Liability for Cyberstalking: A Comparative Study of Thai Law with the Laws of the United States, England and Wales, and Japan

Abstract

This research article examines the nature of cyberstalking, analyses Thailand's existing legal measures, and undertakes a comparative study of the laws of the United States, England and Wales, and Japan, in order to propose reforms to Thai law. The study employs Doctrinal Legal Research combined with Functional Comparative Law methodology.

The findings reveal that Thai law lacks a specific offence, has no pre-emptive protection mechanism, and imposes penalties disproportionate to the gravity of cyberstalking. In contrast, the three comparator jurisdictions have developed more advanced frameworks: the specific federal offence under 18 U.S.C. § 2261A and the recklessness standard established in Counterman v. Colorado (2023) in the United States; the Stalking Protection Order regime of England and Wales; and the 2025 amendment to Japan's Stalker Regulation Act, which extends regulation to the use of Bluetooth tracking tags.

The researcher proposes inserting Sections 309/2 and 309/3 into the Thai Penal Code to establish a specific criminal offence and a regime of temporary protection orders for victims, and amending the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 to cover the installation of stalkerware. The mens rea element should be set at the level of 'knew or ought to have known' in order to balance victim protection with the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression. The study recommends adopting the approach of England and Wales as the principal model for reform.