Short answer. Yes. The Act directs the court to allow the introduction of any history of abusive conduct by the respondent, even where that conduct was not directed against the applicant or against the person on whose behalf the application was made. The door is opened by the statute itself.

What the law says

The court shall allow the introduction of any history of abusive conduct of a respondent even if the same was not directed against the applicant or the person for whom the applicant is made.

RA 9262, Section 16 — Permanent Protection Orders. Read the full provision →

The wording is deliberately wide

Three phrases do the work. Shall allow makes it a direction to the court rather than a discretion to be argued for. Any history is not confined to conduct of the same kind or the same period. And the closing clause removes the objection that would otherwise be obvious — that evidence about someone else has nothing to do with this application. The provision anticipates that objection and answers it in advance, which is why it is worth knowing the sentence exists before the hearing.

Why a statute would say this

Because a first incident against you is often not a first incident. Conduct towards a previous partner, towards children, or towards relatives can show a pattern that a single account cannot, and an ordinary reluctance to admit evidence about other people would keep the pattern out of the room. The provision reflects a judgement that in this class of case the history is relevant to what the court is deciding, and it applies whether or not the respondent turns up to contest anything.

It opens the door; it does not fill the room

This is the practical limit to understand. The provision is about what the court will admit, not about who will come and say it. Somebody still has to give the account, from their own knowledge, and be willing to appear. So the useful preparation is working out who can speak to what — a former partner, a relative, a neighbour who was there — and what documents exist independently of anyone's memory. Bring it to counsel early rather than raising it for the first time at the hearing.

The setting the rule operates in

A permanent order is issued after notice and hearing, and the Act tells the court to conduct that hearing in one day so far as possible. The respondent's non-appearance despite proper notice, his lack of a lawyer, or his lawyer's unavailability are not grounds to postpone it; where he fails to appear the court allows the applicant to present evidence ex parte and decides on the evidence presented. Records of these cases are confidential, which matters if the people you are asking to speak are worried about exposure.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.