How a British woman accused of lying about being gang-raped in Cyprus won a human rights case
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that "certain biases concerning women in Cyprus" meant a British woman accused of lying about being gang-raped on holiday there did not get an effective police investigation.
The woman, now in her early 20s, reported being raped by 12 Israeli men at her Ayia Napa hotel in July 2019, but went on to retract the report. She was then convicted of "public mischief" for making the allegations.
The woman said she was forced into revoking her claims and successfully quashed her conviction at the Cypriot Supreme Court after the judge ruled she did not receive a fair trial.
But Cyprus's attorney general refused to reopen the original rape investigation - and the 12 men never faced charges.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has now concluded police and prosecutors in Cyprus "fell short" of their investigative duties and that "prejudicial gender stereotypes and victim-blaming attitudes" meant she was denied her rights "as a possible victim of gender-based violence".
Here we look back at the details of the case, which sparked outrage from women's and human rights groups around the world.
What happened in the original case?
The woman, who is from Derbyshire, was 19 and working in the party resort of Ayia Napa during the summer before she went to university.
She told the court she was in a relationship with a young Israeli man at the time.
Her testimony claims they had consensual sex twice, but were "disturbed by his friends each time, as they kept coming into his room and trying to film them". "She was groped and even slapped across the buttocks by one of them," it adds.
Then when she entered his hotel room in the early hours of 17 July 2019, he raped her - before 11 other men appeared, pinned her down, and did the same.
Some of them were in Cyprus on holiday before entering the Israeli army, their legal team said.
She reported the alleged incident to the police later that morning and all 12 men were remanded in police custody.
Ten days later, however, she retracted the claims in a signed statement and was charged with "public mischief" for making false rape claims.
Her legal team said she was forced to change her statement and that it had been written by Cypriot detectives instead.
She was jailed for four-and-a-half weeks awaiting trial, which began that August. She pleaded not guilty.
Meanwhile, the Israeli men, who were aged between 18 and 20 and denied all the allegations, were let go and allowed to return home.
The case attracted global media attention, with women's rights campaigners protesting outside court.
During the five-month trial at Famagusta District Court in Paralimni, Judge Michalis Papathanasiou repeatedly shouted "this is not a rape trial" and "I don't want to hear evidence about rape".
In January 2020, she was found guilty, with Mr Papathanasiou ruling she had made false allegations because she felt "embarrassed" about being filmed having sex on some of the men's phones.
She was given a four-month prison sentence suspended for three years and was finally allowed to fly home.
The Foreign Office released a statement after the trial saying it was "seriously concerned" about fair trial guarantees in Cyprus, describing the case as "deeply distressing" and pledging to raise it with Cypriot authorities.
With the help of the human rights group Justice Abroad, the woman lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court in Nicosia in September 2021.
Her legal team claimed what happened in Cyprus had stripped her "both of her dignity and human rights" and that she had been diagnosed with severe post-traumatic stress disorder as a result.
In their appeal, they claimed:
• A forensic linguist had concluded her retraction statement was written in 'Greek English' and was therefore "highly unlikely" to have been written by her;
• It should not have been permissible evidence as it was taken while she was detained for seven hours without a lawyer or a translator;
• DNA evidence linking three of the Israeli men with a condom that had her blood on it was not used;
• Nor was evidence from people who saw her in the hotel on the night of the incident;
• A pathologist had concluded her injuries were consistent with being gang-raped;
• Police had failed to secure the crime scene or take phone evidence from the men;
• None of the men gave evidence.
The woman's lawyer, Michael Polak, said the judge "was against us even before any evidence was called".
Ultimately, in January 2022, the Supreme Court overturned the "public mischief" conviction on the grounds the defendant was not given a fair trial.
Cypriot authorities have always denied any wrongdoing.
European Court of Human Rights
After the Supreme Court ruling, Justice Abroad wrote to the Cypriot attorney general asking them to reopen the woman's original rape case, which was abandoned with her retraction statement.
Specifically, her legal team requested a "proper" police investigation by a different force.
When the case was refused, they maintained the woman was "determined to fight for justice" and filed a case at the ECHR.
In its judgment handed down on 27 February, the court concluded her case had been "marked by a series of shortcomings by the investigative authorities".
