• Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

    “That’s some of the reasons why the ACT party stands for the repeal of this anti-smacking legislation, and that’s why I do too,” said Mr Tashkoff Press Release: Friday, 26 June 2009
  • Recent Posts

  • Networkedblogs

  • Recent Comments

  • Christian Blog Topsites

    Christian Blog Topsites
  • Tags

  • Don’t Vote Labour

    www.dontvotelabour.org.nz
  • Unity For Liberty


    Anti-Smacking Petition
    Signature Counter


  • June 2021
    M T W T F S S
    « Feb    
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    282930  
  • abort73

    For more information about abortion and what you can do to help, please visit... Abort73.com http://www.abort73.com/
  • Archives

  • Statcounter since February 2008

  • online counter
  • Meta

  • Blog Catalog since May 2008

  • « | Main | »

    FI397-Police get new powers in domestic incidents

    By HEF Admin | June 11, 2008

    12 June 2008 Family Integrity #397 — Police get new powers in domestic incidents

    Gidday all,
    At the bottom is a recent article from Stuff about proposed new powers for Police to issue safety orders on the spot (forbidding one person from going anywhere near another person, persons or place) merely on suspicion of “family violence”. Then there is a response from our friend in Sweden, lawyer Ruby Harrold-Claesson. She describes the kind of thing I reckon this proposed legislation, combined with the rewrite of Section 59, will inevitably lead to here in Kiwiland.
    Craig Smith
    National Director
    Family Integrity
    PO Box 9064
    Palmerston North
    New Zealand
    Ph: (06) 357-4399
    Fax: (06) 357-4389
    Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
    http;//www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
    http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/

    Our Home….Our Castle

    —–Original Message—–
    From: Ruby Harrold-Claesson

    Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:16 PM
    Subject: SV: Police get new powers in domestic incidents

    Hi Everyone!
    They talk about “abusive behaviour”. What about the abusive behaviour of the CYFS and the children who are being told that their parents do not have the right to correct their unacceptable behaviour?

    NZ has discrimination against children and Rödeby Cases around the corner.

    At present, through the NCHR, I am involved in a case in Stockholm in which the 10-yr old daughter of Pakistani parents – both social workers educated in Sweden – informed her school teacher that her parents had smacked her. The girl was taken immediately (April 14, 2008). Since then they have not been allowed to see or talk to their daughter. In the meantime, they questioned her younger brother, who told them he had not been smacked. He too has been taken into care. The girl has retracted her statement but no one will listen to her. The Administrative Court in Stockholm confirmed the care order on May 30, and the parents and the children are totally devastated.

    The parents also face criminal charges for assault of their children.

    What a crazy country Sweden is! And NZ has joined the ranks!
    What beats me most is that as many as 22 countries have adopted anti-smacking laws and that the European Council and the UN recommend that ALL countries should have such a law! Well, I’m sure that neither Jamaica nor France will follow suit.

    Kind regards

    Ruby
    http://www.nkmr.org

    Police get new powers in domestic incidents

    By BEN FAWKES – The Dominion Post | Wednesday, 11 June 2008

    Police who attend suspected domestic violence incidents will have the power to issue “on the spot” safety orders lasting up to three days under tough law changes proposed by the Government.

    The safety orders are part of a raft of changes announced by Justice Minister Annette King to the Domestic Violence Act and welcomed by support groups.

    The safety orders would last for up to 72 hours and could be issued in circumstances where police suspected domestic violence but did not have enough evidence to make an arrest.

    Other proposals include stiffening the penalties for breaching court protection orders, with a maximum penalty of up to two years jail to give judges an “appropriate sentencing range”.

    “When you get problems, often deaths, it is when you get breaches of protection orders,” King said.

    The courts would also be allowed to consider making protection orders on behalf of victims and access to counselling programmes for both offenders and victims will be improved.

    The proposed law changes were currently being drafted and were expected to be put before Parliament within weeks, King said.

    Chief Families Commissioner Rajen Prasad welcomed the proposals and said he hoped they would contribute toward a reduction in domestic violence.

    “Better enforcement by the police and courts and better access to programmes will improve safety in families and encourage people to seek help to change their abusive behaviour.”

    National Network of Stopping Violence national manager Brian Gardner also backed the proposals, particularly the safety orders which he said had worked well in Western Australia.

    “It gets the men out of the house and gives them time to cool down and allows the victims to think about what they can do to keep safe.”

    Allowing courts to impose protection orders would give financial relief to victims who he said were currently having to pay around $1500 “on a good day” to obtain a protection order, Gardner said.

    But the proposals received a scathing response from the National Party, who said the Government was copying its own policies.

    “We believe giving police the ability to issue on-the-spot protection orders for suspected victims of domestic violence will be very effective in putting their immediate safety first,” National’s law and order spokesman, Simon Power, said.

    Violent crime had risen by 32 per cent under the Labour Government and Power said on-the-spot safety orders were first mooted by National Party leader John Key last November.

    “On-the-spot protection orders are a good idea, we believe they will work, and are flattered Labour thinks so as well.”

    King said the initiatives pre-dated National’s announcement and were the result of more than a year of research.

    “The discussion paper went out in December last year … it had been worked on for months before that.”

    Topics: Family Integrity email newsletter | No Comments »

    Comments