Child protection office says all forms of violence against child monks or nuns are unacceptable
Earlier this year this paper had reported about a case in a monastery in Sarpang in October 2025 where a Kudrung (senior monk/teacher) severely beat a 17-year-old monk as four other monks restrained him for leaving the premises without permission. The young monk later died by suicide. The police charged the Kudrung and while he was convicted in court for the assault the police and court were unable to link the suicide to the beating due to a 15-day gap despite the pleas of the mother alleging the two were linked. The mother has currently appealed to the High Court.
At the time the Child Care and Protection Office (CCPO) under the Zhung Dratshang completed its investigation into the battery case involving the Kudrung and confirmed that separate disciplinary action will be taken against him.
This action will be independent of the case currently under appeal before the Sarpang Dzongkhag Court.
The Dratshang Lhentshog said it has adopted a zero-tolerance approach to corporal punishment and all forms of violence against child monks and nuns, with an internal child safeguarding framework requiring every monastic institution under the institution to respond even in cases involving ‘a simple slap.’
An official from the Child Care and Protection Office (CCPO) under the Dratshang Lhentshog said that while corporal punishment may have been used in the past as a means of disciplining monks, it is no longer considered appropriate in today’s monastic education system.
He said that violence against children is not tolerable at all, adding that there is a common misconception that monastic institutions experience high levels of corporal punishment.
The official clarified that this perception is inaccurate and stressed that the monk body is committed to ensuring the safety and wellbeing of every child under its care.
Under the internal child safeguarding and protection framework, every monastic institution under the Dratshang Lhentshog is required to safeguard children from exploitation, abuse, neglect and violence.
The framework is guided by principles including the best interests of the child, protection from all forms of harm, non-discrimination, respect for children’s views, confidentiality and safety.
The official said that if a child is subjected to any form of exploitation, abuse, neglect or violation, the framework comes into effect.
In cases involving serious offences, such as sexual abuse or severe corporal punishment, the cases will be reported to the Royal Bhutan Police through due process.
He said that the office also provides awareness to child monks on personal safety, including recognizing good touch and bad touch.
He said, “To strengthen child protection across the monastic community, the CCPO has been conducting awareness and capacity-building programs nationwide. Supported by UNICEF, the office launched a pilot programme in 2023 and 2024 covering Samtse, Chukha and Trashigang, selected because they had larger populations of child monks.”
During the pilot phase, 108 lams, including social service lams, received training on violence against children, child protection and their responsibilities in safeguarding children and sharing these messages within their communities.
Following the pilot’s success, the awareness programs have continued annually in Dratshang Rabdeys across the country.
Each year, between 700 and 1,000 monks particularly new recruits receive training on child rights and protection.
More than 1,000 nuns have also received similar awareness programs through the Bhutan Nuns Foundation.
In addition, monastic teachers are trained to identify early signs of mental health concerns and other child protection issues so that children can be referred for appropriate support.
The official said the office has also begun educating children about online violence as mobile phone use becomes more common among young monks.
According to the office, the Dratshang Lhentshog currently has more than 13,000 monks, of whom just over 7,000 are registered. More than 6,000 of them are minors, making child safeguarding a key priority for the institution.
While the set minimum age for enrolment is six years, the official said a small number of younger children, some as young as five are accepted in exceptional circumstances when they have no one to care for them.
The majority of monks are between 8 and 12 years old.
The CCPO was established in 2009, with its dedicated office set up in 2013 through support from the government and UNICEF.
It serves as the central agency responsible for planning, coordinating, implementing and monitoring child protection programmes across monastic institutions.
The office is supported by an advisory committee, regional representatives and child protection focal persons stationed in monastic institutions and nunneries throughout the country to strengthen reporting, monitoring and early intervention.
The office reported that it recorded six cases of violence so far this year, most of which were minor and resolved within the institution.
It also recorded three cases in 2023, two in 2024 and three in 2025, all of which were considered minor and dealt with internally.
The reforms by the Dratshang Lhentshog is important as those who support corporal punishment link it to culture and tradition in Bhutan where the Dratshang plays a major role.
Facts Only
* A case occurred in a monastery in Sarpang in October 2025 involving a Kudrung severely beating a 17-year-old monk.
