On July 15 2022, the Supreme People’s Court (hereinafter “SPC”) released the Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Cases of Personal Safety Protection Orders (hereinafter “Provisions”, which will take effect on Aug 1). By making it clear that personal safety protection order cases are not dependent on civil litigation procedures such as divorce, the Provisions lowered the threshold of proof collection and listed 10 types of behavior that can be identified as evidence of domestic violence.
Article 23 of the Anti-Domestic Violence Law (released in 2016, you may check our previous post for more information: Anti-domestic Violence System in China) provides that where a party applies to the court for a personal safety protection order due to domestic violence or the real danger of domestic violence, the court shall accept it.
Article 1 of the Provisions stipulates that filing a civil lawsuit such as divorce is not a condition for applying for a personal safety protection order. The provisions make it clear that applicants for a personal safety protection order do not need to first file divorce lawsuits or other lawsuits, nor do they need to file divorce or other lawsuits within a certain period of time after the application of personal safety protection order.
In addition, victims are encouraged to collect digital evidence to better protect themselves.
Acceptable evidence includes:
● Statements by the parties;
● Domestic violence reprimands and decision of administrative penalty issued by Public Security Bureaus;
●Police dispatch records, interrogation records, interrogation records by Public Security Bureaus
●A letter of remorse or guarantee by the perpetrator;
● Audio-video recording the occurrence or resolution of domestic violence;
●Telephone recordings, text messages, instant messaging messages, e-mails, etc. between the perpetrator and the applicant or his/her close relatives;
●Records of medical institutions;
● Records of complaints, reflections, or requests for help received by the applicant or perpetrator ‘s employer, civil affairs department, residents’ committee, villagers’ committee, women’s federation, anti-domestic violence social welfare organizations, and other such organizations;
● Testimony provided by minor children appropriate to their age and intelligence, or testimony of relatives, and other witnesses;
●Injury appraisal statement;
●Other evidence that can prove that the applicant has suffered domestic violence or is facing a real risk of domestic violence.
The Provisions also states that if the evidence is sufficient to indicate a high probability of domestic violence, courts should issue personal protection orders to victims as soon as possible.
To ensure that the orders, which are similar to restraining orders issued in the West, arrive in time to prevent incidences of domestic violence, the Provisions also clarifies that the orders can be applied for, reviewed and issued independently.
In addition, the Provisions has beefed up courts’ ability to issue protective orders by listing more situations that can be deemed as domestic violence, such as harming family members by denying food, incessant insults, slander, threats and other forms of verbal abuse, as well as stalking or harassment.
Until now, China’s Anti-Domestic Violence Law has defined domestic violence as physical, mental or other harm from partners or family members through physical abuse, restriction of personal freedom, or frequent verbal abuse and intimidation.
Hopefully, the Provisions will help courts issue orders more efficiently to ensure victims being protected timely.
