Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Child protection versus teacher protection: a legal review of the settlement of school corporal punishment in Indonesia

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The education sphere nowadays faces the issue of corporal punishment, which is considered a detrimental school discipline that has negative impacts on a child’s development and growth. Teachers are advised to always opt for moral persuasion rather than corporal punishment in disciplining their misbehaving students. In Indonesia, the teacher stays in a dilemma as many cases of the administration of light corporal punishment have gone to criminal litigation and ended up with sentencing of the teacher. Concurrently, often the teacher becomes a victim of a student’s disruptive behavior when they only adopt soft measures such as reprimands. Legal protection for teachers has been guaranteed by the Teacher and Lecturer Law Year 2005 and several other relevant regulations. Unfortunately, the existence of the Law on Child Protection Year 2014, which broadly governs the prohibition of violence, has made criminalisation of teachers easy and their protection questionable. This paper elaborates the extent of legal protection provided to teachers in the term of facing criminal litigation due to corporal punishment. It also explores the legal effort that can be undertaken by the Indonesian Government to embody fair protection for teachers and children.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. see The District Court Ruling No. 257/Pid.B/[2]/-PN. Mjl, 02 May 2013

  2. see the District Court Ruling No.240/Pid.sus/2016/PN. Sda, 28 July 2016

  3. see the District Court Ruling No. 92 Pare-Pare /Pid.Sus/[3]/PN Pre, 18 July 2017

  4. see Article 35 and 37 of the Teachers Law No. 15 of [25] (The People’s Republic of China) and Teacher Protection Act of 2018 (the Republic of Philippines)

References

Books and Journal Articles

  1. Liao, S.-y. (2013). Persuasion and the diversity of fictions. The Philosophical Quarterly, 94(2), 269–289. https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. The District Court Ruling No. 257/Pid.B/2012/-PN.Mjl.

  3. The District Court Ruling No. 92 Pare-Pare /Pid.Sus/2017/PN Pre, the Case of Darmawati v. Ashari.

  4. McCarthy, M. M. (1992). Educational malpractice. Educational Horizons, 70(3), 105–107 https://www.jstor.org/stable/42924939. Accessed 20 February 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Clark, R. E., Adamec, C. A., & Clark, J. F. (Eds.). (2007). The encyclopedia of child abuse (3rd ed.). New York: Facts on File Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Finkelhor, D. (2008). Childhood victimization: Violence, crime, and abuse in the lives of young people. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., Shattuck, A., Hamby, S., and Kracke, K. (2015). Children’s exposure to violence, Crime, and Abuse: An Update, OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin: 1–15.

  8. Setiawan, D. (22 February 2017). Indonesia Peringkat Tertinggi Kasus Kekerasan Di Sekolah. News of KPAI, http://www.kpai.go.id/berita/indonesia-peringkat-tertinggi-kasus-kekerasan-di-sekolah.

  9. Nadir, M. (2 May 2018). Awal 2018 Laporan KPAI Didominasi Siswa Kompas Online News, https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2018/05/02/10110871/awal-2018-laporan-ke-kpai-didominasi-kasus.

  10. Galligan, D. J. (Ed.). (2014). Constitution and the classics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Arief, B. N. (1998). Beberapa Aspek Kebijakan Penegakan dan Pengembangan Hukum (some aspects of law enforcement and development policy). Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti.

  12. Remmelink, J. (2003). Hukum Pidana (Criminal Law). Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rahardjo, S. (2006). Hukum Progresif, Kesinambungan, Merobohkan, dan Membangun (Progressive Law, Sustainability, Breaking Down and Building). Journal Hukum Progresif Doctoral Program of Diponegoro University., 2(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Packer, H. L. (1962). The limits of criminal sanctions. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Arief, B. N. (2012). Kebijakan Formulasi Ketentuan Pidana Dalam Peraturan Perundang-undangan Pidana (Criminal Provisions Formulation Policy in Criminal Laws and Regulations). Semarang: Penerbit Pustaka Magister.

  16. Shklar, J. N. (1986). Legalism: Law, morals, and political trials. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tanya, B. L., Simanjuntak, Y. L., & Hage, M. Y. (2013). Teori Hukum (legal theory). Yogyakarta: Genta Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  18. West, R. (2003). Reconsidering legalism. Minnesota Law Review, 88, 119–158.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Coleman, D. L., Dodge, K. A., & Campbell, S. K. (2010). Where and how to draw the line between reasonable corporal punishment and abuse. Journal of Law and Contemporary Problems, 73(2), 107–166 https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/lcp/vol73/iss2/6. Accessed 15 November 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Arief, B. N. (29 July 2004). Perlindungan Profesi Guru Dari Aspek Hukum Pidana (Teacher Protection from Criminal Law Aspect). presented in: National Conference entitled Protection and Coaching of Teachers in the Regional Autonomy Era. Semarang: Pandanaran Hotel.

  21. Haroun, R., & O’Hanlon, C. (1997). Do teachers and students agree in their perception of what school discipline is? Educational Review, 49(3), 237–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013191970490303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), 167–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/002234336900600301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Black, D. (April 18, 2000). Violent structures. Presented at symposium entitled: Hidden structures of social reality: Five innovative theories, at University of Virginia, Charlottesville. https://www.academia.edu/11147192/Violent_Structures. Accessed 06 July 2019.

