تنبيه بدنى كودكان - حسينى خواه، سيدجواد - الصفحة ٣٠٥ - ث) تفسير عمومى شمارهى ٨ كميتهى حقوق كودك

ensure compensation of the victims. In its decision, the Commission states:

There is no right for individuals, and particularly the Government of a country to apply physical violence to individuals for offences. Such a right would be tantamount to sanctioning State- sponsored torture under the Charter and contrary to the very nature of this human rights treaty.

[١]

The Committee on the Rights of the Child is pleased to note that constitutional and other high- level courts in many countries have issued decisions condemning corporal punishment of children in some or all settings, and in most cases quoting the Convention on the Rights of the Chil

[٢].

When the Committee on the Rights of the Child has raised

[١]

. African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights, Curtis Francis Doebbler v. Sudan, Comm. No./( ); see para..

[٢].

For example, in the Fiji Court of Appeal declared corporal punishment in schools and the penal system unconst itutional. The judgement declared: Children have rights no wit inferior to the rights of adults. Fiji has ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Our Constitution also guarantees fundamental rights to every person. Government is required to adhere to principles respecting the rights of all individuals, communities and groups. By their status as children, children need special protection. Our educational institutions should be sanctuaries of peace and creative enrichment, not places for fear, ill- treatment and tampering with the human dignity of students( Fiji Court of Appeal, Naushad Ali v. State, ). In, Italys highest Court, the Supreme Court of Cassation in Rome, issued a decision that effectively prohibited all parental use of corporal punishment. The judgement states: ... The use of violence for educational purposes can no longer be considered lawful. There are two reasons for this: the first is the overriding importance which the] Italian [legal system attributes to protecting the dignity of the individual. This includes minors who now hold rights and are no longer simply objects to be protected by their parents or, worse still, objects at the disposal of their parents. The second reason is that, as an educational aim, the harmonious development of a childs personality, which ensures that he/ she embraces the values of peace, tolerance and coexistence, cannot be achieved by using violent means which contradict these goals) Cambria, Cass, sez. VI, Marzo] Supreme Court of Cassation, th Penal Section, March [, Foro It II,) Italy ( (. Also see South African Constitutional Court) (Christian Education South Africa v. Minister of Education, CCT/;) (SA) CC (;) (BCLR) CC (, August.