Nicosia, Cyprus. The European Court of Human Rights has formally proceeded with a case against Cyprus over investigative journalist Makarios Drousiotis’ allegations of unlawful surveillance. The court has invited both sides to respond to questions on the legality, necessity and proportionality of any interference with his rights.
Alleged Convention violations
According to a court document, the application concerns alleged violations of Articles 8, 10 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, covering the right to private life and freedom of expression.
The court is asking whether any interference was “in accordance with the law” and “necessary in a democratic society”, and whether the applicant had effective domestic channels to challenge the alleged violations.
Drousiotis’ allegations
In his submission, Drousiotis alleges he was targeted by unlawful surveillance using advanced spyware, claiming interference with his mobile phones, computers, cloud accounts and home security systems, alongside incidents of physical monitoring.
He says sensitive personal data and material relating to journalistic sources were accessed without his knowledge or consent. The application describes the alleged conduct as “a grave intrusion into private life and professional confidentiality”.
Background and international reaction
The case follows years of public claims by Drousiotis that he was subjected to surveillance while investigating corruption involving political and economic elites, detailed in his book, ‘Mafia State’.
He has previously said the monitoring began in 2018, during his time as an assistant to former EU commissioner Christos Stylianides, and coincided with research into links between senior Cypriot figures and Russian business interests.
Press freedom organisations, including Reporters Without Borders, have voiced concern over the handling of his allegations, with the group describing the claims as “deeply troubling” in a joint letter to Cypriot authorities and calling for a thorough investigation.
What steps should authorities take to ensure journalists can report without unlawful surveillance?
