Is online stalking via social media a printing press crime?

The answer in most cases is no. When a person uses social media for the primary purpose of harassing, bullying or disturbing another person's peace, the Court of Cassation does not consider it a printing press crime. Such acts belong in the correctional court and not the assize court, even if the messages were posted publicly on a platform such as Facebook.

The facts and procedural background

In a recent case, which led to the ruling of February 11, 2026, the Court of Cassation had to rule on a conflict of jurisdiction between different courts.

The case revolved around a defendant, H.B., who was prosecuted for facts of stalking with respect to victim J.A.. The defendant had posted several messages on social media, including public comments on the victim's Facebook wall and on third-party pages (such as lavenir.net). The content was hurtful and threatening: among other things, she wrote “I will continue to harass you” and warned of “irreversible consequences”.

The correctional court in Namur had declared the facts proven, but the court of appeal in Liege declined jurisdiction in degree appeal. The appeal court ruled that since the messages were public and contained an opinion or appreciation of the victim, it was a printing press crime. According to the Belgian Constitution printing press crimes are the exclusive jurisdiction of the jury (the assize court) unless they are motivated by racism or xenophobia.

The decision of the Court of Cassation.

The Court of Cassation overturned the ruling of the Court of Appeal of Liège, putting the matter in order. The Court confirmed that the Court of Appeal did have jurisdiction to rule on the case.

The Court clarified that a printing press crime requires that there be the punishment of a thought or opinion expressed in a writing. However, if the publication is merely a tool to attack someone, there is no printing press crime.

The Court stated that:

• Publishing a photo or text online merely to disturb someone's peace of mind is not a printing press crime.
• Expressing criticism, resentment or anger for the purpose of assaulting someone does not fall under the constitutional protection of free speech required by jury trial.

Legal analysis and interpretation

This Court of Cassation ruling is of great importance for the prosecution of cyberbullying and online stalking. It makes an important distinction between the content of a message (speech) and the conduct of the perpetrator (stalking).

In a legal sense, a printing press crime is a crime where the criminality arises from the expression of opinion itself. Article 150 of the Constitution protects this expression by requiring a people's jury (court of assizes) to rule on criminality, to prevent censorship by appellate courts.

However, in this case, the Court held that the defendant was not prosecuted for the content of her opinion per se, but for using the communication network to harass someone. When social media act as a weapon to harm or harass someone, the medium is merely the instrument of the crime. The mere fact that this tool is “public” (such as a public Facebook post) does not suddenly transform the stalking into a printing press crime.

This distinction prevents perpetrators of serious acts of cyberbullying from hiding behind complex procedural rules to escape the correctional court. Indeed, a referral to the assize court would in practice often lead to impunity for these types of offenses, given the severity and cost of assize proceedings.

What this specifically means

This case law has direct implications for victims and defendants in online harassment cases:

• For victims: The threshold for taking action against online stalking remains low. You need not fear that a complaint for public defamation or stalking on Facebook will get bogged down in procedural discussions on the assize court. The correctional court (or police court) retains jurisdiction. It is essential to properly record evidence (screenshots, URLs).
• For the defense: The “lack of competency due to printing press crime” argument will rarely hold up in cases that clearly revolve around stalking. Attorneys must focus on the substantive defense or culpability, as in this case where internment was at issue.
• For social media users: Be aware that “free speech” is not a license for stalking. Even if you express your anger publicly, this can be criminally prosecuted as stalking if the purpose is to disturb the other person's peace.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Is every post on Facebook a printing press crime?
No. Only when a message contains an opinion and the prosecution focuses specifically on the criminality of that opinion can it be a printing press crime. When the message serves to harass or stalk someone, it is a common law crime (stalking).

Why is the distinction between stalking and printing press crime important?
Printing press crimes must basically come before the assize court (a jury court), which is a very heavy and expensive procedure. Stalking comes before the correctional court, which makes for faster and more efficient court proceedings.

Can I be criminally prosecuted for expressing my anger online?
Yes. If your expressions form a pattern that seriously disturbs the peace of another, it may qualify as stalking. The Court of Cassation held that expressing resentment or anger to harass someone is not a “free manifestation of an opinion” within the meaning of the Constitution.

Conclusion

The Court of Cassation clarifies: using social media to make someone's life miserable is not a protected form of free speech that requires a jury trial. It remains a correctional crime. This ensures that victims of cyberbullying in Belgium can efficiently bring their case before the criminal courts.