Stalking under Dutch law: protection, evidence and defence

Stalking under Dutch law is a criminal offence known as belaging, laid down in article 285b of the Dutch Criminal Code (Wetboek van Strafrecht, Sr). It covers anyone who unlawfully, systematically and intentionally invades another person’s private life with the aim of forcing that person to do something, to refrain from doing something or to tolerate something, or of instilling fear. The maximum penalty is three years’ imprisonment or a fourth-category fine, and the public prosecutor may only prosecute if the victim files a formal complaint. Alongside the criminal route, a victim can ask the civil court in summary proceedings for a contact ban and an area ban reinforced by a penalty payment.

What counts as stalking under Dutch law

Article 285b Sr does not describe individual acts. It describes a pattern. That pattern only becomes the offence of belaging when four requirements are met at the same time, and the public prosecutor has to prove each of them:

• the conduct is unlawful, meaning there is no justification such as a professional duty or an ongoing legal dispute that makes the contact legitimate;
• the conduct is systematic, so a single message or one unwanted visit is not enough;
• the conduct is intentional and invades the private life of the other person; and
• the person acted with a specific aim: to force the other to do something, not to do something or to tolerate something, or to instil fear.

Because these conditions are cumulative, most stalking cases are won or lost on one of them rather than on the facts as such. A defence that succeeds usually shows that the contacts were too few and too scattered to be systematic, or that the aim required by the statute is missing.

When is behaviour systematic enough

Systematic means a coherent pattern, not a fixed number of incidents. The Dutch courts weigh the nature, duration, frequency and intensity of the conduct together with the circumstances in which it took place and the effect it had on the victim’s personal life and personal freedom. Ten short messages sent in one evening after a break-up are judged differently from ten messages spread over two years, and a combination of different behaviours weighs heavier than repetition of a single one.

That is why the mix matters. Repeated calls on their own may fall short, but calls combined with waiting outside a workplace, contacting family members and creating new accounts after each block will normally be enough. Duration is the second lever: conduct that has continued for weeks or months, and that starts again after a clear request to stop, is far more likely to be qualified as belaging than a short burst of contact in an emotional period.

The intent requirement: oogmerk

The statute demands an oogmerk, a specific aim. The person must have acted in order to force the victim to do something, to refrain from something or to tolerate something, or in order to instil fear. It is not necessary that the victim actually gave in or was actually frightened; what counts is the aim behind the conduct. In practice the court infers that aim from the conduct itself, on the reasoning that behaviour of this kind is generally suited to provoke exactly that reaction. Messages that combine pleading with threats, or contact that continues after an explicit demand to stop, are the classic examples.

How common is stalking in the Netherlands

Stalking is not a marginal problem. According to the Veiligheidsmonitor 2023 published by Statistics Netherlands (CBS), around 225,000 people aged fifteen or older were victims of stalking in 2023: roughly 137,000 women and 90,000 men, or about two per cent of that age group. CBS also found that women knew their stalker in about two thirds of cases, most often a current or former partner, a neighbour or another acquaintance. That is the practical reality behind most files: the parties have a history, which makes both the evidence and the protective measures more complicated than in cases involving a stranger.

Online stalking and the offences that often run alongside it

Stalking has largely moved online, and article 285b Sr applies to digital conduct in exactly the same way as to physical following. Persistent messages across several platforms, new accounts opened after every block, monitoring through location sharing or tracking software, and posts aimed at the victim’s employer or family all count as invasions of private life. Reading the case as a whole matters here: individually the messages may look trivial, and only the pattern shows what is happening.

Online cases also tend to involve more than one offence. Explicit threats fall under article 285 Sr. Breaking into an email account, a cloud account or a social media profile is computer trespass under article 138ab Sr. Damaging statements presented as fact can amount to defamation under articles 261 and 262 Sr. Where the conduct is aimed at reputation rather than contact, the civil route is often the faster one; we set out those options in our article on cyberbullying and online reputation damage. Choosing the right combination early is important, because each route has its own evidence and its own timetable.

Filing a complaint: the deadline that decides the criminal route

Belaging is a complaint offence. Under article 285b paragraph 2 Sr the public prosecutor may not prosecute unless the victim files a formal complaint, in which the victim expressly asks for prosecution. That is more than reporting the facts to the police, and the two are regularly confused at the counter. Under article 66 Sr the complaint must be filed within three months of the day on which the person entitled to complain became aware of the offence. Miss that window and the criminal route closes, however strong the evidence is.

