"Ordering" to say "no" to domestic violence

On August 1, the "Provisions on the Supreme People's Court on the Application of Laws on the Application of the Personal Safety Protection Order" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations") was officially implemented. Tower area's first application for personal safety protection order.

On August 1, the Yanta District Court received an application for the applicant Ma, saying that he had suffered domestic violence, and he and his relatives were facing the danger of domestic violence and specially protecting the court's personal safety protection order.

After receiving the case, the organizer Lei Jun considers that summoning the parties may cause conflict at the same time, so he asked the applicant and the respondent to come to the court to state their own facts and reasons, and provide evidence materials.

Combined with the evidence provided by the two parties, especially the contents of the WeChat chat records of the two parties can prove that the respondent has the spiritual infringement of regular insults, threats, and harassment. Jun believes that applicants have a real danger of domestic violence. The respondent argued that the applicant also had faults in family life. According to Article 8 of the Regulations, the respondent recognized the existence of domestic violence, but argued that the applicant had faults and did not affect the people's court to make personal safety in accordance with the law to make personal safety in accordance with the law. Protection order. Lei Jun made a civil ruling in a timely manner, ruled that the respondent was prohibited from being beaten, threatened, harassing, tracking the applicant and its related relatives, and the ruling was given to the two parties and the police stations and communities in the area and their jurisdictions.

Lei Jun also faces the response to the respondent to be in violation of the personal safety protection order to face Article 11 and 12 of Article 11 and 12 of the Regulations. Article 11 of the "Regulations" states that in the case of divorce, after the judgment is not allowed to divorce or mediate, if the respondent violates the personal safety protection order to implement domestic violence, it may be identified as Article 127 of the Civil Procedure Law. Seven items stipulated "new situations and reasons". In other words, if the respondent's violation of personal safety protection order still implements domestic violence on the applicant, the applicant may sue again, and the court will accept it. Article 12 states that if the respondent violates the personal safety protection order and complies with the provisions of Article 313 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, in order to refuse to implement the judgment and the crime and punishment; Criminal law shall be dealt with. The respondent deeply recognized the deterrence of personal safety protection orders and promised not to implement domestic violence. (Source: Western Legal System News) (Pictures from the Internet)

- END -