By Mike Bain/cvnznews.com
A survivor‑advocacy organisation is warning that New Zealand’s new anti‑stalking legislation may unintentionally hinder those working to expose institutional abuse and pursue public‑interest accountability.
The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests Aotearoa (SNAP Aotearoa) says aspects of the law are drafted so broadly that they could be used against survivors, whistle‑blowers, journalists, and advocacy groups engaged in legitimate scrutiny of powerful institutions. The organisation argues that repeated communication, public criticism, or coordinated advocacy over a two‑year period could be misinterpreted as stalking‑related behaviour.
The network notes that survivor‑led accountability efforts often involve sustained communication with churches, government agencies, and care providers, as well as media engagement and coordinated survivor action. It fears these activities could be chilled if institutions attempt to characterise them as causing “fear or distress”.
“Survivors of institutional abuse already face enormous barriers when speaking publicly or seeking accountability,” spokesperson Barbara Taylor said. “There is concern that laws drafted too broadly could create a chilling effect for survivors, journalists, whistle‑blowers, and advocacy groups engaged in legitimate public‑interest activity.”
The organisation is also questioning the use of police‑issued warning notices under the legislation, saying they could be misapplied in situations involving public criticism or investigative reporting. It is seeking clarity on what safeguards exist to prevent the law being used to suppress lawful advocacy.
The network is calling for transparency around who was consulted during development of the Bill, including whether survivor groups, civil‑liberties organisations, or investigative journalists were involved — and whether religious institutions or organisations currently facing abuse‑related scrutiny made submissions.
While emphasising that protecting victims of genuine stalking is essential, the organisation says the law must also protect democratic freedoms, survivor advocacy, and public‑interest journalism.
“It would be a profound irony if legislation inspired by the experiences of vulnerable victims ultimately created new risks for those trying to expose wrongdoing,” Taylor said.
The network is urging the Government to provide clearer public‑interest protections, stronger safeguards for survivor advocacy, and ongoing independent oversight of how the law is applied.
