Father to continue battle against protection order

AN ESTRANGED father of five has pledged to go to the Supreme Court after losing his High Court challenge to the constitutionality of protection orders in family disputes.

The man, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, argues sections of the Domestic Violence Act allowing the making of such orders are an attack on the family and therefore a breach of the constitution in which the family unit is afforded special protection.

He is seeking to quash a protection order made against him by the district court following the breakdown of his relationship with his wife, who wanted to end the home-schooling arrangement they had for their older children and send the two youngest to local schools instead.

The dispute deepened when the father tried to remove the two youngest children from the care of his mother-in-law and older children who were looking after them while his wife was abroad visiting a relative with cancer. Their father had questioned the suitability of the arrangement.

In the meantime, the mother applied for and received a protection order while her husband was out of the country.

A protection order is a temporary measure which does not restrict the movements or access of an individual but puts them on notice that they will be asked to attend court in the future to argue why a more serious safety order should not be made against them.

The father argued the protection order was an interference in his attempts to keep his family together and should never have been issued.

However, in his judgement on the challenge, Judge Peter Charleton said the protection order was simply a notice to the father that his wife intended taking further court action and he should not have felt his constitutional rights infringed by it.

“The making of a protection order is not a stain against someone’s character,” he said.

Judge Charleton said it would not prejudice any future court hearing and no hearing would take place without the father having his side of the story heard: “There is nothing to suggest that fair procedures were not applied in this case.”

The father is being supported by the voluntary group, Family Rights Institute of Ireland, which says his case has wide significance. Roger Eldridge, executive director of the institute, said they were disappointed but not deterred by the High Court ruling.

“It’s very unsatisfactory when an ordinary father has to go to all this trouble and expense to fight for the protections the constitution already affords him.

“The judgement... failed to discuss at all the central issue, that the Domestic Violence Act is unconstitutional, but it will be appealed to the Supreme Court and it will be resolved in time. We are confident of that.”