 |
| Welcome to BuaNews, the gateway to quick and fresh government news and information |
| Home | Today's stories | This week's stories | Last week's stories | Other Features | International News | User policy |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Compiled by the Government Communication and Information System --------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15 Oct 2007 Title: Reports of R300 penalty for smacking children incorrect --------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- By Sholain Govender Cape Town - Misinterpretation of a social development portfolio meeting has lead to many parents believing they will be fined R300 if they smack their child. The meeting, held last Monday to discuss the Children's Amendment Bill with input from the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and deliberations on public submissions made on the bill, focused on the implications of Clause 139 of the bill which relates to discipline of children amongst others. However, the meeting itself did not result in any formal decisions being made regarding the particular clause, and it was concluded that further discussions were needed in that regard before a final decision was made. The definition of abuse was discussed and clarified at this meeting in accordance with the definition in the principal act (Children's Act), along with, if, when and what penalties should be imposed should a parent or guardian be found to be abusing their child. During the meeting NPA Western Cape director Rodney de Kok said the question of prosecution in terms of disciplining a child was dependent on establishing whether "unreasonable force" was used or not. He also mentioned an amount of R300 as a fine if it was decided that an admission fee was applicable in any cases where a parent was accused of smacking their child, but this figure was part of a bigger discussion with no link to real penalties which are still to be decided. Mr De Kok said the best interest of the child should also be at the heart of the matter. Clause 139(7) of the bill - prosecute the parent if the punishment constitutes abuse of the child, led to the NPA raising several concerns with the committee. These included questions of parental confusion over what constituted an offence, judicial discretion depending on particular cases and public understanding of what constituted an offence. Mr De Kok said that such a clause would go a long way towards helping change behaviour and reduce patterns of violence against women and children. "The intention of the legislation is a good intention," said Mr De Kok, "violence is not a legitimate method of disciplining a child." The NAP director said they would go back and look at the principal act, the definition of abuse and the cross-referencing and would return to the committee last Thursday. Advocate Mike Masutha who chaired part of the meeting also added that the committee had not yet made a decision and may decide in favour or change the clause but this would require the concurrence of the National Council of Province. If this concurrence is not reached then it would have to go to arbitration. Advocate Masutha said final decisions would be made on Wednesday. The committee also discussed the issue of child-headed households and adult supervision in these cases and foster care. They asked whether adults who volunteer to check up on child-headed households should be limited to supervising 12 children only, as per an earlier social studies model, or if each case should be evaluated base don the ages of the children involved. It was decided that the Department of Social Development would decide on the number of children who may be supervised by an individual adult. - BuaNews |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
