Legislation should provide for an order for protection remedy that is independent of any other legal proceeding. The order for protection is much like the emergency or interim order for protection, but it should be issued after a full hearing and the order should provide protection and assistance remedies for a longer period of time. The goals of victim safety and offender accountability remain paramount in both types of protective orders.  Legislation on orders for protection should provide that:

• The complainant/survivor or the guardian of a minor or legally incompetent complainant/survivor should have standing to apply for an order for protection. If the legislation allows other family members, relevant law enforcement officials, or other professionals, such as social service professionals, to apply for orders for protection on behalf of a complainant/survivor who is competent, legislation should require that the complainant/survivor be consulted. (See: law of South Africa, 4 (3); law of Philippines, Section 11; and UN Handbook 3.10.6.)  Legislation should ensure that the complainant/survivor’s wishes are the final factor in determining who may apply for an order for protection, because complainant/survivors are most often the best judge of the dangers presented to them by violent offenders. These dangers may increase when a complainant/survivor applies for an order for protection. 

• The testimony of the complainant/survivor, in court or by sworn affidavit, should be sufficient evidence on its own for the issuance of an order for protection.  No further evidence, police reports, medical reports or other reports should be necessary. See: UN Handbook 3.10.7; and law of Bulgaria, Ch. 1, S.13 (3).

• Legislation should provide for timely hearings on protection orders. For example, the law of Philippines allows for priority hearings for applications for protective orders. Section 20.

• Legislation should specify that the violation of an order for protection, emergency or regular, is a crime.  See UN Handbook 3.10.9, and law of Georgia, Article 10.

Promising practice: The law of Spain, where violation of order for protection triggers a full hearing on increasing aspects of protection for complainant/ survivor.

Promising practice: The law of South Africa, which provides that prosecutors may not refuse to institute a prosecution based on a violation of an order for protection, or withdraw a charge based on a violation of an order for protection, unless they have received authorization to do so from a Director of Public Prosecutions. Section 18 (1)

Promising practice: The United Kingdom Protection from Harassment Act (1997), which allows a court to place a restraining order on the defendant even if he is acquitted of a criminal offense, in order to offer protection to the survivor.  This allows the use of evidence in a criminal court which would normally be admissible only in a civil court under UK law, thereby extending further protection to complainant/survivors. Sec. 5 (See: Combating violence against women: Stocktaking study on the measures and actions taken in Council of Europe member states (2006))

• Legislation should provide for increased penalties for repeat violations of orders for protection. (See: law of Sierra Leone, Part III, 19)