NSW Is this a gag order?

[Weblight Studio]

The tenant and blogger has been recording constant harassment and discrimination by contractors and Family and Community Services Staff. They have done things like insist the security guard that was on the premises was to intimidate them.
An incident prompted an attempt to evict the blogger but it failed and the orders from NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal included this 3. The Tenant must comply with the terms of residential tenancy agreement by not threatening, abusing, intimidating or harassing any employee or contractor of the landlord
2. If these orders are not complied with by the tenant then: at any time before 23-Oct-2018 the landlord may request the re-listing of this application to determine whether the tenancy should be terminated.

The tenat's lawyer and the NCAT member showed great concern about the term "harassing" as well as the range of people the order now protected. The tenant has anti-discrimination cases pending on several and may now face eviction for raising them. He has protected himself from ongoing persecution by videoing and incidents and writing in a long term journal what is happening and who is doing it.

This appears to be a gag of a persons right to write about themselves and even to use legal options by a backdoor method.

 

[Rod]

No. The NCAT order will not prevent someone exercising their legal rights or from protecting them.

The difficulty is that this will be judged according to the standards of an ordinary person, not the emotionally charged protagonists. So if the person wanting to protect their rights does so in a manner that is harassing they are likely to be evicted.

Publishing a journal online may well be a form of harassment. There is no need to make the material public for the protection of legal interests. If you don't grasp the nuances between harassment and protection of own legal interests then I suspect an eviction notice will come sooner rather than later.

 

[Weblight Studio]

That is my concern. I keep offering the fact that if it isnt happening to me I am not writing it but they have indicated some outrage that a resident and disabled person would publish a view that was contrary to the one they wished to see. I think there are some political interests being forced into the equation. My concern is that governments need to see only their own versions of things reflected back at them but now begin to gag residents in the growing social housing market

The journal has more than 1500 entries and has been online for ten years and my right to create it and write about thing happening to me as a poor artist has been under question though various methods all that time

Thanks for the reply