It commented on the "overly hasty termination of the [original rape] investigation" and that it had "not obtained sufficient forensic and witness evidence", as well as "failing to examine whether there had been consent".
The judgment read: "The court observed that the case revealed certain biases concerning women in Cyprus which impeded the effective protection of [the woman's] rights as a possible victim of gender-based violence.
"Her credibility appears to have been assessed through prejudicial gender stereotypes and victim-blaming attitudes.
"Because she had allegedly participated in group sexual activities before, it seemed to be taken for granted that she would not have refused to do so on the day of the alleged rape."
It added that the "numerous times" the woman was forced to repeat what happened to the authorities "constituted evidence of re-victimisation".
Ultimately, the ECHR said the mishandling of the case constituted a violation of the woman's right to a private and family life and awarded her €20,000 (£16,500) in damages and €5,000 (£4,100) in costs.
Mr Polak, director of Justice Abroad, said: "This is a landmark decision for victims of sexual violence. The ruling reinforces the fundamental principle that allegations of sexual violence must be investigated thoroughly and fairly, without institutional obstruction."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
31 minutes ago
- Reuters
Ex-UK intelligence worker jailed for taking top secret data home
LONDON, June 13 (Reuters) - A former British intelligence worker who endangered national security by taking top secret data home was on Friday jailed for seven and a half years. Hasaan Arshad, 25, pleaded guilty, opens new tab in March to one charge under the Computer Misuse Act, committed between August and September 2022 while working at British signals intelligence agency GCHQ. Prosecutor Duncan Atkinson said the top secret material Arshad had downloaded contained the names of 17 GCHQ employees and that removing it from a secure environment brought the risk of it "falling into the wrong hands". "His actions damaged confidence in the UK's security," Atkinson told London's Old Bailey court. Judge Maura McGowan sentenced Arshad to six years in prison for the Computer Misuse Act offence and a further 18 months for two offences of making indecent images of children, to which he had pleaded guilty in 2023. His lawyer Nina Grahame said Arshad had taken the data due to his "perfectionism" at the end of a year-long placement with GCHQ because he had not completed his work on a particular project. She said Arshad accepted he had caused a risk to national security but added: "He did not intend to cause such a risk."
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
I know the ingredients of Ulster's riots only too well
When I saw images of the homes of immigrant families in Ballymena with loyalist flags placed in their windows to ward off racist mobs, and fearful handmade posters reading 'I work in a care home', I felt as if I was back there. It was all so horribly, desperately, familiar. I grew up about ten miles from the epicentre of the anti-immigrant rioting, in my hometown Antrim. Ballymena and Antrim are like twins. Same people, same problems, same hate. Loyalism runs strong here, as it does in other towns where violence spread: Larne, Portadown, Newtownabbey, Carrickfergus. As a young reporter, I covered crime and terrorism in these places. Read more from Neil Mackay: Back then, the towns of County Antrim were dominated by loyalist paramilitaries. Other areas had Republican gunmen and the IRA. Where I grew up, the UVF and UDA were in charge. Though there's always exceptions to the rule. Republican areas had loyalist pockets, and vice versa. Nothing is ever simple in the north of Ireland. My own family history was far from simple. On my maternal side, it was all Irish, Republican and Catholic. On the paternal side, all British, Loyalist and Protestant. Only in a place like Northern Ireland could the term 'mixed marriage' exist into the 21st century. So I got to know what makes both sides tick. I learned to understand – not accept, just understand – their hatreds. When I learned enough, I'd had enough. That's why I left and have lived in Scotland these last 30 years. I couldn't bear the place anymore. Though, in my heart, I still love its beauty, and its people. When my people are good – on both sides – they're very, very good. When they're bad, they're monsters. There's a terrible truth about what has happened in Northern Ireland, which might help folk in Scotland, bewildered by the labyrinthine history and tribal complexity of my country, understand the deep roots of recent events. Read more: The truth lies in what's called the 'siege mentality' of Ulster's loyalists. I deliberately differentiate between loyalism and unionism. Unionism is a perfectly respectable, mainstream political position. Loyalism has much darker shades to it. Everything is on a spectrum in Northern Ireland. There is, after all, a world of difference between an Irish nationalist who believes in gaining a United Ireland through democratic means, and an