Current legality of corporal punishment

Home

Corporal punishment is prohibited in the home under articles 858 (1) and 884(4) of the Civil Code - amended in 2025. In July 2025, the President of the Czech Republic signed the law amending the Civil Code which explicitly prohibits corporal punishment of children in all settings, including in the home. The law will come into force on 1^st January 2026.

Article 858 (1) of the amended Civil Code prohibits corporal punishment inflicted by adults with parental responsibilities as follows: “Parental responsibility includes the duties and rights of parents, which consist in (a) the care of the child, including in particular the care of the child's health and the care of the child's physical, emotional, intellectual and moral development, without corporal punishment, mental distress and other degrading measures…”

Article 884 (4) of the amended Civil Code extends the prohibition of corporal punishment to all other adults using educational measures on children as follows: “Educational measures may only be used in a form and to an extent that is appropriate to the circumstances, that do not endanger the child's health or development, and do not affect the child's human dignity. Corporal punishment, mental distress, and other humiliating measures are considered to affect the child's human dignity. ”

The law reform process started in June 2023, when the Ministry of Justice announced that the Civil Code would be amended to prohibit corporal punishment of children in all settings, including in the home. By May 2024, the Ministry of Justice released a Civil Code amendment bill which explicitly prohibited “physical punishment, mental hardship and other humiliating measures” (article 858). The Government indicated that the law did not aim to criminalize adults but educated them. [1]

Prior to this, the Civil Code included provisions relating to parental discipline but did not prohibit all corporal punishment. All other provisions against violence and abuse were not interpreted as prohibiting all corporal punishment in childrearing.  In 2013, the Association for the Protection of All Children (APPROACH) Ltd filed a complaint against the Czech Republic with the European Committee of Social Rights,[2] arguing that the Czech laws failed to explicitly ban corporal punishment of children in homes, alternative care, and schools, and that authorities had not acted effectively to end the practice. In 2015, the Committee ruled that the Czech Republic was in violation of the European Social Charter because its laws still did not fully prohibit all forms of corporal punishment. [3]

Alternative care settings

Corporal punishment is unlawful in all alternative care settings under articles 858 (1) and 884 (4) of the amended Civil Code. Article 858 (1) of the amended Civil Code prohibits corporal punishment inflicted by adults with parental responsibilities (see under “home”). Applicable to all adults, article 884 (4) prohibits educational measures affecting the child’s human dignity, including corporal punishment.  Corporal punishment is also unlawful in institutions under the the Act on Institutional Care No.102 2002 (as amended 2005), which specifies the permitted means of correction and does not include corporal punishment, though does not explicitly prohibit it..

Day care

Corporal punishment is unlawful in all day care under article 884 (4) of the Civil Code, amended in 2025, which states: “Educational measures may only be used in a form and to an extent that is appropriate to the circumstances, that do not endanger the child's health or development, and do not affect the child's human dignity. Corporal punishment, mental distress, and other humiliating measures are considered to affect the child's human dignity. ” Corporal punishment is also prohibited in preschool provision in article 31 of the Education Act (see under “Schools”).

Schools

Corporal punishment in schools is unlawful under article 884 (4) of the Civil Code, amended in 2025, which prohibits the use of corporal punishment, mental distress, and other humiliating measures as educational measures (see under “home”). Corporal punishment is also prohibited in schools under article 31 of the Education Act, which states that “specially [sic] rude verbal or intentional physical assault of a pupil or student” is “a serious wilful violation of duties”. The Education Act and the Act on execution of institutional upbringing or protective upbringing at school facilities and on preventive upbringing care at school facilities, do not include corporal punishment among permitted disciplinary measures.

Penal institutions

Corporal punishment is unlawful in penal institutions under article 884 (4) of the Civil Code, amended in 2025, which prohibits the use of corporal punishment, mental distress, and other humiliating measures as educational measures (see under “home”). There is no provision for corporal punishment in the Imprisonment Act 1999.

