Every year, 3 May – World Press Freedom Day – is marked by official statements. This year was no different. Through its government spokesperson, the government reaffirmed “its absolute respect for the institutional role of journalists, the independence of the media and the right of citizens to be informed freely, pluralistically and reliably”.
Democracy, Konstantinos Letymbiotis added, “needs scrutiny, criticism, investigation, exposure and opposing views. It needs journalists who can work without fear, without pressure, without threats and without institutional obstacles”.
These are correct statements – ones that should be self‑evident in a European country. Unfortunately, reality undermines this picture. In the World Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders, Cyprus is in steady decline. Over the past five years, it has dropped by ten places and now finds itself ranked alongside the occupied areas. The Republic of Cyprus stands in 80th place, while the occupied territories – where journalists face harassment – are ranked 82nd. According to the president of the Cyprus Journalists’ Union, Cyprus, along with Greece, sits at the bottom among European countries.
The country’s continuous fall in the index cannot be dismissed as accidental. Journalists experience this deterioration first‑hand in their daily work – closed doors when seeking information and institutional barriers, to use Letymbiotis’s own words. After years, even decades, of effort, journalists in Cyprus – like all citizens, particularly following EU accession – had secured the right to access public information.
They could pick up the phone, speak directly with civil servants and obtain information on technical matters, keeping the public informed on developments of wider interest.
Over the past three years, this has no longer been the case. In any ministry. Public officials – even senior, well‑paid directors – now refer even basic queries to press officers. These officers request written questions, which are then filtered at ministerial level. Information that may damage the government’s image is removed before responses are returned – usually with considerable delay.
This practice, introduced by the current government, effectively sidelines public servants and places journalistic content under control. It is not only unacceptable – it is undemocratic.
Protecting press freedom, therefore, cannot be reduced to statements of principle. It requires genuine access to information. Without it – and it is clear that this is where those in power are investing – holding the executive to account becomes almost impossible.
