- School students’ knowledge poor
The use of corporal punishment in Sri Lankan schools is prevalent, with students having a poor level of knowledge regarding the same.
These findings were made in an original article on "Understanding the dynamics of corporal punishment: Knowledge, consequences and associated factors of corporal punishment among students aged 15-19 years in the Colombo and Kegalle Districts" which was authored by K. Dhammearatchi, D. Fernando, C. Devruwan, A. Sandeepani and A. Ramzani (all five attached to the Sri Jayewardenepura University's Medical Sciences Faculty), D. Ariyarathna (attached to the same Faculty's Forensic Medicine Department), and S. Goonewardena (attached to the same Faculty's Community Medicine Department), and published in the Galle Medical Journal's 30th Volume's Third Issue, last month (December 2025).
Corporal punishment is defined by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child as “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light” (the Convention on the Rights of the Child [CRC]). The term corporal punishment encompasses a wide variety of methods of punishment including slapping, spanking, pinching, and striking with objects such as belts or canes. Corporal punishment is controversial as it is separated by a fine line from physical abuse or the domestic abuse of minors (E.T. Gershoff's "Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviours and experiences: A meta-analytic and theoretical review").
Recently, corporal punishment has attracted both legislative and judicial attention in Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka is a Party to the 1989 UNCRC, which is a legally binding international agreement that applies to every child. The UNCRC specifically protects children from violence, abuse, neglect, sexual exploitation, and other forms of exploitation.
The legal framework in Sri Lanka prohibiting certain forms of corporal punishment is contained in several Legislative enactments. They include the Penal Code, No. 2 of 1883, the Children and Young Persons Ordinance, No. 48 of 1939 (CYPO), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act, No. 56 of 2007, etc. The Education Ministry Circular Number 12/2016 states that corporal punishment is deemed to be an inappropriate and damaging process on students in schools, and that alternative methods of disciplining should be employed. These Laws prohibit cruelty to children, assault and causing bodily hurt, sexual abuse, criminal force, child neglect, causing physical and mental derangement, and mistreatment.
Moreover, in the case of H.M. Karunapala and Others v. J.P.K. Siriwardhana, Teacher, Puhulwella Central College and Others (SC/FR/97/2017), the Supreme Court (SC) (President's Counsel [PC] and Justice Sithambarampillai Thurairaja joined by Murdu Nirupa Bidushinie Fernando PC J. as she was then and Kulahath Sisira Jayawilal de Abrew J.) held on 12 February 2021 that corporal punishment inflicted by a teacher on a 15-year-old student, that caused a tympanic membrane injury, constituted a violation of Article 11 of the Constitution - “No person shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” While the Penal Code attaches criminality to this form of punishment, this judgment has defined a new dimension to corporal punishment, defining it as a violation of a child’s Fundamental Rights (FR) through cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
However, the legal framework has not achieved its desired results due to the inability to repeal outdated laws, remove legal barriers, and introduce new laws and norms to prohibit corporal punishment.
Despite all these Laws and Circulars, the Sri Lankan system has allowed corporal punishment under Section 341 of the Penal Code which made exceptions for a schoolmaster while Section 82 of the Penal Code made exceptions for an “act done in good faith for the benefit of a child or person of unsound mind, by or by consent of guardian”.
In Sri Lanka, corporal punishment is lawful in the home. The Penal Code was amended in 1995 (Act, No. 22 of 1995) to provide for the offence of cruelty to children (Section 308A, amended further in 2006 [Penal Code {Amendment} Act, No. 16 of 2006]), but, Section 82 states: “Nothing, which is done in good faith for the benefit of a person under 12 years of age, or, of unsound mind, by or by consent, either express or implied, of the guardian or other person having lawful charge of that person, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause/or be intended by the doer to cause, or be known by the doer to be likely to cause, to that person….” Illustration (i) of the offence of “criminal force” (Section 341) states that a schoolmaster who flogs a student is not using force illegally. However, the Corporal Punishment (Repeal) Act, No. 23 of 2005, omitted the sentence of whipping. Provisions against violence and abuse in the Children’s Charter of 1992/1994 (The Charter on the Rights of the Child), the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Act, No. 22 of 1994, the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, No. 34 of 2005, and the ICCPR Act are not interpreted as prohibiting all corporal punishment of children (Corporal punishment of children in Sri Lanka).
