Stalking in Poland means persistent harassment of another person or a person close to them, which, in the circumstances, gives rise to a justified sense of threat, humiliation or torment, or significantly violates the victim’s privacy. This is how Article 190a of the Polish Criminal Code describes the offence [1]. In practice, stalking may involve both private conduct and situations occurring in a professional environment: harassment of an employee, management board member, shareholder, journalist, whistleblower, contractor or a person involved in court proceedings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Persistent harassment cases require a calm assessment of the facts. Not every unwanted behaviour is a criminal offence. The key factors are repetition, intensity, context and the impact of the perpetrator’s conduct on the victim. In business cases, reputation, organisational security, employee relations and the risk of conflict escalation are also important.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The basis for criminal liability is Article 190a of the Polish Criminal Code<\/strong>. This provision covers several types of conduct. The most frequently analysed provision is Article 190a \u00a7 1 of the Criminal Code, which concerns persistent harassment. Liability may arise when the following elements occur jointly:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Persistent harassment can take many forms: repeated phone calls, messages, visits at the workplace or place of residence, surveillance, publishing content online, creating fake profiles, or contacting the victim’s family, clients or employer. In a corporate context, seemingly case-related actions are also common, such as pressure on witnesses, harassment of former employees or using business communication channels to escalate a private conflict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Separately, Article 190a \u00a7 2 of the Criminal Code criminalises impersonating another person by using their image, personal data or other data by which that person is publicly identified, if the purpose is to cause that person financial or personal harm [1]. This may include fake social media accounts, impersonation in email correspondence or using the data of a person from a company in dealings with contractors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The penalty for stalking<\/strong> is most often imprisonment from 6 months to 8 years for an offence under Article 190a \u00a7 1 of the Criminal Code. The same penalty range applies to impersonation under Article 190a \u00a7 2 of the Criminal Code [1]. If the consequence of the offence is that the injured party attempts to take their own life, liability is more severe and ranges from 2 to 15 years’ imprisonment under Article 190a \u00a7 3 of the Criminal Code [1].<\/p>\n\n\n\n The sentence depends on the circumstances of the specific case. Relevant factors may include the duration of the harassment, the number of incidents, the use of personal data, violation of the sanctity of the home, online publications, actions directed at the family, the impact on the victim’s health and any breach of employment or contractual duties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Criminal proceedings may also involve preventive and protective measures, including Police supervision, a ban on contact, a restraining order or an order to periodically leave premises occupied jointly with the injured party – in the cases provided for in the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure [2]. The choice of measure depends on the actual risk to the injured party and on the evidence gathered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Evidence in a stalking case<\/strong> should show a pattern of behaviour, its repetition and its impact on the injured party. A single item of evidence rarely determines the outcome of the case. Usually, the entire sequence of events is significant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In practice, the following may be useful:<\/p>\n\n\n\n In organisations, it is important to secure evidence in a way that does not breach personal data protection rules or the secrecy of correspondence. Access to business mailboxes, CCTV or system logs should be based on a legal ground, internal policies and the data minimisation principle under the GDPR [3]. Improperly obtained material may weaken its evidential value in proceedings or create separate legal risks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A practical discussion of the elements of this offence is also available in the KKZ material on what constitutes the offence of persistent harassment<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As a rule, offences under Article 190a \u00a7 1 and \u00a7 2 of the Criminal Code are prosecuted upon a motion by the injured party [1]. This means that law enforcement authorities need a formal motion in order to conduct proceedings. The motion may be submitted together with a notification of suspected commission of an offence. The aggravated type under Article 190a \u00a7 3 of the Criminal Code is prosecuted ex officio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The procedure usually includes the following stages:<\/p>\n\n\n\n In corporate cases, the criminal procedure should be coordinated with internal actions. This is particularly important where the perpetrator or the injured party is an employee, manager, contractor or person performing a public function. Issues related to employment law, protection of personal rights, breach of trade secrets, cybersecurity or disciplinary liability may arise in parallel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Persistent harassment in the workplace may overlap with workplace bullying, discrimination, an employee conflict or infringement of personal rights. Not every action by a supervisor or co-worker meets the elements of a criminal offence. The assessment depends on the facts, the intensity of the conduct, the perpetrator’s purpose and the effect on the injured party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In business disputes, stalking can be used as a tool of pressure against management board members, company owners, attorneys, witnesses or persons responsible for compliance. It may also occur alongside online defamation, publication of data, impersonation or a reputation-damaging campaign. In such cases, it is important to quickly separate facts, assessments and hypotheses, and to prepare a coherent litigation strategy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Support in matters requiring criminal law<\/a> assistance includes not only filing a notification of an offence, but also analysing evidence, assessing risks for the organisation and representing the injured party or the suspect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The safest course of action is to document incidents, limit informal reactions and obtain a prompt legal assessment. It is advisable to avoid impulsive correspondence, public accusations without securing evidence and retaliatory actions. In employment relationships, confidentiality and equal treatment of the parties should also be maintained until the matter is clarified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This material is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every stalking case requires an analysis of the specific conduct, evidence and effects on the injured party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If the situation requires an assessment of whether the conduct meets the elements of persistent harassment and what procedural steps are justified, Kope\u0107 & Zaborowski law firm can analyse the case after contact through the KKZ<\/a> website.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As a rule, stalking requires persistence, meaning repetition, long duration or particular intensity of repeated conduct. A single message is usually not enough, although it may constitute another violation of the law, depending on its content and context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is not always only about fear. Article 190a \u00a7 1 of the Criminal Code also covers a justified sense of humiliation or torment, as well as a significant violation of privacy [1].<\/p>\n\n\n\n Offences under Article 190a \u00a7 1 and \u00a7 2 of the Criminal Code are prosecuted upon a motion by the injured party. The aggravated type under Article 190a \u00a7 3 of the Criminal Code, connected with the injured party attempting to take their own life, is prosecuted ex officio [1].<\/p>\n\n\n\n The most important factor is a coherent set of evidence showing the sequence of events: messages, calls, online posts, recordings, witness testimony, medical records and incident notes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes. In criminal proceedings, it is possible to apply for preventive measures, including a ban on contact or a restraining order, if justified by the circumstances of the case and the conditions set out in the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure [2].<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes. Certain conduct may be assessed in parallel under criminal law and employment law. However, this does not automatically mean that every workplace conflict constitutes stalking or workplace bullying.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Author: <\/strong>adw. Maciej Zaborowski, Managing Partner<\/p>\n\n\n\n E-mail:<\/strong> m.zaborowski@kkz.com.pl<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
Stalking penalty – what sanctions may the perpetrator face?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Stalking evidence – what matters in a criminal case?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Criminal procedure in a stalking case<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Stalking in the workplace and in business disputes<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
How to respond to persistent harassment?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
FAQ – Stalking (persistent harassment)<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Can a single message constitute stalking?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Does stalking have to cause fear?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Is a stalking case prosecuted ex officio?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
What evidence is most important in a persistent harassment case?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Can a ban on contact with the perpetrator be requested?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Can workplace stalking also constitute workplace bullying?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
References<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n