  24. Hart, H. L. A. (2012). The concept of law (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. The Teachers Law No. 15 of 1993 (The People’s Republic of China).

  26. Kempe, C. H., et al. (1985). The battered-child syndrome. Journal of Child Abuse & Neglect. Pergamon Press Ltd. USA, 9, 143–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gershoff, E. T., & Bitensky, S. H. (2007). The case against corporal punishment of children. Journal of Psychology, Public Policy, and Law., 13(4), 231–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Renteln, A. D. (2010). Corporal punishment and the cultural defense. Journal of Law and Contemporary Problem. Spring Edition, 73, 253–229.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kant, I., Churton, A. (tr). (2003). On education. Mineola – USA: Dover Publication Inc.

  30. Kilimci, S. (2009). Teachers’ perception on corporal punishment as a method of discipline in elementary schools. The Journal of International Social Research, 2(8), 242–251.

    Google Scholar 

Legislation and International Convention

  1. General Comment No. 8 (2006), CRC/C/GC/8, 02 March 2007.

  2. The Appeal Court Ruling No. 226/PID/2013/− PT.BDG.

  3. The Child Protection Act No. 35 of 2014 (the 1st Amendment).

  4. The Government Regulation No. 74 of 2008.

  5. The Legal Assistance Act No 16 of 2011.

  6. The National Constitution of Indonesia 1945.

  7. The National Education No. 20 of 2003.

  8. The Penal Code of Indonesia n.d.

  9. The Regulation of Minister of Education and Culture No. 10 of 2017.

  10. The Regulation of The Minister of Education and Culture No 82 of 2015.

  11. The Supreme Court Ruling No. 1554/K/PID/2013, the Case of Saopuddin v. Himawan of.

  12. The Teacher and Lecturer Act No. 14 of 2005.

  13. The Teacher Protection Act of 2018 (the Republic of Philippines).

  14. The UN Convention on the rights of the child, general assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989.

  15. Violence By Using Unpleasant Act n.d.

The Online Document

  1. Alfons, M. (13 November 2018). Guru Di Kendal di Bully, Mendikbud: Bercanda Ada Batasnya. https://news.detik.com/berita/d-4299719/guru-di-kendal-di-bully-mendikbud-bercanda-ada-batasnya. Accessed 20 Nov 2018.

  2. Anonymous. (24 July 2018). Kekerasan terhadap Siswa masih Marak, Guru Berdalih Demi Kedisiplinan, https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/indonesia-44925805. Accessed 20 November 2018.

  3. Irawan, Y. K. (20 June 2017). Tidak Naik Kelas, Siswa ini Nekat Pukul Gurunya dengan Kursi Kayu. https://regional.kompas.com/read/2017/06/20/09594541/. Accessed 2 Mar 2018.

  4. Jajeli, R. (2 February 2018). Cerita Siswa Aniaya Guru di Sampang Hingga Meningga Dunia, https://news.detik.com/berita/d-3845912/cerita-siswa-aniaya-guru-di-sampang-hingga-meninggal-dunia. Accessed 2 Mar 2018.

  5. Putra, A. (08 March 2018). Kronologi Guru MTS di Pontianak Dianiaya Siswa, Berawal dari Teguran Main, HP’. https://news.okezone.com/read/2018/03/08/340/1869621/. Accessed 10 Mar 2018.

Lists of Interviewee

  1. Interview with Muhammad Mustofa, in University of Indonesia, Jakarta, (25 August 2017, 03.30 pm).

  2. Interview with Rini Handayani, Assistant Deputy of Child Protection at Ministry of Women Empowerment and Child Protection, Bogor, (24 August 2017, 11.00 am).

  3. Interview with Rita Pranawati, Vice-Chairwoman of the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (KPAI), Jakarta, (25 August 2017, 05.00 pm).

  4. Interview with Salman Luthan, The Judge of Supreme Court, Yogyakarta, (21 October 2017, 04.00 pm).

  5. Interview with Teachers in 15 Schools (10 Elementary Schools and 5 Secondary Schools) in Madura, (Medio 2017).

  6. The District Court Ruling No.240/Pid.sus/2016/PN.Sda, 28 July 2016, the case of Samhudi v. Kurniawan.

  7. The District Court Ruling No. 92 Pare-Pare /Pid.Sus/2017/PN Pre, the Case of Darmawati v. Ashari.

  8. Vockel, E. L. (1991). Corporal punishment: the pros and cons. The Clearing House Journal 64 (4), 278–283.

  9. The Human Rights Act No. 39 of 1999.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Trunojoyo Madura (UTM), Jl. Raya Telang Po. Box 2 Kamal, Bangkalan, Madura, Indonesia

    Rusmilawati Windari

  2. Faculty of Law, University of Sebelas Maret (UNS), Jl. Ir. Sutami No. 36 A Kentingan, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia

    Supanto

  3. Faculty of Law, University of Sebelas Maret (UNS), Jl. Ir. Sutami No. 36 A Kentingan, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia

    Widodo Tresno Novianto

Authors
  1. Rusmilawati Windari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Supanto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Widodo Tresno Novianto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rusmilawati Windari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Windari, R., Supanto & Novianto, W.T. Child protection versus teacher protection: a legal review of the settlement of school corporal punishment in Indonesia. Crime Law Soc Change 76, 1–22 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-021-09941-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-021-09941-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation