logo
Mistakes to avoid when applying for a protection order against alleged abusers

Mistakes to avoid when applying for a protection order against alleged abusers

The Citizen6 days ago
The respondent must be served with the order within 24 hours. If it has not been served, then it is not yet active.
The court can grant an order for an abusive spouse to continue maintaining their partner despite a protection order against them.
This was shared by senior National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) advocates Buyisiwe Nkala and Mzoxolo Rusi, along with senior domestic violence court clerk Qaqamba Tshangela, in their Eastern Cape domestic violence webinar on Wednesday.
The officers shared steps to take when applying for a protection order against an abusive close relative and also mistakes for victims to avoid to ensure their order remains in place.
According to the South African Police Service (Saps), a protection order aims at preventing the recurrence of domestic violence or sexual harassment by stating what conduct the alleged offender must refrain from doing.
ALSO READ: Protection orders and police 'failing victims of GBV'
As long as the alleged offender complies with the protection order, the complainant will be safe. If the alleged offender contravenes any stipulation of the protection order, they may be arrested. Once a protection order is granted, it is enforceable throughout the country.
What to know about protection orders
According to the Saps, to apply for one, the complainant must make an affidavit and complete an application form at their nearest police station.
Supporting affidavits by persons who have knowledge of the matter in question may accompany the application. These documents must be handed to the clerk of the nearest court. The court will consider the application immediately.
Once the interim has been granted, it goes to the police station, where they will look for the respondent.
The respondent must be served with the order within 24 hours. If it has not been served, then it is not yet active, according to Tshangela.
Tshangela said the interim protection order will protect you for the period you wait until your trial date.
While still waiting for your trial date, if anything happens to you, you can go back to the police with the interim order, and the respondent will be arrested.
However, Tshangela cautioned applicants against the mistake of not going back for their trial date once the interim protection order has been granted.
ALSO READ: Justice department's poor record-keeping delays protection orders for GBV victims – AG
'Until the magistrate grants you a final order, that's when your protection order application is valid for a lifetime,' she said.
'If you only have the interim and not the final order, it means once your trial date comes and you don't show up, your application will be set aside after two postponements, and you won't have the protection order.'
Those who do return for trial are allowed to take no more than three people to accompany them to court.
Domestic violence
In a situation where your alleged perpetrator is a spouse whom you depend on, the NPA urged victims not to let this stop them from applying for a protection order, as there are systems in place to ensure their upkeep.
'In your application, in the interim order, there is a section that highlights that if this person was maintaining you and now you fear that if you open the case and he will not provide anymore, the magistrate will conduct an inquiry with you that clearly explains that this person was providing for you,' said Tshangela.
ALSO READ: Public protector probe confirms inadequate GBV measures by justice department
'It will be a must that he must continue providing whatever he was providing for you. The court can oblige him to continue with the maintenance.'
Monetary relief
An applicant can also apply for emergency monetary relief – compensation for the things they lost due to their spouse's domestic violence conduct.
'If someone assaulted you to the point of getting admitted to the hospital and you lost your earnings, you can apply for that relief for the person to compensate you,' said Tshangela.
'If you have to relocate because you cannot be under one roof with your perpetrator, they must pay for the relocation. The presiding order decides on the duration of the payment.
'If you are married in community of property and you are being violated, the courts can grant an order that the perpetrator must move out, even if you're both owners of the property. The perpetrator must go.'
For those who do not wish to return to their home, they can apply for a place of safety, where they are provided with accommodation.
An applicant can also apply for a safety monetary notice, which forces the police to visit and monitor the applicant's safety.
READ NEXT: Man sentenced to life after brutally murdering ex, despite protection order
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ten SAPS, EMPD officers in court for fraud and corruption
Ten SAPS, EMPD officers in court for fraud and corruption

The Herald

time8 minutes ago

  • The Herald

Ten SAPS, EMPD officers in court for fraud and corruption

Ten South African Police Service and Ekurhuleni metropolitan police officers were arrested while on duty on Monday for their alleged role in corruption and fraud. They are expected to appear in the Germiston magistrate's court on Tuesday. 'It is alleged that on June 4 during a multidisciplinary operation by law enforcement, the accused officers raided a shop in Edenvale where they seized cigarettes and took R35,000 in cash and three packs of headache tablets to the value of about R5,000,' Independent Police Investigative Directorate spokesperson Lizzy Suping said. The nine constables and a sergeant arrested the cashier for trading in illicit cigarettes and another employee for violating immigration laws. 'It is also alleged that the accused officers failed to record all the merchandise seized from the shop at the police station. The shop manager disputed the quantity and type of merchandise booked in the occurrence book to the station commander.' TimesLIVE

Farm murder accused says he was forced to feed women's bodies to pigs
Farm murder accused says he was forced to feed women's bodies to pigs

The Citizen

time2 hours ago

  • The Citizen

Farm murder accused says he was forced to feed women's bodies to pigs

During the brief proceedings, a supervisor on the farm turned state witness. One of the three men accused of killing two women and throwing their bodies in a pigsty in Limpopo has told the court he was forced to feed their bodies to pigs. Pig farmer Zackariah Olivier, his co-accused Rudolph de Wet, and Zimbabwean national William Musoro returned to the Polokwane High Court on Monday. Trial National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) regional spokesperson Mashudu Malabi said the murder case was postponed to Thursday, 07 August 2025, to afford legal representatives an opportunity to consult and prepare for trial. 'The trial will commence on Monday, 11 August 2025. Accused number three (William Musora) has been moved out from the previous attorneys. Now he is going to be represented by Legal Aid South Africa.' State witness During the brief proceedings on Monday, the 20-year-old De Wet, a supervisor on the farm, turned state witness, and testified that Olivier shot and killed the two women. De Wet is expected to testify that he was 'under duress' when he was forced to throw their bodies into the pig enclosure, according to his lawyer and the state prosecutor. Charges against De Wet are expected to be dropped when he begins his testimony as a state witness. [WATCH] A Limpopo pig farmer, Zacharia Olivier, and his two workers, accused of killing two women and disposing of their bodies in a pigsty, had their trial postponed to Thursday in the High Court in Polokwane. — SABC News (@SABCNews) August 4, 2025 ALSO READ: Pig farm murder case in Limpopo set for trial in August Charges The 50-year-old Musora and the 60-year-old Olivier have yet to enter a plea and remain behind bars. Olivier, De Wet and Musora are facing two counts of murder, attempted murder, defeating the administration of justice, possession of an unlicensed firearm, and unlawful possession of ammunition. Musora, who is a Zimbabwean national, faces an additional charge of contravening the Immigration Act. In December, a visibly emotional Olivier shook his head when Magistrate Ntilane Felleng announced the postponement of his bail application, meaning he spent Christmas behind bars. Murder Olivier, De Wet and Musora are accused of killing Maria Makgato and Lucia Ndlovu before dumping their bodies in a pigsty at Onvervaght farm in Sebayeng, outside Polokwane, in August. It is the state's case that Makgato and Ndlovu went to the farm to collect expired food that the pigs were eating. They were then allegedly fatally shot and dumped into the pigsty, where the animals consumed their bodies. ALSO READ: Limpopo pigsty murders: Two accused abandon bid for bail

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store