* Four other monks restrained the young monk from leaving premises without permission, leading to the monk's subsequent suicide.
* Police charged the Kudrung for assault, but a link between the beating and the suicide could not be established due to a 15-day gap.
* The Child Care and Protection Office (CCPO) under the Zhung Dratshang investigated the battery case and confirmed separate disciplinary action would be taken against the Kudrung, independent of the pending court appeal.
* The Dratshang Lhentshog adopted a zero-tolerance approach to corporal punishment and violence against child monks and nuns.
* Monastic institutions must respond to incidents involving 'a simple slap' under an internal safeguarding framework.
* The CCPO stated that corporal punishment is no longer appropriate in the monastic education system.
* The child safeguarding framework is guided by principles including the best interests of the child, protection from all forms of harm, non-discrimination, and confidentiality.
* Awareness programs involving violence against children, child protection, and responsibilities are conducted nationwide.
* Pilot programs were launched in 2023 and 2024 in Samtse, Chukha, and Trashigang, training 108 lams on these topics.
* Annually, between 700 and 1,000 monks receive training on child rights and protection in Dratshang Rabdeys.
* More than 1,000 nuns have also received similar awareness programs through the Bhutan Nuns Foundation.
* Monastic teachers are trained to identify early signs of mental health concerns and other child protection issues for referral.
* The CCPO has begun educating children about online violence.
* The Dratshang Lhentshog oversees over 13,000 monks, with over 6,000 being minors.
Executive Summary
The Child Care and Protection Office (CCPO) under the Zhung Dratshang has adopted a zero-tolerance approach to all forms of violence against child monks and nuns, asserting that corporal punishment is no longer appropriate in monastic education. The institution operates an internal child safeguarding framework requiring every monastic entity to respond to incidents involving violence, regardless of severity. While past disciplinary actions existed, the current stance emphasizes that violence against children is intolerable, dispelling any misconception regarding high rates of corporal punishment within the monastic system.
The CCPO actively implements this framework by providing awareness and capacity-building programs nationwide, supported by UNICEF. These efforts include training for monks and nuns on child protection, personal safety (including recognizing inappropriate touch), mental health identification, and online violence. The office coordinates these efforts through a dedicated structure involving regional representatives and focal persons to ensure monitoring and early intervention across monastic institutions.
The framework is guided by principles such as the best interests of the child, non-discrimination, and confidentiality. In cases involving serious offenses like sexual abuse or severe corporal punishment, reports are made to the Royal Bhutan Police for due process. The institution acknowledges that this shift in policy aligns with cultural considerations within Bhutan regarding tradition and the role of the Dratshang.
Full Take
The narrative shifts from addressing specific, high-profile incidents of violence to establishing a systemic mandate for child protection across the entire monastic body, underpinned by a formal framework. The key tension lies between the historical accommodation of corporal discipline linked to cultural tradition and the modern imposition of universal standards of safety and well-being. The existence of the zero-tolerance policy signals a necessary paradigm shift away from internal disciplinary mechanisms that prioritize tradition over immediate child protection.
The emphasis on an independent safeguarding structure suggests an awareness that previous internal responses were insufficient or contextually flawed, as evidenced by the inability to link the 2025 suicide to the court proceedings. The proactive educational initiatives—pilots and annual training for monks, nuns, and teachers—demonstrate an attempt to operationalize abstract principles of protection into tangible behavioral change. However, the continued framing that links these reforms directly to the cultural role of the Dratshang suggests a potential friction point where institutional legitimacy versus safety protocols must be navigated carefully.
The pattern observed is an effort to de-contextualize violence by isolating it from tradition while simultaneously attempting to integrate protection mechanisms into existing structures. The implication for agency is whether this systemic change results in true behavioral modification or merely procedural compliance, especially given the historical context where disciplinary action was deeply embedded in religious authority. The missing element is a deeper exploration of how these externally mandated standards interact with localized spiritual authority in practice.
BRIDGE QUESTIONS: How do monastic leaders reconcile the concept of zero-tolerance for violence with established cultural mandates regarding monastic discipline? What mechanisms are in place to ensure that educational awareness translates into genuine behavioral change rather than mere compliance? What are the long-term consequences for child mental health when institutional structures prioritize external legal standards over internal traditional frameworks?