In November 2022, with the enactment of the Children and Young Persons (Amendment) Act, No. 39 of 2022, the Government repealed Section 71(6) of the CYPO which confirmed “the right of any parent, teacher or other person having lawful control or charge of a child … to administer punishment to him/her”. The Children and Young Persons (Amendment) Act came into force on 1 January 2024. However, Sections 82 and 341 of the Penal Code which authorise the use of corporal punishment are still in force.
To mark the International Day to End Corporal Punishment in 2024 (30 April), the Cabinet of Ministers approved amendments to provisions in the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure to ban and prohibit corporal punishment in all spheres and settings. The Cabinet, on 9 June 2025, made two decisions related to the same, one to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure (Special Provisions) Act, No. 15 of 1979, with regard to physical punishments, and the other to amend the Penal Code (19th Authority), also on physical punishments. Cabinet approval had been granted on 29 April 2024 to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure (Special Provisions) Act to impose provisions to ban physical punishments causing physical injuries, in all sectors. Regarding the Penal Code amendment, the Cabinet described that "It has been scientifically proven that physical and mental injury caused to a child due to physical punishments is immense, and so to impose provisions to define penalties related to physical injury and to ban injuries from physical punishments in any sector". Draft legislation in the form of the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill has been presented in the Parliament on 19 August 2025 to broaden the scope of legal provisions covering corporal punishment on children (including parents inflicting such punishments), enhanced penalties for voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt on children, etc. (published in Part II of the Government Gazette of 8 July 2025).
Methodology
Dhammearatchi et al.'s study was a descriptive, cross-sectional one conducted in 2021 in Government and private (but not international) schools in the Colombo and Kegalle Districts among school students aged 15-19 years. Convenience sampling was used. A self-administered online questionnaire was circulated.
Results
A total of 212 students formed the study sample. The mean age was 17 years (standard deviation 1.41 years). Most were from Government schools (84.8 per cent). The categorisation of schools was gender-based: boys only (38%), girls only (34.7%) and mixed (27.3%).
Most of the study population had heard of the term “corporal punishment” (69.5%). Although most were aware that corporal punishment was illegal (42.9%), an almost equal proportion of the population stated that they were ignorant on its legal status (41.6%). More than two thirds thought that it was important for students to be informed of their rights and the law (78.2%). Boys reported facing corporal punishment (92%) more compared to girls (80%).
At least one form of corporal punishment was experienced by most (86.4%). Kneeling (87.8%) and being told to keep standing/standing on a chair (87%) were the most frequent methods that were experienced/witnessed. More than half had experienced non-physical forms of punishment such as neglect and ignoring (59.6%) and name calling or cursing (52.2%). The majority was subjected to corporal punishment due to bad behaviour (91.8%). The frequency of experiencing corporal punishment in schools was: rarely (136, 64.2%), a few times per month (35, 16.3%), never (26, 12.5%), two-three times per week (11, 5.3%), and everyday (four, 1.7%).
The majority had a poor level of knowledge regarding corporal punishment (60.8%). The knowledge among female students was slightly better (40.1%) than that of males (38%). Students in Colombo had better knowledge on corporal punishment (53.3%) than those of Kegalle (46.7%). Students from Government schools had better knowledge (52.48%) than those in private schools (47.52%).
