Who may impose a provisional measure against a stalking actor, on what finding, and what does such a measure reach?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file of this kind, we read the court record for the stalking offence to see whether an investigation or trial is under way, the papers setting out how the victim needs protection, and the court's written ruling naming which measure was imposed and on whom.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading takes the provision as written: the court, finding it necessary for the smooth investigation and adjudication of the stalking offence or for the protection of the victim, may by ruling impose on the stalking actor a written warning, an approach ban, a ban on telecommunication-based approach, attachment of a location-tracking electronic device, or detention in a police lock-up or detention house.
The provision does not identify who brings the matter before the court, but it provides some guidance on assessing the grounds: before ordering electronic-device attachment or detention, the court may, if it considers this necessary to assess those grounds, hear the prosecutor, the stalking actor, the victim, or other persons who may provide relevant information; the methods, procedures, and other necessary matters are prescribed by Supreme Court Rules.
Your judgment
If the ruling records only that a measure was needed, what in the file could show which of the two stated grounds — the investigation and trial, or the victim's protection — the court relied on?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change who may seek a measure or to add a type of measure, or if a court decision sets out what the necessity finding must rest on.