Stalking: The Crime They Struggle to Prove

Warning: this article contains descriptions of violence

It was 2022, and Farzana Yaqubi was walking home from work in West Auckland when she was ambushed. The 21-year-old law student was stabbed 12 times in broad daylight. Members of the public attempted first aid, but she died at the scene.

Farzana’s attacker was Kanwarpal Singh, a security guard who worked at the same mall as her. Two years earlier, Farzana had reluctantly agreed to coffee with him. She quickly felt uneasy and told him she did not wish to see him again. Singh refused to accept this.

What followed was a sustained campaign of harassment and stalking. Singh contacted Farzana relentlessly on social media, creating new accounts each time she blocked him. There were thousands of messages; he monitored her movements. He filmed outside her home. And he sent increasingly violent threats, including threats to stab her.

Farzana’s tragic murder is not an isolated case. It underscores how difficult stalking and criminal harassment can be to prove and prevent under New Zealand’s legal framework.

While New Zealand does not yet have an official national stalking prevalence rate, reported criminal harassment charges have more than doubled since 2015. Even so, surveys consistently show that only around one in four victims report harassment to police. Fearing even more retribution, many do not report at all.

Part of the problem lies in how our laws have historically understood harassment. Under the Harassment Act 1997, criminal harassment is framed around repeated acts intended to cause fear. The focus is on individual incidents: how many messages, how close together, how explicit the threat. Stalking rarely presents that neatly. It is not just repeated unwanted contact, but a pattern of fixation and control. The behaviour is often persistent, strategic, and psychologically coercive. Individual acts may appear minor or even benign in isolation, but together they create fear, hypervigilance, and loss of autonomy.

Most of criminal law was developed in a pre-digital world. It did not anticipate GPS tracking, burner accounts, read receipts, impersonation, doxxing, or digital surveillance. Modern stalking is fragmented across platforms and time, making it hard for police and courts to see the cumulative harm.

Proving criminal harassment or stalking is therefore complex. Victims are often expected to preserve extensive evidence, reconstruct timelines across multiple platforms, and demonstrate escalation and impact. This is time-consuming and often retraumatising. 

Farzana did report. In October 2022 she made a complaint to police about Singh. A month later, she followed up with a full statement detailing Singh’s threats and describing her “extreme fear” of him. Instead of being assigned to an officer, that statement was mistakenly left in an out-tray. Two days later, Singh murdered her.

Change is here, though. On 26 May 2026, the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Act came into force. For the first time, stalking and harassment are now recognised as a standalone criminal offence under the Crimes Act 1961, carrying a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.

The new law shifts the focus away from isolated incidents and toward patterns of behaviour. A person may now commit the offence by engaging in at least two specified stalking behaviours within a two-year period, knowing that the conduct is likely to cause fear or distress.

The legislation expressly recognises modern stalking methods, including digital surveillance, GPS tracking, repeated unwanted communication, monitoring, doxxing, impersonation, interference with property or pets, and conduct intended to damage a person’s reputation, relationships, or sense of safety.

At Veritas, we can provide advice on your personal safety, both physical and digital. This includes prevention guidance, safety planning, and investigative services when harassment or stalking is already occurring. Compiling evidence capable of supporting a criminal charge or protective order requires time, expertise, and careful documentation. Police are not always capable of doing this early. We are. Please get in touch with our team if you need support.

If something doesn’t feel right, it’s worth taking seriously and early. Prevention and response through expert support can make a critical difference.