Charlottetown - A verdict will be handed down this afternoon in the latest test case of Canada's so-called spanking law.
Justice David Jenkins of the P.E.I. Supreme Court will rule on the guilt or innocence of 78-year-old Lucille Poulin, who is charged with assaulting five children at a religious commune near Summerside, P.E.I.
Poulin, the spiritual leader of the commune, faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison if found guilty.
Poulin testified in her own defence during her two-week trial and admitted to hitting the children with a heavy, wooden paddle she called a rod.
"Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child and the rod of correction will drive it away," the former Roman Catholic nun told the court.
Poulin said the commune lives by the word of God, including scriptures that warn sparing the rod spoils the child. She said the spankings hurt the children, but the punishments were delivered with love, not anger, and were always reasonable.
The children, who cannot be named because of a court-ordered publication ban, said they were beaten frequently, painfully and often without reason.
The question facing Jenkins is whether Poulin crossed a somewhat vague legal line that separates the reasonable use of corporal punishment from criminal assault.
Poulin has invoked protection of Section 43 of the Criminal Code, which permits the use of physical punishment and exempts caregivers from prosecution for assault as long as their use of force is "reasonable under the circumstances."
Poulin's lawyer, Zia Chishti, also argued that freedom of religion provisions in Canada's Constitution entitle Poulin and the commune to follow the dictates of their faith without fear of prosecution, including what they see as a God-given right to spank their children.
The prosecution argued that Poulin crossed the line from spanking to assault, although the charge does not extend to causing bodily harm since there was no medical evidence of physical damage to the children, ranging in age from seven to 12.
Crown prosecutor Darrell Coombs said that although the beatings left no physical scars, there are emotional scars.
"It was a regime of discipline based upon pain and abuse," he said of the commune.
The timing of the trial could be unfortunate for Jenkins because, just last week, the Supreme Court of Canada announced it will review Section 43, the spanking law, which has been on the books for more than a century.
The law, which gives teachers, parents and other caregivers the right to use physical force to discipline children, was challenged two years ago by the Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law.
The foundation says the spanking law violates the Charter of Rights.
The Supreme Court has not given a date for its hearing on the challenge, but it won't be in time for Jenkins, who must interpret such vague terms as "reasonable in the circumstances."
Justice David McCombs of Ontario Superior Court upheld the law in July 2000, saying parents and teachers must have some leeway in carrying out their duties.
The Ontario Court of Appeal unanimously agreed in January of this year, although it cautioned that the law sanctions only "strictly limited force" that does not expose children to unreasonable punishment.
The courts must decide on a case-by-case basis what is reasonable, wrote Justice Thomas Goudge.
Section 43 has been a bone of contention for years, with some groups arguing passionately for its abolition and others contending that parents should not be turned into criminals for administering a mild spanking.