Dear New Zealand Police,

Since the new stalking and harassment legislation has come into operation and associated fact sheets have been released to the public, I note that some definitions and examples may be open to interpretation in practice.

I request the following information under the Official Information Act 1982:

1. Interpretation of “specified act”

Please provide any operational guidance, policy documents, training materials, manuals, or decision-making frameworks used by New Zealand Police that explain how the term “specified act” is interpreted and applied in practice under the harassment provisions.

In particular, I request documents addressing whether:

- the list of “specified acts” is treated as exhaustive or illustrative; and
- conduct not expressly listed in legislation may nevertheless be treated as falling within a specified act category for investigation or enforcement purposes.

2. Encounter-based harassment (non-stalking context)

Please provide any operational guidance, policy material, or training documents that address how harassment is assessed where the alleged conduct arises during incidental or face-to-face encounters between individuals, rather than through surveillance, following, monitoring, or other ongoing pursuit-type behaviour.

This includes guidance on situations where:

- the alleged behaviour occurs only when the parties come into contact or proximity with one another;
- the conduct is not characterised by active following, tracking, or surveillance; and
- the behaviour is alleged to be repeated across separate encounters and directed at a specific individual in those contexts.

3. Harassment vs stalking classification

Please provide any documents that explain how New Zealand Police distinguish between:

- harassment-type offending, and
- stalking-type offending,

including any guidance on whether these are treated as distinct categories in operational practice.

4. Reasonable person test and contextual assessment

Please provide any guidance or training materials that explain how the “reasonable person” test is applied in harassment assessments where contextual factors may be determinative of whether conduct is considered fear or distress inducing.

In particular, I request material addressing whether and how the assessment is influenced by surrounding circumstances, including but not limited to:

- prior history of interactions between the parties;
- prior disclosure by the affected person that the behaviour is distressing;
- known vulnerability or sensitivity of the affected person; and
- power imbalance between the parties.

5. Knowledge of impact

Please provide any guidance or operational material describing how Police assess whether a person knew or ought to have known that their conduct would cause fear or distress.

If any part of this request requires clarification in order to be processed, could you please request that I refine the scope rather than refusing the request outright.

Where information is withheld or not held, please specify the grounds for withholding under the Official Information Act 1982, or confirm that the information is not held.

Yours faithfully,

A. L.