What is the Definition of an Cyberstalking? Explaining the Criteria for Police Intervention

In recent years, there has been a surge in cases where individuals are subject to persistent contact or harassment driven by romantic feelings from former partners or complete strangers. Such stalking behavior, if left unchecked, can lead to irreversible damage, necessitating early intervention.

According to the Japanese National Police Agency’s Response to Stalking Cases (please note that this article is in Japanese), the number of consultations related to stalking in 2021 (Gregorian calendar year) was 19,728. Although this number is on a downward trend, it remains at a high level.

Furthermore, the number of arrests for violations of the “Japanese Anti-Stalking Act” in 2021 was 937, a decrease from the previous year, but still maintaining a high level.

As such, stalking behavior is widely recognized as a social issue, and there are not a few people who have actually been victimized.

Especially with the proliferation of social networking services (SNS), stalking behavior using different methods from traditional ones (net stalking) has become prominent, and in response, the “Japanese Anti-Stalking Law” has been revised in recent years.

In this article, we will explain the outline of the “Japanese Anti-Stalking Law” and how to confront the increasingly prevalent issue of “net stalking”.

Definition of Cyberstalking

Cyberstalking refers to the act of persistently pursuing a specific individual, often driven by romantic feelings, by misusing internet platforms such as social networking sites and email. This is considered a form of cybercrime.

Actions that constitute cyberstalking are not just sending messages via e-mail to a specific person, but also include actions such as;

• Identifying and disclosing personal information such as addresses and photographs
• Posting defamatory comments on internet forums

These various acts are regulated by the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law.

What is the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law?

The Japanese Anti-Stalking Law (officially known as “The Act on the Regulation of Stalking Acts”) was established in 2000, triggered by the “Okegawa Stalker Murder Case” in 1999 (Heisei 11).

Okegawa Stalker Murder Case
A female university student (21 years old at the time) who was being stalked by her ex-boyfriend (27 years old at the time) and his group, was stabbed to death in broad daylight by the stalker group, including the ex-boyfriend’s real brother.

The victim’s family had repeatedly reported the stalking behavior to the Ageo Police Station for more than four months before the murder occurred, and even filed a complaint against the perpetrator group. However, the Ageo Police Station did not take the matter seriously. The family criticized the police, saying, “Our daughter was killed by the perpetrator and the police.”

Before the enactment of the Anti-Stalking Law, stalking behavior itself was not regulated, and perpetrators were only arrested when they committed threats, assaults, or home invasions.

Therefore, even if a person felt in danger due to a stalker and consulted the police, the police could not effectively respond to the situation.

What is “Stalking”?

Under the Anti-Stalking Law, the following actions committed with the purpose of “satisfying feelings of love, other positive feelings, or resentment for not having these feelings fulfilled” towards a specific person are prohibited as “stalking”:

1. Following, ambushing, forcing oneself on, loitering, etc.
2. Informing that one is being watched, etc.
3. Requesting meetings or relationships, etc.
4. Violent behavior, etc.
5. Making silent phone calls, repeatedly calling after being rejected, sending faxes, emails, SNS messages, etc.
6. Sending filth, etc.
7. Informing of matters that harm one’s reputation, etc.
8. Informing of matters that harm one’s sexual modesty, etc.

Stalking is an act that should be dealt with strictly from the early stages as it has a high potential to escalate into serious incidents.

However, it would be problematic if one were accused of being a stalker simply for repeatedly contacting someone to ask for repayment of a loan or execution of agreed matters. Therefore, under the Anti-Stalking Law, an act is considered “stalking” only if it is committed with the purpose of “satisfying feelings of love, other positive feelings, or resentment for not having these feelings fulfilled” towards a specific person.

What is “Unauthorized Acquisition of Location Information”?

Under the Anti-Stalking Law, the following actions committed with the purpose of “satisfying feelings of love, other positive feelings, or resentment for not having these feelings fulfilled” towards a specific person are prohibited as “unauthorized acquisition of location information”:

This “unauthorized acquisition of location information” was added by a legal amendment in 2021 (Reiwa 3).

1. Acquiring location information through GPS devices, etc., without consent
2. Installing GPS devices, etc., without consent

For example, actions such as using a location information app installed on the victim’s smartphone without permission to obtain their location information, or attaching a GPS device to the victim’s car, fall under “unauthorized acquisition of location information”.

What is “Stalking Behavior”?

