As the Constitution already prohibits violence against children, there is no justification for including such a provision within the Education Bill.
This has been in the highlighted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights in their report on the review of the Education Bill which states that in Fiji, the Constitution explicitly forbids corporal punishment in schools.
The Committee says this means principals, teachers, or community leaders (like Turaga ni Koro) cannot legally administer physical discipline.
The Committee also says the ban aligns with international human rights standards, particularly the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Fiji has ratified.
They say these frameworks emphasise protecting children from violence in all settings.
They say calls to reintroduce corporal punishment reflect a tension between traditional authority structures and modern legal protections.
Meanwhile, the Committee has recommended that a nominee of the Great Council of Chiefs be included as a member of the Education Advisory Council and the National Curriculum and Assessment Authority.
They recommend representatives from the Fiji Arts Council, the Permanent Secretary responsible for multi-ethnic affairs, and the Permanent Secretary responsible for sports be also added in the National Curriculum and Assessment Authority.
Other recommendations include retaining accountability provisions for parents but reducing the fine from $2,000 to $500 and reducing the prison term from 12 months to 2 months and expanding language learning to include other languages spoken in Fiji in addition to iTaukei and Hindi.
They recommend establishing an Education Appeals Tribunal to hear matters relating to refusals of school approvals, school closure orders, and home school stoppage orders.
The Committee recommends removing the provision relating to zoning and the provision on corporal punishment, noting that corporal punishment is already prohibited under the Constitution.
They also recommends the removal of the clause that requires the Minister to consult with the Education Advisory Council.
The Committee observed that while the Minister is not legally bound by the Council’s advice, there is a statutory obligation to consult with them.
They say however, if the Minister disregards matters raised by the Council, particularly those of significant educational importance, the Council’s role risks being rendered ineffective.
The Committee says in such circumstances, the Council would be unable to fulfill its intended function of contributing meaningfully to educational governance and policy development.
They recommend that in this regard, the provision be removed.
Meanwhile, the Education Bill 2025 was withdrawn from Parliament, following its initial tabling in November last year.
