Digital shaming tests Cyprus’ balance between free speech and human dignity

Local lawparliamentsocial mediaTop News Digital shaming tests Cyprus’ balance between free speech and human dignity Image 135 Relevant News Digital shaming tests Cyprus’ balance between free speech and human dignity 14 June 2026 US, Iran inch closer to deal, timing remains unclear 14 June 2026 Unstable weather continues as yellow warning issued for thunderstorms and hail 14 June 2026 Ernestos Mousas 14 June 2026 FacebookXWhatsAppEmailPrintViber Public shaming no longer needs a town square. A post, a photograph, a name and a few lines of accusatory language are enough to place someone before an informal digital court, often without evidence, without an immediate right of reply and without any restoration of the truth if the claims prove false. In Cyprus in 2026, the balance between freedom of expression and the protection of human dignity is being tested daily on social media. Online public trials can form within minutes, often with irreversible consequences for the people targeted. Legally, Cyprus allows certain restrictions on freedom of expression to protect the reputation or rights of others. In practice, however, there is no mechanism to monitor digital activity and quickly identify violations so they can be brought before justice. Even when a victim is vindicated in court, the damage may already have been done. This has made the development of critical thinking among citizens increasingly urgent, so that society can distinguish criticism that serves democracy from deliberate attempts to destroy reputations for ulterior motives. Lawyer Elias Stephanou addresses the legal dimension of the issue in Cyprus in comments to Phileleftheros on Sunday. Psychiatrist Dr Giorgos Mikellides examines the psychiatric aspect, explaining how the ability to filter information is not only part of critical thinking but also a factor in protecting mental health. The legal framework in Cyprus In Cyprus, freedom of expression is protected under Article 19 of the Constitution. Every person has the right to freedom of speech and expression in any form. This includes freedom of opinion, as well as the freedom to receive and transmit information and ideas without interference by any public authority and regardless of borders. The exercise of those rights may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions, or penalties set out in law. These must be necessary for the security of the Republic, constitutional order, public safety, public order, public health, public morals, the protection of the reputation or rights of others, the prevention of disclosure of confidential information, or the safeguarding of the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. For defamatory content, Cypriot law relies mainly on the Civil Wrongs Law, Cap. 148. Stephanou notes that the criminal provisions on defamation in the Criminal Code were abolished in 2003. As a result, classic defamation now falls primarily within the civil field, with claims for damages or other remedies. However, when online expression becomes a tool for spreading hatred, it enters the sphere of criminal law. “Under Law 134(I)/2011 and Article 99A of the Criminal Code, the author of a post who intentionally and publicly incites violence or hatred on grounds of race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity commits a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment of up to five years, a fine of up to €10,000, or both,” Stephanou said. As an EU member state, Cyprus also operates within the framework of the Digital Services Act. The DSA does not replace national law on defamation or harassment, but it requires major platforms to provide mechanisms for reporting illegal content, transparency in content removal decisions and appeal options for users. The problem, according to the source text, is the absence of an enforcement mechanism. Although countless comments that may breach legal restrictions are posted on social media, there are no structures responsible for identifying them immediately, assessing them and reporting them. The question is no longer only whether an affected person can go to court, but whether the state has mechanisms that are fast and effective enough to prevent a post from turning into digital humiliation. Freedom of expression remains a foundation of democracy, but private life and the rights of others cannot be left unprotected. The debate on fake news and the internet Fake news and its wider consequences have concerned the state before. The debate in parliament has effectively exposed the deadlock facing Cyprus. On the one hand, false or malicious posts can lead to public humiliation, intimidation and real harm. On the other hand, attempts at criminal regulation have met serious objections over freedom of expression and press freedom, as the term “fake news” can be interpreted broadly and may even affect good-faith journalism or public criticism. During Emily Yiolitis’ tenure at the Justice Ministry, a relevant bill was tabled in 2021 and later returned to the House Legal Affairs Committee under the current government. It did not concern fake news alone, but also threats, insults and the dissemination of obscene photographs or images online, with provisions turning such behaviour from civil wrongs into criminal offences carrying prison sentences. The issue was promoted for discussion in 2024 but ran into strong objections in the House Legal Affairs Committee from several bodies, including representatives of the journalistic community. The objections focused on the risk that the proposal, as drafted, could indirectly criminalise journalistic work and affect freedom of expression and press freedom. Political forces said they could accept the need to close the legal gap, but could not support a regulation as it stood if it criminalised publications or posts because they might be considered offensive. As a result, the Justice Ministry requested in August 2024 that the debate be postponed and moved to set up a group of legal experts to work on solutions aimed at a broader consensus. The challenge now is to find a balance that allows Cyprus to tackle malicious targeting, threats and attempts at character assassination effectively, while preserving respect for the universal right to freedom of expression. The aim is for criticism to be exercised in a civil and humane framework, without exposing anyone to digital stoning as a result of arbitrary publications or accusations. Protection by the state could be pursued through obligations on platforms to remove posts that publicly shame people quickly, as well as through investment in digital literacy so that society