The Republic of New Zealand Party

Why would men make a public display of burning protection orders. After all, they protect victims and vulnerable people from abusers don’t they?

Well, there’s no good evidence they protect anyone actually. But they definitely do abandon fundamental principles of justice. They treat an accused as guilty until he can convince a Court he is innocent. They dispose of fair trials and any need for reasonable proof before punishing someone. And they abuse children by automatically depriving them of an adequate relationship (and often of all contact) with one of their parents, almost always the father, regardless of whether or not there is any evidence that he presents a risk to those children. They also bring about ridiculous state abuses such as imprisoning fathers for the heinous crime of waving at their children when they happen to see them riding past in a car. They arbitrarily define whoever applies for them first as “the victim” and the poor sod who is targeted as “the abuser”, even though good research makes it clear that domestic violence is usually a two-way street. They are used, and invite themselves to be used, as weapons in disputes over custody or property, and as a convenient way of kicking one’s partner out of his own home when you are bored with him. What’s more, they prevent many couples and ex couples from venting their feelings and opinions and from working through their conflicts, making those conflicts more bitter and longer-lasting. This does provide lucrative work for lawyers though.

Protection orders are travesties of justice. In their current form they are not o.k. ever, because they contravene basic justice and cause more damage to relationships than they ever prevent.

That’s why Hamilton will see our first ever public burning of protection orders this Saturday 26th July, in Garden Place in the centre of Hamilton city at 11:00am. It is organized by the Republic of New Zealand Party who assert that children need both parents whether living together or apart, and that the state should interfere in parent-child relationships only where there is very good evidence this is necessary and beneficial.
Ends