27-02-2025
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."
