Women - victims of sexual crimes v. Cyprus: ECHR condemns handling of rape cases

The recent judgments by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in N.T. v. Cyprus and X v. Cyprus deliver a stark and concerning message regarding the Cypriot authorities' handling of rape and sexual crime cases. These rulings, coming within months of each other, highlight systemic failures rooted in deep-seated biases and a lack of victim-sensitive approaches.

A consistent theme across both cases is the pervasive influence of prejudicial gender stereotypes and victim-blaming attitudes. In X v. Cyprus, the ECHR found that the credibility of the young British woman's allegations was assessed based on her perceived "sexual liberty and conduct," effectively suggesting that her prior behavior negated her right to refuse. Similarly, in N.T. v. Cyprus, the authorities disproportionately focused on N.T.'s emotional expressions towards her alleged perpetrator, and her admission of having "liked" him, using these to cast doubt on her credibility and ultimately discontinue the criminal proceedings. This approach, as the ECHR explicitly stated, "betrayed sexist stereotypes" and undermined the victims' dignity.

Furthermore, both judgments underscore significant procedural failures and insufficient investigations. In X's case, the Court criticized the overly hasty termination of the investigation, the coercive circumstances under which her retraction statement was obtained, and the failure to adequately consider crucial evidence like the impact of intoxication on consent or physical signs of force. In N.T.'s case, the ECHR pointed to the failure to obtain specialized psychological assessments and to properly weigh conflicting testimonies, particularly considering the psychological impact of trauma on victims. The lack of access to case files for victims seeking justice was also a common concern, hindering their effective participation in the process.

These repeated condemnations by the ECHR indicate that despite existing legal frameworks, the practical application of the law in Cyprus regarding sexual offenses falls short of international human rights standards. The rulings point to a culture within some parts of the Cypriot justice system that not only fails to effectively investigate and prosecute gender-based violence but also contributes to the secondary victimization and discrimination of those who bravely come forward.

More Details about the 2 Cases

N.T. v. Cyprus

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) delivered on 3.7.2025 a judgment in the case of N.T. v. Cyprus (Application no. 28150/22), condemning Cyprus for its handling of a rape investigation and finding violations of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment - procedural aspect), Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case involves N.T., a Cypriot national, who reported to the police in 2021 that she had been raped ten years earlier (when she was 18) by a schoolfriend, A.T. The police initiated an investigation and indicted the alleged perpetrator. However, the Deputy Attorney General ultimately decided to discontinue the criminal proceedings, primarily based on perceived inconsistencies in N.T.'s statements and her admission that she had "liked" A.T. and perhaps sent him "wrong signals."

The ECHR found that this approach by the Cypriot authorities was not objective or sensitive, but rather reflected prejudicial and stereotypical perceptions, particularly focusing on "sexist victim-blaming" attitudes. The Court criticized the authorities for:

-Insufficient investigation: Failing to adequately weigh conflicting testimonies, not obtaining specialized psychological assessments of N.T., and neglecting critical parameters like her age at the time of the alleged rape and the potential impact of psychological violence and trauma on her statements.

-Victim-blaming: Disproportionately emphasizing N.T.'s emotional expressions towards the accused while sidelining elements that would indicate a lack of consent, and using language that betrayed sexist stereotypes.

-Secondary victimization and discrimination: Concluding that the authorities' actions not only failed to protect N.T. but also contributed to her secondary victimization, which constituted a form of gender-based discrimination.

-Lack of access to justice: The Deputy Attorney General's refusal to grant N.T. access to the case file without justification was deemed problematic, limiting her effective participation in proceedings and ability to seek remedies.

The ECHR ruled that the Cypriot authorities failed to uphold their positive obligations under the Convention to effectively investigate and prosecute gender-based violence. Cyprus was ordered to pay N.T. €20,000 in non-pecuniary damages and €15,470 for costs and expenses. This judgment highlights the need for a fundamental shift in how rape allegations are investigated in Cyprus, urging authorities to move beyond outdated and discriminatory practices.

The Judgment is available here

X v. Cyprus

In Chamber judgment on 27.2.2025 in the case of X v. Cyprus, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously found a violation of Article 3 (lack of effective investigation) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case concerned a young British woman, X, who alleged she was gang-raped by several Israeli nationals in Ayia Napa, Cyprus, in July 2019, and the subsequent investigation by national authorities. After extended questioning, X retracted her allegations and was prosecuted for public mischief, leading to a conviction that was later overturned on appeal by the Cyprus Supreme Court due to investigative failures. The Court found that, without expressing an opinion on the suspects’ guilt, the response of the investigative and prosecutorial authorities to X’s allegations fell short of the State’s duty to effectively investigate and prosecute. This was due to numerous shortcomings, including the assessment of X’s credibility through prejudicial gender stereotypes and victim-blaming attitudes.

The principal facts detail X's account of events leading to the alleged gang-rape, including initial consensual encounters that were disturbed, and a subsequent forceful encounter with S.Y. and approximately 12 friends. After the incident, X reported it to the police, underwent medical examinations, and warrants were issued for suspects. DNA evidence was collected, and some suspects were released while others remained in custody. Ten days later, after over six hours of questioning that lasted late into the night, X signed a retraction statement, was immediately arrested for public mischief, and was subsequently convicted. Her conviction was later overturned by the Supreme Court, which noted various failures in the police investigation, such as not establishing the time of the alleged rape, disregarding witness statements about X’s psychological state, and overlooking evidence from video recordings and physical injuries.

The Court observed that Cyprus had a legal framework for protecting victims of sexual violence, and the investigation began promptly. However, it was marred by a series of shortcomings by the investigative and prosecutorial authorities and the first instance court, primarily the overly hasty termination of the investigation and immediate prosecution of X after her retraction. The Court emphasized the authorities’ obligation to secure all available evidence and explore all facts, finding that they failed to adequately examine the issue of consent, considering X’s intoxication and the presence of drugs, and ignored her explicit protests and desire for privacy.

The police and investigator also took the suspects’ statements at face value, despite contradictory testimony and physical evidence suggesting force had been used. The authorities’ disinclination to pursue the investigation further appeared to be based on X’s sexual history, assessing her credibility through prejudicial gender stereotypes. The Court also noted that the decisions to discontinue and not reopen the investigation relied on alleged inconsistencies in X’s statements, without considering the circumstances under which they were made or her psychological state. X, an 18-year-old foreigner, was questioned for extended periods without a lawyer or psychologist present, leading to her retraction.

The Court viewed the repeated recounting of events and the lack of a victim-sensitive approach as re-victimization, concluding that the case revealed biases concerning women in Cyprus that impeded the effective protection of X’s rights as a possible victim of gender-based violence. Consequently, the Court found a violation of Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention and held that Cyprus was to pay X 20,000 euros for non-pecuniary damage and 5,000 euros for costs and expenses.

The judgement is available here

(photo freepik.com)