Defamation in Cyprus is a civil wrong, not a crime. Criminal libel was taken out of the Criminal Code in 2003, so a false and damaging post about you leads to a damages claim in the District Court, not a police complaint. The rules sit in sections 17 to 25 of the Civil Wrongs Law, Cap. 148, and the clock is short: you have one year from publication to issue proceedings.
What counts as defamation under Cap. 148
Section 17 defines defamation as publishing, by any means, matter that does one of five things to another person:
- 1accuses them of a crime (including conduct abroad that would be an offence in Cyprus);
- 2accuses them of improper conduct in a public office;
- 3tends to injure their reputation in their profession, trade, work or position;
- 4is likely to expose them to general hatred, contempt or ridicule;
- 5is likely to cause others to shun or avoid them.
That list is narrower in form than the English common-law test, because the Cypriot statute was lifted almost word for word from a colonial-era model. In practice most damaging allegations fit into one of the five boxes.
The meaning does not need to be spelled out. Under section 17(4), an innuendo counts if the defamatory sense and the reference to the claimant can be worked out from the words themselves, from outside circumstances, or from both. A post that never names you but describes "the British estate agent on the corner of the main square in Kato Paphos" can still be about you.
Section 17(2) closes off the usual excuses. It is no defence that you were repeating a rumour, that you named your source, that you believed the statement was true (subject to the specific defences below), or that you did not mean to refer to the claimant. A court can take those points into account when it sets damages.
Publication, libel and slander
Something is only defamatory once it reaches a third party. Section 18 treats publication as making the defamatory meaning known to anyone other than the person defamed or the publisher's own spouse. A private message sent only to the person you are criticising is not published. Copy in their employer and it is.
Cap. 148 keeps the old distinction between permanent and spoken defamation. Under section 17(3), defamation by words, gestures or other sounds is only actionable if you can prove special damage (a real, quantifiable loss), unless the words:
- impute a crime punishable by imprisonment on a first conviction;
- are aimed at damaging your reputation in your profession, trade, work or position;
- impute a contagious or infectious disease;
- impute adultery or unchastity to a woman or girl (the statute's wording, which dates from 1932).
Broadcasting is treated as permanent, as are print and writing. A Facebook post, Google review, WhatsApp group message or YouTube video falls on the permanent side of the line, so most claims arising today are libel claims and special damage does not have to be proved.
The defences
Section 19 sets out four defences.
Truth. If the statement is true, the claim fails. Where a publication makes several separate allegations, the defence survives even if one is not proved, provided the unproved part does not materially injure the claimant's reputation given what was proved.
Fair comment. Honest opinion on a matter of public interest is protected. Where a piece mixes facts and opinion, the defence does not fail just because every fact cannot be proved, as long as the opinion is fair in light of the facts that are established. It does fail if the claimant shows the comment was not made in good faith.
Privilege. Section 20 grants absolute privilege, where truth and motive are irrelevant, to things such as statements made in court by judges, lawyers, witnesses and parties, and fair, accurate and contemporaneous reports of court proceedings (unless the court has banned publication). Section 21 grants qualified privilege, which depends on good faith, to communications made under a legal, moral or social duty to someone with a matching interest, to complaints made to a person with authority over the subject (a complaint about a lawyer to the Cyprus Bar Association, say, or about an employee to their manager), and to statements made to protect your own or another's legitimate interests.
Qualified privilege is lost under section 21(2) if the statement was false and the maker either did not believe it, or published it without taking reasonable care to check it, or used the occasion to cause substantially more harm than the purpose required. Helpfully for defendants, section 21(3) puts the burden of proving bad faith on the claimant.
Unintentional defamation. Section 22 lets a publisher who defamed someone innocently (without knowing the words could refer to them, or could be read as defamatory) make a formal "offer of amends": a correction and an adequate apology, backed by a sworn statement of the facts relied on. If the claimant accepts and the offer is carried out, the claim against that publisher ends. If they refuse, the offer becomes a defence, provided it was made as soon as practicable and not withdrawn.
There is also a separate claim for injurious falsehood under section 25: a malicious false statement about someone's business, goods or title to property. It usually needs proof of financial loss, which matters to a company whose products are trashed online.
The one-year time limit
The Limitation of Actionable Rights Law of 2012 (Law 66(I)/2012), section 6(4), bars any defamation or malicious falsehood claim brought more than one year after the cause of action arose. Most other civil wrongs carry six years under section 6(1). One year is short when you factor in tracking down an anonymous account, gathering screenshots and getting a letter of demand out. If you are reading this months after a post went up, speak to a lawyer this week.
Keep evidence before it disappears: full screenshots showing the date, URL and account name, a list of who saw or shared the post, and anything showing harm (lost clients, cancelled contracts, messages from people who read it).
How a claim works in practice
Defamation claims start in the District Court and, if filed on or after 1 September 2023, run under the new Civil Procedure Rules, which expect a proper letter of claim before proceedings are issued. Our guide to the Cyprus court system explains which court hears what.
The usual sequence is:
- 1A letter from your advocate demanding removal of the material, a retraction and an apology, sometimes with a compensation figure.
- 2If that fails, issuing a claim for damages and, where the material is still online and causing harm, applying for an injunction ordering it to come down.
- 3Exchange of pleadings and documents, then trial on liability and damages.
When damages are set, section 23 lets the defendant reduce them by proving, with reasonable notice to the claimant, that they apologised (or offered to) before the claim was issued or at the first opportunity, that the claimant already had a general bad reputation in the respect attacked, or that the claimant provoked them. Section 24 gives licensed newspapers a further defence if they pay a sufficient sum into court, published without actual malice and without gross negligence, and printed a full apology.
There is no published tariff for awards, and figures depend on how serious the allegation was, how many people saw it and whether the defendant apologised. Run the costs against the likely recovery before you sue, and read our note on how much lawyers cost in Cyprus first. Where the post also misuses personal data, a complaint to the Data Protection Commissioner may run alongside the claim; see our guide to GDPR in Cyprus.
Is defamation going to become a crime again?
Possibly, though not yet. A government bill to amend the Criminal Code, which included re-criminalising defamation and insult alongside a "fake news" offence with up to five years' imprisonment, sat before the House Legal Affairs Committee for about three years. In July 2024 the government asked for the vote to be postponed and set up a team of experts to rework it, and in October 2024 the OSCE advised that the draft should not be pursued in its current form. We could find no record of a revised version being passed as of October 2026. Check the current position before relying on it, particularly if you write about public figures.
If someone is threatening to sue you
Take a defamation letter seriously but do not panic or delete everything at once. Removing the post and offering a correction promptly can reduce damages under section 23 and may support an offer of amends under section 22. Arguing the point in public usually makes the publication, and the damages, larger. If you believe what you wrote is true or was honest opinion on a matter of public interest, get advice on whether you can prove it before you reply.
Dealing with a defamatory post or a threatening letter? Browse litigation and dispute resolution lawyers, find an advocate in Nicosia or elsewhere through the directory, and get advice well within the one-year limit.