raise awareness about its harmful effects.”
(25 July 2011, CCPR/C/BGR/CO/3 Advance Unedited Version, Concluding observations on third report, para. 14)

Committee Against Torture

“While taking note that corporal punishment is explicitly forbidden in law, the Committee is concerned about persistent lack of implementation and notes that the Committee on the Rights of the Child has found that children are still victims of corporal punishment in the home, schools, the penal system, alternative care settings and in situations of employment.  The Committee is concerned that a 2009 survey shows that 34.8% of public opinion is in favour of corporal punishment in childrearing in some circumstances and that 10.9% felt it was acceptable if the parent believed that it would be effective.  It is concerned in particular that the use of corporal punishment is substantially higher in institutions for children with disabilities and that a number of cases of physical abuse were documented in the children’s personal files (art. 16).

The Committee recommends: that the State party carry out professional and public awareness-raising in order to promote non-violent, positive and participatory methods of childrearing and education; and that the State party take a comprehensive approach to ensuring that the law prohibiting corporal punishment is widely enforced and known, including among children with regard to their right to protection from all forms of corporal punishment.  There should be an absolute prohibition of corporal punishment in institutional settings, including for children with disabilities.  The State party should provide effective and appropriate responses to corporal punishment, including investigations, prosecution and sanctioning of perpetrators.”
([November 2011], Advance Unedited Version, Concluding observations on fourth/fifth report, para. 30)

European Committee of Social Rights

“The Committee previously asked whether all forms of corporal punishment of children were prohibited, including corporal punishment within the family. According to the report there is no explicit prohibition of corporal punishment in Bulgaria. However it cites the Child Protection Act 2000, which stipulates that children shall have the right to be protected against any activities, which violate their dignity, and includes any physical or psychological violence and all forms of influence, which are not in a child’s interest. The Home Violence Protection Act 2005 protects child victims of domestic violence.

The Committee highlights that where legislation which may be interpreted as prohibiting all forms of corporal punishment is relied upon by a state party it must be accompanied by strong evidence that such legislation is so interpreted and applied and that the necessary measures have been taken to ensure that there is widespread awareness of this. The Committee asks the next report to provide such evidence.”
(2006, Conclusions 2006, vol. 1, pages 114-115)

“The Committee asks whether corporal punishment within and outside the family is explicitly prohibited by the existing legislation….

“Pending receipt of the information requested, in particular regarding any form of exploitation of children other than sexual and about corporal punishment, the Committee defers its conclusion.”
(30 September 2004, Conclusions 2004 Vol. 1, page 55)

Universal Periodic Review

Bulgaria was examined in the first cycle of the Universal Periodic Review in 2010. No recommendations were made concerning corporal punishment of children (prohibition in all settings was achieved in 2000). Examination in the second cycle is scheduled for 2015.