Landmark Ruling on Cyprus Gang-Rape Case Exposes Investigation Failures

The European Court of Human Rights ruled that Cyprus authorities failed to effectively investigate a British teen's 2019 gang-rape allegations. The ruling highlighted flaws in consent determination, bias against women, and inadequate legal representation, leading to an overturned conviction. Justice Abroad called it crucial for ensuring fair investigation of sexual violence cases.

On Thursday, the European Court of Human Rights delivered a stinging critique of Cyprus' law enforcement authorities, underscoring their failure to adequately investigate a British teenager's allegations of gang-rape by a group of Israelis in 2019. The court highlighted significant investigative deficiencies, specifically pointing to the oversight in determining whether the alleged victim, then 18, consented to any sexual activities.

The ruling revealed that the teen had expressly declined multiple partners' advances, but the suspects ignored her protests. Despite ongoing sexual relations with an Israeli friend, the investigation did not establish if consent was obtained from the other suspects. The court noted that evidence suggested the woman's capacity to consent could have been impaired by alcohol and cocaine traces found in her system.

Moreover, investigators faced criticism for accepting suspects' denials without ample scrutiny and failing to pursue thorough physical evidence or potential witnesses. The court's decision spotlights systemic biases against women in Cyprus, risking continued victim mistrust in the justice system. Justice Abroad lauded this landmark ruling, emphasizing its significance in safeguarding sexual violence cases from institutional neglect.

(With inputs from agencies.)