Sentence for crime

Corporal punishment was abolished as a sentence for crime by 1867. It is not a permitted sanction under the Criminal Code and the Juvenile Justice Act No. 218/2003.

[1] https://echo24.cz/a/HCHpQ/zpravy-domov-konec-pohlavku-a-facek-novela-obcanskeho-zakoniku-oznacuje-fyzicke-trestatni-za-nepripustne - accessed 6 August 2024

[2] Collective complaint No. 96/2013, Association for the Protection of All Children (APPROACH) Ltd v Czech Republic

[3] Collective Complaint No. 96/2013, Association for the Protection of All Children (Approach) v Czech Republic, Decision on the Merits, Adoption 20 January 2015, Notification 28 January 2015, Publication 29 May 2015

Universal Periodic Review of the Czech Republic’s human rights record

The Czech Republic was examined in the first cycle of the Universal Periodic Review in 2008 (session 1). No recommendations were made concerning corporal punishment of children.

Examination in the second cycle took place in 2012 (session 14). The following recommendations were made:[1]

“Take measures to combat domestic violence, in particular against children, including the usage of corporal punishment (Russian Federation);

“Explicitly prohibit all corporal punishment of children in all settings, including in the home (Liechtenstein)

“Explicitly prohibit corporal punishment of children in all settings (Hungary)”

The Government accepted the first of these recommendations but rejected the recommendations to explicitly prohibit corporal punishment in all settings, stating that the law already protects children from “inappropriate corporal punishment” in the home: “The Recommendations No. 89 and 90 regarding the prohibition of corporal punishment of children in all settings do not enjoy the support of the Czech Republic. As regards this issue, the Czech Republic considers violence against children entirely unacceptable and is committed to combating this phenomenon in all settings using all means and methods. At present, corporal punishment of children is prohibited in all public institutions, such as schools and child-care facilities. In all these settings, children have the right to be treated in a manner that respects their rights and human dignity. In the family, parents are only allowed to use upbringing methods that do not endanger children's dignity or their physical, mental, or emotional development and are appropriate for the situation. Inappropriate corporal punishment and other forms of punishment in the family are therefore prohibited, and parents who administer such punishment may be penalised and, in severe cases, face criminal prosecution. In such a case, a child may be placed in institutional care. The same applies to foster family care. Moreover, the Czech government takes action to educate the population regarding violence against children by organising campaigns aimed at improving the protection of children from violence and at increasing public sensitivity to this issue, including alternate methods of positive parenting and violence-free upbringing.”[2]

Third cycle examination took place in 2017 (session 28). The Czech Republic’s national report stated that “The Czech government considers any violence towards children as utterly inadmissible in any environment. Both corporal and psychical punishments are banned in schools and social or healthcare facilities. Parents may apply their upbringing methods only to a reasonable degree and must not jeopardise the child’s health or development or hurt the child’s dignity.”[3] The following recommendations were made:[4]

“Strengthen its child protection system by explicitly prohibiting all forms of corporal punishment of children in all settings (Austria);

“Consider the further harmonization of the prohibition of corporal punishment against children with international standards (Croatia);

“Strengthen national measures to address abuses towards children and end corporal punishment (Indonesia);

“Undertake practical steps to put an end to corporal punishment of children in all settings (Montenegro);

“Prohibit by law corporal punishment of children in all settings, including at home (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela)”

The Government noted the first and the last of those recommendations on explicitly prohibiting corporal punishment in all settings, stating: “The Czech Republic regards corporal punishment of children as inadmissible. Children are entitled to treatment respecting their rights and human dignity. There is a ban on corporal punishment of children in all public institutions such as schools and childcare institutions. In family setting, the parenting style must not undermine the child’s human dignity and physical, mental and emotional development. Parents who violate these rules are liable for penalties. In extreme cases the parents may face criminal prosecution and the child may be taken away. The same rules apply to foster carers.” It supported the other three recommendations.[5]

The Czech Republic was examined in the fourth cycle of the Universal Periodic Review in 2023 (session 53). The following recommendations were made:[6]