Under the Anti-Stalking Law, “stalking behavior” is defined as repeatedly committing acts that fall under “stalking” or “unauthorized acquisition of location information”, and penalties are provided for such behavior.

However, it should be noted that among the “stalking” acts, acts such as ambushing, violent behavior, and continuous email sending after rejection (the acts mentioned in 1 to 4 and 5 (only email and SNS sending) above) are considered “stalking behavior” only when they are committed in a way that “causes fear of harm to physical safety, peace of residence, or honor, or significantly impairs freedom of action”, even if they are repeated.

Amendments to the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law

The Japanese Anti-Stalking Law, which was enacted in response to the “Okegawa Stalker Murder Case,” has been amended over time, particularly in response to the rise of so-called “internet stalking” that has become prominent with the development of the internet.

Amendments to the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law in July 2013

When the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law was established in 2000, “stalking” did not include methods such as sending emails.

However, the “Zushi Stalker Murder Case” in 2012 led to the inclusion of email transmission in the definition of “stalking.”

Zushi Stalker Murder Case
On November 6, 2012, a freelance designer woman (33 at the time) was stabbed to death in an apartment in Zushi City, Kanagawa Prefecture, and the perpetrator, her ex-boyfriend (40 at the time), also committed suicide by hanging.

The two had been dating since around 2004, but broke up around April 2006. The victim woman moved to Zushi City after marrying another man in the summer of 2008. She had kept her new surname and address hidden from the perpetrator, but he began to send her harassing emails after knowing about her marriage from her frequent Facebook posts about her newlywed life around April 2010. The emails escalated, and in April 2011, she received 80 to 100 threatening emails a day, such as “I will stab you to death,” prompting her to consult the police. The perpetrator was arrested on suspicion of intimidation in June of the same year, and in September, he was sentenced to one year in prison with a three-year suspended sentence. Despite this, the victim woman received a total of 1,089 harassing emails from late March to early April 2012. She consulted the police, but they declined to press charges, saying the act did not constitute a crime. The perpetrator, using detectives and other means, located the victim woman’s address, leading to the incident in November.

Amendments to the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law in December 2016

With the development of social networking services (SNS) such as LINE and Twitter, more people began to use SNS to communicate with friends and acquaintances than email.

However, stalking activities through SNS were considered separate from the “email transmission” added in the July 2013 amendment and were not regulated by the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law.

However, the “Koganei Stalker Attempted Murder Case” in 2016 led to the inclusion of continuous message sending on SNS such as Twitter and LINE, and persistent posting on personal blogs in the definition of “stalking.”

Koganei Stalker Attempted Murder Case
An attempted murder case that occurred in Koganei City, Tokyo, on May 21, 2016.

A man (28 at the time) who claimed to be a fan repeatedly stalked a female university student (20 at the time) who was involved in entertainment activities on SNS such as Twitter, and tried to stab her to death at a live house in Koganei City. The man, a company employee living in Kyoto, tried to contact the female university student on Twitter, but received no reply. He demanded that she and her associates return the presents he had unilaterally sent. However, he became enraged when the the female university student returned a wristwatch he had sent as a gift, and started planning to kill her. After the wristwatch was returned, his posts became even more extreme.

Amendments to the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law in May 2021

In recent years, there have been frequent cases of stalking where GPS devices are installed without permission on the cars of ex-partners and others to track their whereabouts. In response to this, the May 2021 amendment added a new category of behavior called “unauthorized acquisition of location information,” which was newly added to the regulated behaviors.

In addition, despite being rejected, the act of continuously sending documents such as letters, and the act of watching or loitering near the actual location of the victim in addition to places where the victim usually is, such as school, workplace, and residence, were newly added as behaviors that constitute “stalking.”

Warnings and Prohibition Orders under the Japanese Anti-Stalking Act

When “stalking” occurs, it is investigated and apprehended by the police based on the victim’s complaint.

However, for “persistent following” and “unauthorized acquisition of location information,” which do not amount to stalking, immediate apprehension does not occur.

Nevertheless, at the victim’s request, the police can issue a “warning” to the perpetrator not to repeat such actions. Also, if the victim requests a prohibition order, the police can implement a “prohibition order” after following certain procedures. Violation of a “prohibition order” will lead to apprehension. Therefore, a “prohibition order” is considered a measure taken before stages such as arrest.