The offence itself becomes time-barred after six years under article 70 Sr, because the maximum sentence does not exceed three years. In a continuing pattern the period runs from the last act, which is one reason to keep recording incidents even after the first complaint. Withdrawing a complaint does not automatically end a prosecution that has already started, although the prosecutor will take it into account.

Which protective orders can stop the contact

The fastest protection usually comes before any trial. Under article 509hh of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Wetboek van Strafvordering, Sv) the public prosecutor can impose a behavioural instruction on a suspect: a contact ban, an area ban, a duty to report to the police, or an instruction to accept assistance. It applies for a maximum of ninety days and can be extended three times, up to 360 days in total, and the suspect can put it before the district court. If the suspect is arrested and pre-trial detention is suspended, the court can attach the same kind of conditions to that suspension, and at sentencing a suspended sentence can carry a contact ban as a special condition. The court can also impose the freedom-restricting measure of article 38v Sr, which allows an area ban, a contact ban or a reporting duty for a longer period, enforced by detention if it is breached.

Where the parties share or shared a household, the mayor can impose a temporary domestic exclusion order under the Wet tijdelijk huisverbod. It removes the person from the home for ten days and can be extended to twenty-eight days, which buys time to arrange further measures.

The civil route runs in parallel and does not depend on the police. In summary proceedings under article 254 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Rv) the preliminary relief judge can impose a contact ban and an area ban on the basis of unlawful act, article 6:162 of the Civil Code (BW), and attach a penalty payment under article 611a Rv so that every breach costs money immediately. This is often the more effective instrument when the criminal file is still thin, and it can be combined with a claim for damages. What victims can claim after a criminal case is set out in our guide to victims’ rights in Dutch civil law.

Evidence: what actually convinces the police and the court

Stalking files stand or fall on documentation, because the pattern is the offence. Keep a single chronological log in which every incident is recorded with the date, the time, the place, what happened and who else saw it. Save messages as full screenshots that show the sender, the time stamp and the surrounding conversation rather than the one sentence that looks worst, and request call records from your provider before they are deleted. Statements from colleagues, neighbours and family who saw the same person in the same place repeatedly carry real weight, as do camera images and delivery records for unwanted gifts.

Two practical warnings. First, do not gather evidence unlawfully: placing a tracker on someone else’s car or accessing their accounts turns a victim into a suspect and taints the file. Second, do not answer. Any reply, even a hostile one, is used to argue that contact was mutual and that the conduct was neither unwanted nor systematic. Route contact through your lawyer instead and keep the log running.

If you are accused of stalking

Being reported for belaging does not mean a conviction follows. The prosecution has to prove the full pattern, the invasion of private life and the aim behind it, and it can only start the case at all if a valid complaint was filed in time. A serious defence therefore begins with the file rather than with the accusation: how many contacts were there really, over what period, who initiated them, and was there a legitimate reason such as a shared child, a business dispute or a joint property.

The most common defences are that the contacts were too few or too scattered to be systematic, that the required aim is absent because the messages concerned an existing legal or family matter, and that the case is in fact an escalated conflict in which both sides made contact. From the first day, follow one rule without exception: no contact, direct or indirect, and no messages through friends or family. A breach of a behavioural instruction or of a court condition damages the defence more than the original allegation. Our criminal law guides explain how a Dutch criminal case proceeds from the first interview onwards.

What to do now

If you are being stalked, start the log today and set a reminder for the three-month complaint deadline, counted from the moment you understood what was happening. Report the matter to the police and state explicitly that you are filing a complaint and asking for prosecution, and ask for the report number. Tell the people around you, including your employer and your children’s school, so that the stalker cannot use them as a channel. Then decide, preferably with a lawyer, whether the criminal route, summary civil proceedings or both together fit your situation, because a contact ban with a penalty payment can often be obtained in a matter of weeks.

If you have been accused, do not try to explain yourself to the other party or to the police without advice. Collect your own version of the timeline, including messages that show who initiated contact, and comply with every condition imposed on you while the case is assessed.

Law and More acts for both victims and suspects in stalking cases. We assess the file, secure or challenge the evidence, apply for or contest contact and area bans, and represent you before the criminal and civil courts. If you are dealing with belaging, or with an accusation of it, contact our office to discuss your position.

Frequently asked questions