“Put an end to violence, trafficking and sexual and labour exploitation of women and children, which have increased in the country, and prohibit corporal punishment of children by law, providing comprehensive assistance to victims (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela);

“Explicitly prohibit corporal punishment of children and strengthen activities aimed at encouraging non-violent forms of discipline as alternatives in this regard (South Africa);

“Prohibit corporal punishment of children, in all of its forms and settings, respecting the recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and promoting greater awareness of children’s rights among children and the professionals who work with them (Spain);

“Strengthen national measures for child protection by enacting legislation that prohibits corporal punishment of children in all settings, including the home (Sweden);

“Explicitly prohibit corporal punishment in law, in all forms and settings, and promote positive, non-violent and participatory forms of childrearing and discipline (Croatia);

“Prescribe in law the prohibition of all forms of violence, including corporal punishment in education settings (Cyprus);

“Implement the recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child to explicitly prohibit corporal punishment of children by law and promote non-violent education methods (Austria);

“Take effective steps to proscribe in law all forms of violence, including corporal punishment, in education settings (Liechtenstein).”

The Government supported all recommendations. Responding to the second recommendation in relation to explicitly prohibiting corporal punishment in all settings, the Government stated: “Czechia plans to emphasize in its law that corporal and psychological punishments affect the human dignity of the child. The specific form of regulation is being discussed as well as the accompanying awareness and educational measures.”[7]

[1] 26 December 2012, A/HRC/22/3, Report of the working group, paras. 94(88), 94(89) and 94(90)

[2] 1 March 2013, A/HRC/22/3/Add.1, Report of the working group: Addendum, para. 4

[3] 9 August 2017, A/HRC/WG.6/28/CZE/1, National report, para. 15

[4] 27 December 2017, A/HRC/37/4, Report of the working group, paras. 115(149), 115(150), 115(151), 115(152) and 115(153)

[5] 1 March 2018, A/HRC/37/4/Add.1 Advance unedited version, Report of the working group: Addendum, para. 6 and section II

[6] 15 March 2023, A/HRC/53/4, Report of the Working Group, paras. 133(81), 133(148), 133(149), 133(150), 133(151), 133(152), 133(153) and 133(154)

[7] 23 June 2023, A/HRC/53/4/Add.1, Report of the Working Group: Addendum

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

(27 September 2021, CRC/C/CZE/CO/5-6, Concluding observations on the combined fifth and sixth periodic reports, para. 24)

“Recalling its general comment No. 8 (2006) on the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment, the Committee reiterates that the State party should explicitly prohibit corporal punishment in law, in all forms and settings, and promote positive, non-violent, and participatory forms of child-rearing and discipline".

Committee on the Rights of the Child

(4 August 2011, CRC/C/CZE/CO/3-4, Concluding observations on third/fourth report, paras. 39, 40 and 41)

“While noting that the corporal punishment of children is prohibited in public care, the Committee notes with concern there that is still no legislation which explicitly prohibits corporal punishment of children in all settings, including in the family. The Committee is also concerned at the fact that according to surveys undertaken by the State party, the vast majority of Czech citizens expressed acceptance of corporal punishment in a child’s upbringing.

“The Committee urges the State party to address the widespread tolerance of corporal punishment by, inter alia, conducting awareness-raising and public education programmes with a view to encouraging the use of alternative disciplinary measures in accordance with the inherent dignity of the child, and in doing so, ensure that corporal punishment is prohibited in all settings including the family.

“The Committee welcomes the State party’s participation in the initiatives of the Council of Europe and the United Nations to prevent and ban the corporal punishment of children and the drawing up of a National Strategy of Preventing Violence against Children (2008-2018) as well as its accompanying National Action Plan (2009-2010).

Committee on the Rights of the Child

(18 March 2003, CRC/C/15/Add.201, Concluding observations on second report, paras. 40 and 41)

“The Committee is concerned that there is no legislation explicitly prohibiting corporal punishment, and that it is practised in the family, in schools and in other public institutions, including alternative care contexts.

