The police disciplinary investigation into the leak of photos of a murder victim’s remains from the morgue is still ongoing, a representative of the Cyprus Police reported on Monday during a meeting of the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights.
The Committee addressed the issue of protecting victims of criminal acts, as well as their families, from the public disclosure of their personal data, following a presentation by DISY MP Michalis Kounounis, with Committee members raising questions regarding the effectiveness of the measures being taken.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
Thomas Hadjikyriakou, representing the Cyprus Police at the meeting, assured the committee that the collection of evidence from crime scenes is permitted only to those who, in the course of their duties, need to obtain specific evidence for investigative purposes, emphasizing that such evidence is handled with discretion and confidentiality. He also added that the agency has the ability to track the handling of this material at every stage and determine whether any leaks have occurred.
He further stated that when leaks are detected involving police officers, a criminal and/or disciplinary investigation is conducted to determine the offenses. However, in response to a question from the Committee Chair and AKEL Member of Parliament, Christos Christofides, Mr. Hatzikyriakou stated that regarding the case of leaked photographs from the morgue of a murder victim in 2025, the investigation into a disciplinary offense is still ongoing. Regarding this matter, Mr. Christofides requested further information, noting the length of time that has elapsed.
During the Committee’s discussion, an official from the Office of the Commissioner for the Protection of Personal Data stated before the Committee that administrative fines had been imposed on the Cyprus Police in the past, citing illustrative examples, one of which concerned, on the one hand, the provision of material to an unauthorized individual who had retired from the force and was working as a private investigator, and, secondly, the publication in the media of excerpts from a statement given to the Police, 24 hours after the statement was taken. It was also noted that there are cases in which it cannot be determined where leaks of material containing personal data originated.
The Commissioner for the Protection of Personal Data, Maria Christofidou, in submitting a brief with comments and recommendations to the Committee, highlighted, among other things, the need to establish a common practical management framework for all entities and the relevant procedures, “which will specify who has access to photographs, testimony, and audiovisual material; how they are securely stored and transmitted; how access is logged, where feasible; and how the need for access is reviewed as a case progresses.”
She added that, in this context, there should also be a provision for an immediate response procedure in the event of a leak of such information. When asked by the Committee Chair whether protocols for managing such data currently exist in various institutions, such as hospitals, she replied that, even if they do exist, they are not implemented in practice.
On behalf of the Ministry of Justice, Spyros Gialouridis, Legal Affairs Officer, reported that, following the enactment of legislation in 2016—in accordance with an EU directive on the protection of the rights of victims of criminal acts— the Police had prepared and printed a guide for those affected, so that it would be available to them in the event that their rights were violated.
He also expressed the view that with the passage of this legislation and the publication of the guide, “things are now running smoothly,” noting that the criminal code is also sufficient for prosecuting cases where necessary. She added, however, that if it turns out that this process needs improvement, the Ministry is open to such changes.
The Chair of the Journalism Ethics Committee, Elli Kotziamani, pointed out during her remarks to the Committee that she was not aware of the Police’s publication of the guide in question, and expressed her intention for the Ethics Committee to review it, with a view to better managing issues related to the disclosure of information to the media.
In any case, Ms. Kotziamani emphasized the importance of weighing each case of information disclosure, taking into account both respect for personal data and the best possible performance of journalistic work. He highlighted the importance of media self-regulation, adding that this is a dynamic process, as the code of journalistic ethics is constantly being revised.
He explained that, depending on the situation, the disclosure of certain information can be useful for highlighting the true scope of an event and that these are delicate balances that need to be weighed on a case-by-case basis, guided by the code of journalistic ethics. He noted, however, cases in which provisions of the code regarding the publication of violent images may be violated, provided that the images serve a symbolic purpose for society as a whole, citing, for example, the murders of S. Solomos, I. Isaac, and P. Fyssas.
Ms. Kotziamani did, however, speak of the public’s lack of awareness of their rights, acknowledging that the relevant authorities also bear responsibility for this situation and emphasizing that guidelines and protocols regarding citizens’ rights should be publicized through the media.
He noted that citizens should be aware that they can also turn to the Journalism Ethics Committee, adding that there have been cases in the past of swift action and citing, by way of example, the case of photographs from the Helios air crash, which were published about five years ago. The immediate reaction, Ms. Kotziamani said, resulted in the photographs being withdrawn, adding that this also sent a message to the public that their reproduction is not appropriate.
In response to a question from DIKO MP Andreas Apostolou about whether it is appropriate to designate a person at each news organization who would be responsible for data protection issues, Ms. Kotziamani replied that no such proposal has been made, though she emphasized that the Commission maintains regular and two-way communication with journalists on issues related to the code of ethics.
In any case, Commissioner Christofidou also noted that she considers it necessary to strengthen journalistic ethics and self-regulation in order to prevent even indirect identification, through the publication of information regarding the victim’s identity and background.
At the same time, the Chair of the Human Rights Committee of the Cyprus Bar Association, Alexia Kountouri, noted that the media have made progress regarding the publication of photographs over the past 10 years or so, but she added that caution is needed in cases where photographs of families or victims of criminal acts are published, along with unnecessary information.
In remarks following the session, AKEL MP Anastasia Hasikou, noted that, although the Constitution and European legislation provide a framework for the rights of victims and families involved in criminal acts, and the code of journalistic ethics prohibits the acquisition and publication of material from hospitals without respect for privacy, questions remain regarding the scope and effectiveness of the protection provided.
“The European General Data Protection Regulation does not apply to the data of deceased individuals,” he explained, adding that “we need a clear picture of what the law currently provides for, what is applied in practice, and where there are gaps.” To that end, she said, the Commission will revisit this issue.
Responding to a reporter’s question, Ms. Hasikou acknowledged that the problem lies primarily on social media. “It is an issue we will address more comprehensively with the establishment of digital human rights,” she said. Responding to a question about examples of how other countries handle this issue, he noted that all European countries face this challenge and that citizens must be aware of their rights and know where to turn when they encounter a violation.
“We are not here to assign blame; we want to work with the relevant authorities to prevent leaks at their source,” Mr. Kounounis stated after the meeting.
“As Democratic Alarm, we are calling for rules regarding who has access to the scene, who takes photos, with what device, and who has access to the footage; and when a leak occurs, there must be an immediate investigation and accountability, because once such an image reaches people’s cell phones, you can no longer take it back, and those who ultimately pay the highest price are often people who did nothing wrong,” he added.
Responding to a reporter’s question, she said that what was said at the meeting was not satisfactory and that the Committee should review the matter again; otherwise, there will be no improvement.
Litsa Drousioti, a member of parliament from the Alma Movement, pointed out in her remarks that the real question, however, is whether protocols and procedures actually work when the need arises. “What does a family do in the first 60 minutes after a leak, who contacts the platforms, and who protects the family?” she said. He also added that human rights cannot be limited to the scope of the GDPR.
“We need a unified, clear, and immediately activated framework among all relevant agencies so that they know who has access to the data, who monitors data breaches, and who takes immediate action when one occurs,” he said.
Source: CNA
