Tighten protection order laws to prevent abuse

The DA is correct to suggest the law around protection orders be tightened so that it is not abused by those trying to evade journalists, frustrate criminal investigations and intimidate people pursuing allegations of wrongdoing.

It’s also becoming common, according to labour lawyers, to be deployed by workers facing disciplinary action, who claim any attempt to probe their behaviour is intimidation.

Media lawyer Helene Viljoen – who has acted for two local publications where attorneys who were subjects of reporting sought protection orders against journalists rather than responding to media inquiries – says the use of protection orders in this way will have “chilling effect on the right to freedom of expression”.

Those developments alone are bad enough, but the situation is far more grim when you consider that the legislation is intended to offer help to the very real victims of intimidation, often women and children who are targets of gender-based abuse.

We would suggest to the DA and our parliamentarians that the legislation be modified to allow the target of such an order to appeal before it is confirmed.

And if the order is cancelled because it is considered abuse, the complainant should be forced to pay punitive costs for wasting court time.