“The Committee recommends that the State party take action to address ill-treatment and abuse committed against children in the family, in schools, in the streets, in institutions and in places of detention through, inter alia:

f)taking all necessary steps to enact legislation prohibiting the use of corporal punishment in schools, institutions, in the family and in any other context;

g) making use of legislative and administrative measures, as well as public education initiatives to end the use of corporal punishment and ensuring this is adhered to….

i) taking into account the Committee’s recommendations adopted at its day of general discussion on ‘Violence against children within the family and in schools’ (CRC/C/111).”

Committee on the Rights of the Child

(27 October 1997, CRC/C/15/Add.81, Concluding observations on initial report, paras. 18 and 35)

“The Committee is concerned that corporal punishment is still used by parents and that internal school regulations do not contain provisions explicitly prohibiting corporal punishment, in conformity with articles 3, 19 and 28 of the Convention....

“The Committee recommends that further measures to protect children from abuse and maltreatment be undertaken, in particular through the development of a widespread public information campaign for the prevention of corporal punishment at home, at school, and in other institutions.”

Committee Against Torture

(13 July 2012, CAT/C/CZE/CO/4-5, Concluding observations on fourth/fifth report, para. 22)

“The Committee is concerned about the widespread tolerance of corporal punishment in the State party and the absence of legislation explicitly prohibiting it.  It is also concerned about the provision in Act No. 94/1963 Coll. Family Act which states that parents have the right to use ‘adequate educational measures’ and that the issue will be addressed in a similar manner in the new Civil Code (arts. 2 and 16).

The Committee recommends that the State party amend its legislation, including the Family Act and the new Civil Code, with a view to introducing an explicit prohibition against corporal punishment in all settings. The State party should carry out awareness-raising campaigns among the general public regarding the unacceptability of and the harm done by corporal punishment.”

Human Rights Committee

(6 December 2019, CCPR/C/CZE/CO/4, Concluding observations on fourth report, paras. 42 and 43)

“While noting the general policies stressing the prohibition of corporal punishment and the explanations provided by the State party regarding adequate and proportional disciplinary measures, the Committee remains concerned (CCPR/C/CZE/CO/3, para. 19) that corporal punishment does not appear to be explicitly prohibited in all settings (arts. 7 and 24).

“The State party should take practical steps, including through legislative measures where appropriate, to explicitly prohibit corporal punishment in all settings, including the home. It should also strengthen activities aimed at encouraging nonviolent forms of discipline as alternatives to corporal punishment and continue to raise awareness about its harmful effects.”

Human Rights Committee

(22 August 2013, CCPR/C/CZE/CO/3, Concluding observations on third report, para. 19)

“While welcoming the criminalization of various forms of child abuse, and the various initiatives to prevent these practices, the Committee is concerned at the large number of victims of sexual abuse and the small number of cases that are reported by the victims themselves. The Committee is also concerned that corporal punishment is currently not explicitly prohibited by law in public institutional settings and in the home (arts. 7 and 24).

The State party should further strengthen its efforts to combat child abuse by improving mechanisms for its early detection, encouraging reporting of suspected and actual abuse and taking steps to ensure that all cases of abuse of children are effectively and promptly investigated, and that perpetrators are brought to justice. The State party should also take practical steps 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 conduct more public information campaigns to raise awareness about its harmful effects.”

European Committee of Social Rights

(March 2020, Follow-up to the Complaint No. 96/2013 - Association for the Protection of all Children (APPROACH) Ltd v. Czech Republic)

“The Committee concluded that Article 17 of the 1961 Charter had been violated on the ground that not all forms of corporal punishment that is likely to affect the physical integrity, dignity, development or psychological well-being of children, were prohibited.

“The Committee notes the developments of Czech legislation aiming at strengthening the protection of children against all forms of violence.