Penalties for Stalking

Penalties are imposed under the Japanese Anti-Stalking Act for those who engage in stalking or violate restraining orders and continue to stalk.

Article 18: A person who has engaged in stalking shall be punished by imprisonment for up to one year or a fine of up to one million yen.

Article 19: A person who has violated a restraining order (limited to those pertaining to Article 5, Paragraph 1, Item 1) and engaged in stalking shall be punished by imprisonment for up to two years or a fine of up to two million yen.

2 In addition to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, a person who has engaged in stalking by violating a restraining order and persistently following or obtaining location information without consent shall be treated in the same manner as the preceding paragraph.

Furthermore, with the amendment in 2016 (Heisei 28), the provision making it a complaint-based crime was removed, allowing for prosecution even without a complaint from the victim.

Criteria for Police Intervention in Cases of Cyberstalking

If you fall victim to cyberstalking, it is crucial to consult with the police without hesitation.

However, there are certain points to keep in mind for the police to respond effectively to stalking behavior. Here, we introduce two key points.

Sufficient Evidence is Available

Firstly, to make it clear to the police that you are indeed a victim of cyberstalking, you need to prepare objective evidence.

For instance, screenshots of messages sent by the perpetrator through email or social media, and data of posted images or videos can be considered.

Especially in cases of cyberstalking through messages, it is important to have evidence that shows the victim has rejected the messages, yet they are still being sent repeatedly.

There is Urgency

Also, cyberstalking through social media is considered “stalking behavior” only when it is carried out in a manner that “causes fear of physical safety, disturbance of residence or honor, or significant restriction of freedom of action”.

Therefore, it is important to clarify that the actual cyberstalking behavior is causing the victim to feel anxious, and that it is an urgent situation that requires immediate police intervention.

Specifically, if persistent messages soliciting a relationship are sent via social media despite rejection, or if posts are made as if the victim is being monitored, it is important to explain specifically that this has made it difficult to go out, causing negative effects on daily life, and that the victim feels a threat to their personal safety.

When to Consult a Lawyer About Cyberstalking

If you are a victim of cyberstalking, it can be difficult to resolve the situation on your own. Moreover, if the victim ignores the harassment, the cyberstalking behavior may escalate.

Therefore, it is important to first consult with the police. If the behavior is abnormal, it is crucial to file a complaint and clearly express your intention to seek punishment.

When the Police Do Not Respond

Even if you consult with the police, they may not respond if they judge that there is no criminality, or if they cannot apply the Japanese Anti-Stalking Law.

Furthermore, there are perpetrators who ignore “warnings” or “prohibition orders” from the police and continue their stalking behavior.

If you are not satisfied with the response from the police, it is effective to consult with a lawyer who specializes in internet troubles and consider specific countermeasures.

When Taking Legal Action

If the cyberstalker posts defamatory comments on social media, it is common to request the removal of such posts. In this case, you can consider requesting the removal of the post through a lawyer to the social media operator.

In addition, you may also claim damages against the cyberstalker in addition to their punishment. As there is a possibility that this could lead to specific negotiations or litigation, it is advisable to consult with a lawyer.

Especially on social media, where messages can be sent anonymously, it is necessary to specifically identify the perpetrator’s name, etc., in order to claim damages.

When Settling with the Stalker

If it goes to court, the perpetrator may offer to settle. It can be a great burden for the victim to conduct this settlement negotiation themselves. Therefore, it is better to leave it to a lawyer.

Conclusion: Consult a Lawyer for Cyberstalking Cases

If you are a victim of cyberstalking through social media or other online platforms, it is crucial to take immediate action such as consulting with the police. Ignoring the situation despite being victimized can potentially escalate the stalker’s actions.

However, even if you consult with the police, if the victim’s situation and intentions are not clearly stated, there is a chance that they may not be able to take sufficient action.

To clearly demonstrate that you are a victim of stalking, you may need advice on:

• What to preserve as evidence
• How to explain the situation to the police
• What to do to prevent further victimization

If you need specific advice on these matters, please do not hesitate to consult with a specialized lawyer.

Introduction to Our Firm’s Measures

Monolith Law Office is a legal office with high expertise in both IT, particularly the Internet, and law. If stalking damage intensifies, there is a risk that personal information and unfounded slander may spread on the Internet.

This kind of damage is becoming a major issue as a “Digital Tattoo”. Our firm provides solutions for dealing with “Digital Tattoos”.