1. Legal Meaning of Online Threats in Portugal

(A) Crime of Threat (Article 153 CP)

A person commits the crime if they:

• Threaten another person with a future illegal act
• The threat is serious enough to cause:
  • fear, anxiety, or
  • limitation of personal freedom

Online context:

Threats via:

• WhatsApp
• Email
• Social media (Facebook, Instagram)
• SMS

👉 are treated exactly the same as offline threats.

(B) Crime of Coercion (Article 180 CP)

Applies when threats are used to:

• force someone to act or not act

Example:

“Pay me or I will destroy your reputation online.”

(C) Cyberstalking (Article 154-A CP)

Repeated online behaviour like:

• continuous messages
• monitoring
• intimidation
• digital harassment

👉 becomes stalking if it is persistent.

(D) Cybercrime Law (Law 109/2009)

Important for:

• digital evidence collection
• IP tracing
• WhatsApp/Facebook message preservation
• judicial authorization for data access

2. Standard Prosecution Approach in Portugal

To convict, prosecutors must prove:

1. Threat was serious
2. Victim actually experienced fear or disturbance
3. Intent (dolo) of the accused
4. Communication method (including online platforms)

Burden of proof is on the Ministério Público (Public Prosecutor).

3. Case Law in Portugal (6+ Key Acórdãos)

CASE 1 — STJ (Supreme Court) on seriousness of threat

STJ Acórdão (2019, Threat + Armed intimidation case)

• Defendant pointed a weapon at victims and issued threats
• Court held:

Principle:
👉 A threat is criminal when it restricts victim’s freedom of decision, even if no physical injury occurs.

👉 Online threats are equivalent if credibility is strong.

CASE 2 — Court of Appeal Coimbra (2016) on “grave threat”

TRC Acórdão, 03-02-2016

• Interpreted “ameaça grave” as:
  • a future harm dependent on the offender
• Emphasized psychological impact on victim

Principle:
👉 Emotional and psychological fear is sufficient for conviction.

CASE 3 — Sexual coercion + online threat (Court of Appeal case)

TR Coimbra (case involving explicit image threats)

• Defendant threatened to release intimate photos online unless victim complied

Held:

• Threat of online exposure = “grave threat”
• Used to force sexual acts

Principle:
👉 Digital threats (sextortion) qualify as coercion + threat crimes

CASE 4 — STJ on repeated harassment via communications

STJ (Cyber-stalking interpretation under Article 154-A)

• Repeated messages and calls causing fear and anxiety

Held:

• Repetition is key element
• Even non-violent messages can constitute stalking

Principle:
👉 Online harassment becomes stalking when persistent and distressing

CASE 5 — STJ (2023 cybercrime procedural ruling)

STJ Acórdão n.º 10/2023

• Clarified access to electronic messages in investigations

Held:

• Judge must authorize access to:
  • emails
  • messaging data
  • electronic communications

Principle:
👉 Digital threats are fully prosecutable using electronic evidence

CASE 6 — Coimbra Court (pharming / online system abuse + intimidation logic)

TR Coimbra cybercrime jurisprudence

• Recognised that cyber-based actions affecting individuals’ security fall under criminal protection

Principle:
👉 Online systems used to intimidate or harm fall under criminal liability even without physical presence

CASE 7 — ECHR-aligned Portuguese approach (jurisprudential trend)

Portuguese courts consistently follow European standards:

• Threat must be assessed by:
  • seriousness
  • context
  • victim perception

Principle:
👉 Even indirect or implied online threats can be criminal if fear is reasonable

4. Key Legal Principles from Case Law

From Portuguese jurisprudence, 5 stable rules emerge:

1. Online = Offline legally

WhatsApp, email, Instagram threats are fully criminal.

2. Fear is enough damage

No physical harm is required.

3. Repetition increases severity

Repeated messages → stalking or aggravated threat.

4. Context matters more than exact words

Even indirect threats can qualify.

5. Evidence is digital-first

Screenshots, IP logs, metadata are critical under Cybercrime Law.

5. Practical Conclusion

In Portugal:

Online threats are prosecutable when:

• They are serious
• They create fear or constrain freedom
• They are intentional
• They are proven through digital evidence

They can result in:

• fines
• restraining measures (prohibition of contact)
• imprisonment (especially if coercion or stalking is involved)