“The Committee considers that the legislative amendments in 2017 and 2018 are a step forward, but they do not constitute a total, clear and explicit prohibition of all forms of corporal punishment of children that are likely to harm their physical integrity, dignity, development or mental well-being. National legislation does not 17 explicitly prohibit corporal punishment of children in the family home and of children in institutions. In its report the government does not dispute this situation.

“The Committee recalls that it has already assessed the provisions of national law referred to in paragraph 26 and following in the context of the present complaint (see §§49 to 51 of the decision) and noted that they prohibit severe violence against children, and that national courts convict perpetrators of corporal punishment provided that they reach a certain threshold of seriousness.

“The report cites no clear and precise case law that comprehensively prohibits the practice of corporal punishment. The Committee recalls that it has observed in particular that existing legislation could also be interpreted as distinguishing all forms of corporal punishment from the notion of “educational measures", thus allowing corporal punishment for educational purposes, which is contrary to the Charter.

“The Committee further notes that according to the latest report (April 2019) of the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children http://www.endcorpor alpunishment.org/wp-content/uploads/country-reports/CzechRepublic.pdf corporal punishment is still not prohibited in the family home, in alternative care settings, daycare centres and penal institutions. Moreover, in its Concluding observations published on 6 December 2019, the UN Human Rights Committee’ invited the Czech Republic to take practical steps, including through legislative measures where appropriate, to explicitly prohibit corporal punishment in all settings, including the home.

“Legislation on violence and abuse are not interpreted as prohibiting all corporal punishment. However, it should be possible for courts to apply various legislation to clearly and explicitly prohibit all forms of corporal punishment. The Committee invites the authorities to keep it informed of any legislative and jurisprudential developments that would redress the violation found.

“Meanwhile, the Committee therefore considers that the situation has not been brought into conformity with the 1961 Charter.”

European Committee of Social Rights

(October 2017, Follow-up to the Complaint No. 96/2013 - Association for the Protection of all Children (APPROACH) Ltd v. Czech Republic)

“The Committee concluded that Article 17 of the 1961 Charter had been violated on the ground that not all forms of corporal punishment that is likely to affect the physical integrity, dignity, development or psychological well-being of children, were prohibited.

“The Government states in the information registered on 31 October 2016 that in order to strengthen the protection of children under 15 years of age an amendment was made to Act No 200/1990 Coll., regulating contraventions, adopted in October 1, 2016. The amendment imposes an obligation to commence proceedings in a case of “an administrative delict or offence”, “ without a notice of motion” where the  affected person is a child younger than 15 years. According to the Government this legislative change will enable more efficient sanctioning of contraventions against children (for example for offences less serious than bodily harm of a child). It will cover inter alia cases of corporal punishment, verbal abuse, insulting or humiliation of a child. The law increases the penalties for these offenses. The imposed fine can reach up to CZK 20 000 (763€) and in case of a repeated offence within a year to 30 000 CZK (1140€).

“The Committee takes note of the developments in Czech law, which seek to strengthen the protection of children from forms of violence. However, the Committee considers that the above mentioned amendment does not amount to a complete prohibition of all forms of corporal punishment likely to affect the physical integrity, dignity, development or psychological well-being of children.

“Therefore the Committee finds that the situation has not been brought into conformity with the 1961 Charter.

“The Committee will next assess the situation on the basis of the information to be submitted in October 2019.”

European Committee of Social Rights

(October 2016, Follow-up to the Complaint No. 96/2013 - Association for the Protection of all Children (APPROACH) Ltd v. Czech Republic)

“The Committee concluded that Article 17 of the 1961 Charter had been violated on the ground that not all forms of corporal punishment that is likely to affect the physical integrity, dignity, development or psychological well-being of children, were prohibited.

“The Government indicates in the information registered on 15 November 2015 that there have been no changes to the situation

“There has been no change to the situation. The Committee finds that it has not been brought into conformity with the 1961 Charter.

“The Committee will next assess the situation on the basis of the information to be submitted in October 2016.”

