MOGOENG CJ [60] It follows that these observations on the utmost necessity of child protection and the paramountcy of the importance of the best interests of a child find application regardless of the belief behind the practice that has potentially injurious consequences on the child. It could be religious, cultural practices or any other basis on the strength of which parents believe that their children ought to be treated in a particular way that happens to be harmful to their well-being. [61] Section 28(2) wisely anticipates possibilities of conduct that are actually or potentially prejudicial to the best interests of a child. Unsurprisingly, it is crafted in terms so broad as to leave no doubt about the choice it makes between the best interests of the child and the parent’s perceived entitlement to resort to unreasonable and immoderate chastisement meant to procure a child’s obedience to a parent’s legitimate directive and orders. However, what remains to be determined is whether chastisement that is moderate and reasonable, is constitutionally justifiable in our kind of democracy, regard being had to the paramountcy of the best interests of a child. The extent of the limitation and its relation to purpose [62] Parents have over the years enjoyed the right to discipline their children in a variety of ways. One of the instruments for instilling discipline in their children is the administration of moderate and reasonable chastisement. As indicated, its foundation is both religious and cultural in character. It is thus regarded partly as an incidence of the enjoyment of one’s constitutional right of freedom of religion or culture. [63] The disadvantage though is that, unlike the constitutional protections available to the child, the right to freedom of religion does not expressly provide for parental entitlement to administer moderate and reasonable chastisement to the child nor does any provision of the Constitution acknowledge the existence of a cultural right to the same effect. Freedom of Religion’s reliance on “the right to parenting” grounded on South Africa’s international obligations under several conventions that deal with the 23