can distinguish scrutiny and criticism from slander and online cannibalism. A mechanism for monitoring content on social media is also considered crucial, so that interventions crossing the red line can be identified. Tsiridou says Cyprus must modernise Former deputy chair of the House Legal Affairs Committee, Fotini Tsiridou, told Phileleftheros on Sunday that Cyprus needs to modernise. The Democratic Rally MP said phenomena such as cyberbullying, harassment, breaches of personal data, hate speech and the spread of fake news have been recorded for years and are now taking on worrying dimensions globally. She said the issue had been discussed at the House Legal Affairs, Justice and Public Order Committee, where a proposed framework was examined for incorporating provisions into Cypriot law that would help social media operate more smoothly and safely. According to Tsiridou, the aim is for citizens to express themselves and interact online more safely, as she said has already happened in other European countries. In January, Tsiridou also tabled a bill on the teaching of digital citizenship and safe behaviour on social media. The purpose of the initiative is to make such education compulsory in public and private schools at all levels. Through the proposed education, pupils would gain basic knowledge of what constitutes lawful and unlawful behaviour in the digital environment before mistakes turn into criminal, social, or psychological trauma. They would also learn to act responsibly on social media, respect privacy, personal data and the rights of others, and develop psychological resilience and the ability to seek help when needed. Elias Stephanou: When the keyboard breaks the law The ease of using social media has created the illusion that freedom of speech is unlimited in the digital environment, Stephanou said. He stressed that freedom of expression is one of the foundations of every democratic society and protects not only information or ideas that are easily accepted, but also those that offend, shock, or disturb. But that does not mean the right to expression is uncontrolled or unrestrained. It may be limited to protect public order, national security, or the reputation and rights of others. In Cyprus, online defamation is a civil wrong aimed at restoring the damage suffered by the victim through financial compensation. Defamation involves the publication of claims that attribute criminal or improper conduct to another person, damage their professional or social standing, or may expose them to hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Stephanou also stressed that responsibility may extend to users who reproduce a rumour or cite a third person as their source. A victim may seek, through civil proceedings, the immediate removal of posts through court orders, the disclosure of anonymous users’ details by platforms, and financial damages. The former criminal offence of libel, meaning the publication of defamatory material intended to damage a person’s reputation, was abolished in 2003. However, online expression enters the field of criminal law when it becomes a tool of hatred. In that case, Stephanou said, the focus of the law changes and seeks strict punishment of the offender for the social gravity of the act. “Under Law 134(I)/2011 and Article 99A of the Criminal Code, the author of a post who intentionally and publicly incites violence or hatred on grounds of race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity commits a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment of up to five years, a fine of up to €10,000, or both,” he said. Stephanou added that the European Court of Human Rights has also confirmed that when the keyboard spreads hatred, the protection of society prevails over freedom of speech. Dr Giorgos Mikellides: Character assassination in the age of social media Dr Giorgos Mikellides said the age of social media has created unprecedented possibilities for communication, information and expression. At the same time, it has created an environment in which public humiliation and so-called character assassination can occur with unprecedented speed and intensity. A comment, photograph, video, or accusation can spread to thousands of people within hours, often without any meaningful verification of the accuracy of the information. From a psychiatric and psychological perspective, social rejection is one of the most painful human experiences, Mikellides said. The human brain evolved within social groups, and the need for acceptance is deeply rooted in biology. Studies have shown that social rejection activates areas of the brain associated with the experience of physical pain. For that reason, public humiliation, mockery, or online targeting are not merely unpleasant experiences, but can cause real psychological suffering. In clinical practice, Mikellides said, specialists encounter people who develop symptoms of anxiety, insomnia, low mood, panic attacks, social withdrawal and intense shame after online attacks or public exposure. In some cases, particularly involving young people or individuals with pre-existing mental health difficulties, the effects can be serious and long-lasting. A further problem is that social media often favours an immediate emotional reaction over a calm assessment. People tend to form impressions quickly and seek information that confirms their existing beliefs. In this way, a rumour or fragmentary information can become “truth” in the eyes of many before the real facts are examined. In today’s world, the ability to filter information is not only part of critical thinking but also a factor in protecting mental health, Mikellides said. Before reproducing a story or taking part in the condemnation of a person, people should ask themselves whether they know all the facts and whether their reaction is based on evidence or emotional impulses. Empathy, responsibility and respect for human dignity are the foundations of a mature society. In a world where information travels at the speed of light, caution and humanity remain more necessary than ever. Subscribe to our Newsletter Latest News US, Iran inch closer to deal, timing remains unclear Unstable weather continues as yellow warning issued for thunderstorms and hail Former company executive arrested in Limassol over €610,000 theft and fraud case Young motorcyclist killed in Strovolos traffic collision Body found in car trunk near Iran’s World Cup training base in Tijuana Regulators lose sight of solutions right in front of them Motorcyclist arrested in Larnaca with 18 packets of cannabis and cocaine Follow en.philenews on Google News and be the first to know all the news about Cyprus and the world.