Domestic violence orders 'decided on the run and then ignored'

Family Court judges are making decisions on protection orders against domestic violence with inadequate information, a study has found.

It has also found the legal system is failing to hold violent men accountable for breaching orders.

One judge admitted that reading documents on protection order applications and making decisions on them "often occurred during a 15-minute tea break".

Judges, Family Court lawyers and men's and women's groups were interviewed for the study, commissioned by Auckland's Inner City Women's Group and other women's support agencies.

It was presented to the Family Court Association this week, and is expected to be published next month.

The study says judges are concerned about a lack of follow-up information to tell them about the results of their decisions on protection orders - designed to protect people, usually women, from domestic abuse.

Unless the woman came back to have the order cancelled, the judge did not know what had happened.

"So that's the only feedback we get," said one judge. "Unless there's a case of, say, murder or something with a protection order."

Every month since June last year, there have been more breaches of protection orders than new orders granted.

When a protection order is granted the man is directed to attend an anti-violence programme.

But about 35 per cent of men ordered to attend programmes do not complete them, which is a breach of the protection order.

Programme organisers questioned for the study said breaches were often not recorded because of the paperwork and the difficulties it caused in maintaining a relationship with the man.

Women's advocates said women had lost faith in protection orders because of the cost involved and the failure of men to be held accountable.

Obtaining a protection order often placed women in more danger because men saw them as a "red flag", said one women's advocate.

But Union of Fathers national president Jim Bagnall said some women used protection orders vindictively, to gain sway in the courts.

He criticised what he said was a lack of evidence needed for an order to be granted.

Some accusations were hearsay, from unreliable sources or just made up. "You can tell lies in the Family Court and get away with it."

Under the Domestic Violence Act 1995, temporary protection orders can be granted without notice, but before the order is made permanent the respondent - usually the male - is notified.

A woman must produce affidavits detailing the abuse and if her partner defends the application she may have to give evidence in court.

A lawyer who participated in the study said the adversarial system was a "ton of fun for lawyers" but "no fun at all for participants".

The study also found a judge may be told about only one breach of an order, when there had been many.

When men knew the breaches were not being acted on, the ability to hold men accountable became farcical, the study says.

Heather Henare, manager of the National Collective of Independent Women's Refuges, said women had lost faith in protection orders.

They were costly, the legislation was ineffective and the process was dangerous for women.

"We need to start listening to our women," she said. "When a woman says 'he's going to kill me', nine times out of 10 she's likely to be right."

She referred to the case of Sheryl Pareanga, whose partner was sentenced last month to life in prison with a minimum non-parole period of 15 years for murdering her.

The man, who has name suppression, had breached a protection order seven times in five years.

Ms Pareanga had reported the breaches to police, and told other people days before she was killed that she feared for her life.

Brian Gardner, manager of the National Network of Stopping Violence Services, said only half the men directed to attend an anti-violence programme came to the first meeting.

He had major concerns about the lack of prosecution for breaches.

"The message ends up being just lay low, just ignore it, it will be all right, it will pass on by.

"The message needs to be that this is a breach of a protection order, it's a court order and you will be charged."

Study author Dr Alison Towns said the study was not about blame, but highlighted the lack of information and resources available to the courts and people working in the area of domestic violence.

The Ministry of Justice is reviewing domestic violence legislation to make it more effective.