European Committee of Social Rights

(January 2016, Conclusions 2015)

“In its previous conclusion (Conclusions XIX-4 (2011)) the Committee found that the situation was not in conformity with the Charter as there was no explicit prohibition in legislation of corporal punishment in the home and in institutions.

“In its decision on the merits of 12 December 2014 of Complaint No. 96/2013, Association for the Protection of All Children (APPROACH) v. the Czech Republic (§§ 49-51), the Committee noted that the provisions of the domestic law referred to in the context of this complaint prohibit serious acts of violence against children, and that national courts will sanction corporal punishment provided it reaches a specific threshold of gravity. However none of the legislation referred to by the Government sets out an express and comprehensive prohibition on all forms of corporal punishment of children that is likely to affect their physical integrity, dignity, development or psychological well-being.

“Furthermore, there is no clear and precise case-law prohibiting the practice of corporal punishment in comprehensive terms. The Committee observed in particular that also the revised legal provisions (Act No. 303/2013 Coll.) may be read as separating all forms of corporal punishment from the notion of permitted “educational measures”.

“The Committee likewise took note of the domestic case-law on corporal punishment (§ 34). It noted that there was nothing in the legislation that would allow it to conclude that all corporal punishment would be automatically prohibited. The Government did not contest this. On the contrary, it stated that bodily harm needed to attain a specific threshold of gravity before it amounted to corporal punishment, and that physical punishment was allowed as long as it did not reach the prohibited level of intensity.

“The report refers to Act No. 303/2013 Coll., amending certain acts in connection with the adoption of private-law recodification and provides that any person who uses inadequate educational means or restrictions against a child commits an offence, punishable in the form of a fine of up to CZK 50,000 (€ 1 821).

“The Committee considers that the situation which it has previously held to be in violation with the Charter has not changed. It reiterates its previous finding of non-conformity on the ground that all forms of corporal punishment are not prohibited in the home and in institutions.”

“The Committee concludes that the situation in the Czech Republic is not in conformity with Article 17 of the 1961 Charter on the ground that all forms of corporal punishment are not prohibited in the home and in institutions.”

European Committee of Social Rights

(January 2012, Conclusions 2011)

“In its previous conclusion the Committee held that the situation was not in conformity with the Charter as there was no explicit prohibition in legislation of corporal punishment in the home and in institutions.

“The Committee notes from the report of the Governmental Committee to the Committee of Ministers (TS-G (2005) 24 § 200) that Amendment to Act (No. 109/2002) on Institutional Care signed by the President on 2 September 2005 states exactly the extent of correctional means, which can be used and corporal punishment is not among them and therefore it cannot be used in these institutions. The Committee further notes from the report that the Czech law does not provide for a general prohibition of corporal punishment, but nevertheless parents are only allowed to exercise their parental authority in a way that does not affect the child's dignity and in no way jeopardises the health of the child and his/her physical, emotional, intellectual and moral development. Parents cannot resort to inappropriate means of education and this prohibition applies to the use of excessive corporal punishment. Such acts are punishable under Section 59 Paragraph 1.h of the Act on Socio-Legal Protection of Children.

“The Committee notes from another source that there that is still no legislation which explicitly prohibits corporal punishment of children in all settings, including in the family. The UN CRC urges the Czech Republic to address the widespread tolerance of corporal punishment by, inter alia, conducting awareness-raising and public education programmes with a view to encouraging the use of alternative disciplinary measures in accordance with the inherent dignity of the child, and in doing so, to ensure that corporal punishment is prohibited in all settings including the family.

“The Committee notes from another source that corporal punishment is lawful in the home. Section 31(2) of the Family Act (1963) states that in caring for children, parents ‘may use adequate upbringing measures so that the child’s dignity is not violated and his or her health, emotional, intellectual and moral development are not endangered’, but neither this nor provisions against violence and abuse in the Act on Social and Legal Protection of Children (amended 2002), the Charter on Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (1992), the Act on Misdemeanours (1990), the Criminal Code (2009), the Constitution (1992) and the Domestic Violence Law (2006) are interpreted as prohibiting all corporal punishment in childrearing. Corporal punishment is lawful in alternative care settings. There is no provision for it in the Act on execution of institutional upbringing or protective upbringing at school facilities and on preventive upbringing care at school facilities, but it is not explicitly prohibited.