More than half had felt pain or physical discomfort after being subjected to corporal punishment (61.2%). Nearly one fourth had experienced or witnessed corporal punishment in school that had caused physical injuries (cuts, bruises, fractures, nerve/muscle damage, etc.) (28.2%). The psychological consequences experienced as a result of corporal punishment were: feeling sad/unhappy/depressed (183, 86.5%), shame/self doubt (170, 80.4%), humiliation and the inability to face friends/family (150, 71%), anger towards the teacher/s or students involved (134, 63.3%), the loss of self-esteem (128, 60.4%), feelings of failure and the lack of self-confidence (119, 56.3%), and fear or panic when given attention by teachers (117, 55.1%). The social sequelae as a result of the same are increased aggressiveness and rebellious attitudes (113, 53.1%), retaliation against a teacher (97, 45.8%), and the consumption of alcohol/substance abuse (35, 16.3%). The majority did not believe that corporal punishment was acceptable (76.7%). Only 29% were of the opinion that it had a positive influence.
Mothers who were housewives had better knowledge (48%) when compared to those who were employed (35%). This was statistically significant.
Discussion
Most had a poor level of knowledge regarding corporal punishment (60.8%). The majority had heard of the term “corporal punishment” (69.5%). More than two thirds thought that it was important to be informed of their rights and the law (78.2%).
Although most were aware that corporal punishment was illegal (42.9%), an almost equal proportion were ignorant (41.6%). This indicates the need for the better dissemination of knowledge, especially as this is a matter that intimately affects all school children.
At least one form of corporal punishment was experienced by the majority (86.4%). Similarly, in P. de Zoysa, U. Senarath and H. de Silva's "Disciplining in Sri Lankan schools: A cross-sectional study", which was carried out among 948 students and 450 teachers in the Colombo, Galle, Monaragala, Trincomalee, Mullaitivu, and Nuwara Eliya Districts, approximately 80% of the students reported having experienced at least one episode of corporal punishment during the past school term.
Kneeling (87.8%) and being told to keep standing/standing on a chair (87%) were the most frequent methods.
More than half of the study population had experienced non-physical forms of punishment such as neglect (59.6%) and name calling or cursing (52.2%). The majority was subjected to corporal punishment due to ‘bad behaviour’ (91.8%).
Most have been subjected to punishment resulting in pain or physical discomfort (61.2%) and 28.2% had experienced or witnessed physical injuries. Although such frequencies represent a minority, the prevalence indicates that there is physical abuse carried out in schools that use severe forms of physical punishment.
Being unhappy or depressed (86.5%), self-doubt (80.4%), humiliation (71%), and low self-esteem (60.4%) were common.
A total of 53.1% of students agreed that corporal punishment can lead to increased aggressive and rebellious behaviour. Only 13% agreed on alcohol and substance dependence as a long-term social consequence.
The majority, regardless of age or gender, showed poor knowledge on this form of punishment. The knowledge of female students was slightly better (40.1%) than that of males (38%) but 92% of boys reported facing corporal punishment at least once in their school life compared to only 80% of girls. De Zoysa et al.'s study found that 90.5% of boys had reported corporal punishment compared to 59.7% of girls.
Students in the Colombo District had better knowledge regarding corporal punishment (53.3%) than those in Kegalle (46.7%). Colombo, being an urban District with recourse to broader resources would have given more access to knowledge and means of reporting an incident than other Districts. Students from Government schools had better knowledge (52.48%) than those in private schools (47.52%). These findings may signify that the regular use of corporal punishment in Government schools has led to greater awareness and knowledge regarding the use, causes and outcome of corporal punishment. Previous experiences, the awareness of the consequences and the outcome of corporal punishment as a disciplinary method result in good knowledge. This could be the case in students with a low socioeconomic background.
A statistically significant association was observed between the mother's employment status and knowledge on corporal punishment. Students whose mothers were housewives had a better knowledge (48%) when compared to those with employed mothers (35%). This, according to Dhammearatchi et al.'s view, may be because when mothers are mostly at home, children communicate with them frequently and therefore the mothers are aware. This would create a better understanding of corporal punishment in a child from a young age. “A child from such a family is more likely to report school punishment and gain comfort and advice from a mother who is unemployed and available at home for the child,” Dhammearatchi et al. observed.
Recommendations
Awareness programmes on corporal punishment need to be introduced in the school education systems. Research and implementation of alternative methods of disciplining children in the school system and teachers’ governing bodies is a must.