advocate of the IRA and armed republicanism. Loyalism's siege mentality has deep roots in the past. It goes back to the Plantation of Ulster in the 1600s, when mostly Scottish Protestants settled lands once owned by Irish Catholics. In effect, Ireland became the first 'British' colony, and Ulster was ground zero. To take someone's land you must fight them, and that means you must kill them and they'll kill you back. To kill people, you must learn to hate them. Therein lies the source of loyalism's siege mentality. Loyalists just never felt safe on the land they took. Why would someone from Ireland, like me, have a name like 'Mackay'? The plantation is your answer. Sometime, long ago, my paternal Scottish ancestors colonised the land which my maternal Irish ancestors owned. Siege mentality requires a sense of your own supremacy. You must think: this is my land, nobody else deserves it. Wars and bloodshed have come and gone, but such ancestral traits are hard to shake. All of us carry some burden inherited from our grandfathers and grandmothers. The Troubles are over. Such a ghastly euphemism for what it was: an ethnic civil war of neighbour against neighbour. But grievance and supremacy linger on. To many hardline loyalists, this land is still their land and nobody can claim any right to it; others do not belong, just as Catholics once didn't belong. You can see how such deep psychological currents can easily wash up against the shores of present-day racism and anti-immigrant hate. Thus, all those loyalist flags placed in immigrant windows; thus, all those signs saying 'we're local, we work in care homes'. It was an attempt to say 'we don't threaten you', 'we aren't here to take what you believe is yours'. Even after the riots began, politicians from the hardline Traditional Unionist Voice party talked of 'the influx of Roma' and 'very real grievances' among the people of Ballymena. So far, it appears that loyalist paramilitaries are not orchestrating the violence. Yet. Though the burning of homes has called to mind images of loyalist mobs burning Catholics out of Belfast at the start of the Troubles: the trigger for the arrival of the British army. Aaron Edwards, a Northern Irish security analyst and author who I know and whose work on loyalism I respect, says the absence of loyalist paramilitaries 'may not last for long'. The areas where rioting happened are poor. It is easy for violent men to exploit marginalisation and deprivation. Evidently, supremacy and poverty are a combustible mix. Nor can we forget the long links between loyalist terrorists and the British far-right. That truth came roaring into sight during last summer's far-right riots, which spread from England to Ulster. These are dangerous times in Northern Ireland, where violence and hatred are never far from the surface. What we're seeing may look very new – very 21st century – but the tragedy is that this is a very old toxin still poisoning the country that I both love and loathe.
ITV News
an hour ago
- ITV News
First Rochdale grooming jury discharged over race bias concerns
Concerns a juror - thought to be an ex-police officer - may be racist led to a second jury being needed in the Rochdale grooming trial, it has emerged. Less than a week after the prosecution opened its case at Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court in January, a note was sent to the judge inquiring about the whereabouts of one of the defendants who was not in the dock. Previously, Judge Jonathan Seely told jurors the fact that Kasir Bashir, 50, was not present did not affect their task of deciding whether he was guilty of child sexual exploitation charges or not He ordered them not to speculate why he was not in court and that his absence should not count as evidence against him. Days later the judge received a note which read: 'Where is Kasir Bashir? In the UK, Pakistan or elsewhere? 'Have any other defendants tried to abscond? What nationality are the defendants and who has dual nationality?' Lisa Wilding KC, on behalf of defence barristers in the case, successfully applied to the judge for the jury to be discharged. She said: 'The court knows that Kasir Bashir has indeed absconded. 'The concern raised at the defence bar is that this note reveals firstly, and perhaps most concerning, the disregarding of your honour's directions. 'Secondly, what nationality Kasir Bashir and the others are is, of course, a matter that is wholly irrelevant to these proceedings and displays potentially a bias against defendants who are not of British origin. 'We know one of these jurors is a former serving police officer. It is our belief that the note comes from this juror, perhaps it matters or not. 'It is our application that the jury be discharged. It is not capable of remedy.' The prosecution did not oppose the application as a second jury was sworn in shortly after. They jury went on to convict seven men of the sexual exploitation of two teenage schoolgirls in Rochdale. The defendants preyed on the vulnerabilities of the victims to groom them as 'sex slaves' from the age of 13 on various dates in the Greater Manchester town between 2001 and 2006.