“The Committee holds that the situation which it has previously found not to be in conformity with the Charter has not changed. Therefore, it reiterates its previous finding of non-conformity on this ground.…

“The Committee concludes that the situation is not in conformity with Article 17 of the Charter of 1961 as corporal punishment of children is not explicitly prohibited in the home and in institutions.”

European Committee of Social Rights

(July 2005, Conclusions XVII-2)

“The Committee recalls that Article 17 of the Charter requires a prohibition in legislation against any form of violence against children, whether at school, in other institutions, in their home or elsewhere. It considers that this prohibition in legislation must be combined with adequate sanctions in penal or civil law.

“The report states that under the amended Families Act (1998), parents have the right to use reasonable correctional means that do not affect the child’s dignity nor endanger the child’s health, or his physical, emotional, intellectual, and moral development. The Committee notes that this provision does not explicitly prohibit the corporal punishment of children within the family. It notes from another source that there is no legislation explicitly prohibiting corporal punishment, and that it is practised in the family, in schools and in other public institutions, including alternative care contexts. The Committee therefore considers that since there is no explicit prohibition in legislation of corporal punishment in the home, in schools and in other institutions, the situation cannot be considered to be in conformity with Article 17 of the Charter on this point.

“The Committee furthermore notes from the report that the Notification of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport No. 291/1991 Coll., on elementary school, regulates the correctional and educational measures which the school may use, i.e. praise and other rewards and measures to improve discipline (warnings and reprimands). It asks what other legislative and administrative measures, as well as public education initiatives are used to end the use of corporal punishment.

…

“The Committee concludes that the situation in the Czech Republic is not in conformity with Article 17 of the Charter on the ground that there is no explicit prohibition in legislation of corporal punishment in the home, in schools and in other institutions.”

European Committee of Social Rights

(2003, Conclusions XVI-2, page 173)

“As regards the corporal punishment of children the Committee wishes to know whether legislation prohibits the corporal punishment of children in schools, in institutions, in the home, or elsewhere….

“Pending receipt of the information requested the Committee defers its conclusion.”

Prevalence/attitudinal research in the last ten years

A 2018, research conducted by the Open Men’s League and the research agency Nielsen /Admosphere found that nearly two-thirds of Czech parents use corporal punishment to discipline their children. A total of 63 percent of respondents reported that they would use or have used physical punishment when addressing their children’s “misbehaviour,” which, according to the survey, included “disobeying parents or grandparents” or “lying”.

(Reported in expats.cz, 12 November 2018)

A 2011 poll found that about 30% of teachers at Czech elementary schools had slapped a pupil, despite corporal punishment being unlawful.

(Reported in Prague Daily Monitor, 25 November 2011, praguemonitor.com)

As part of a Government-sponsored campaign on violence against children in 2009, research was undertaken into public tolerance of corporal punishment of children. Almost half (49.9%) of those surveyed felt that corporal punishment may be necessary in some situations; a quarter (24.8%) were in favour of smacking or slapping children as part of their upbringing and did not view this as corporal punishment; 11% expressed a strong belief in the use of corporal punishment in childrearing. Only 8.3% were not in favour of corporal punishment and said they would never use it.

(Reported in the Government’s written replies to the List of Issues of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, 10 May 2011, CRC/C/CZE/Q/3-4/Add.1)

A poll in April 2007 conducted by the Median agency for the daily Lidove noviny found that three fifths were against a law banning corporal punishment of children. Nearly three out of four (71.5%) reported having been beaten in childhood, and 25% of parents admitted to using it on their children occasionally or regularly; only 31% said they had never beaten their children.

(Reported in Ceske Noviny, 8 April 2008)