The Republic of Cyprus had to pay €5,000 and face proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) before moving to abolish an outdated provision of the Criminal Code dating back to the British colonial era, a provision widely seen as an obvious interference with private life and one that created the risk of criminal prosecution.
What makes the matter particularly striking is that the problematic provisions of the Criminal Code are not unknown. They have been examined in studies, highlighted repeatedly and featured in numerous reports over the years. Yet they have remained in force.
The application before the ECHR concerned Article 97 of the Criminal Code, which criminalises the participation of women who dance or sing at Muslim celebrations and, remarkably, legally equates the term "dancer" with "prostitute".
Specifically, the provision states:
(1) Any person who organises or is responsible for organising a Muslim celebration, or who is the owner of premises where such a Muslim celebration takes place, and who hires, whether for payment or otherwise, or knowingly permits a dancer to dance or sing during such a celebration, is guilty of a misdemeanour and liable to a fine not exceeding seventy-five pounds or imprisonment for one month.
(2) In this section, "dancer" means a female prostitute or a woman who dances or sings for payment at a Muslim celebration. "Muslim celebration" means a Muslim festivity organised on the occasion of a marriage or circumcision.
The Muslim complainant
The case was resolved in September 2026 through a friendly settlement, which provided for the payment of €5,000 to the applicant (Ziya v. Cyprus) and a commitment by the state to amend the legislation.
Following the settlement, the Ministry of Justice last Thursday submitted an amending bill to Parliament seeking the repeal of the disputed provision.
The applicant is a Muslim resident of Larnaca. On the occasion of his daughter's wedding, he wished to organise a Muslim celebration featuring Ottoman dances and music. Under the existing legislation, however, he faced the possibility of criminal prosecution and imprisonment.
Outdated and contradictory provisions
The Criminal Code contains numerous provisions that belong to another era, either because of their content or their language. These include rules that are outdated, contradictory or unclear and which ought to be examined in light of modern social realities and contemporary legal standards.
One notable example is the offence of breaking plates in entertainment venues. As surprising as it may sound, intentionally smashing tableware in a public entertainment establishment remains a criminal offence.
Likewise, possessing handcuffs without a permit from the Chief of Police remains a criminal offence. An item now sold openly in shops selling adult products is still treated under the law as an object requiring official authorisation, with penalties including imprisonment.
And the list does not end there. The Criminal Code still contains provisions defining the duties of a "Master", requiring him to provide food, clothing and accommodation to servants.
Examples of provisions that may require review
Article 50D - Insulting the military
(1) Any person who maliciously publicly insults the military is guilty of a misdemeanour and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or a fine not exceeding one thousand five hundred pounds, or both.
(2) For the purposes of this section, "military" includes the army of the Republic, the National Guard and any other military force established by law.
Article 83 - Knives at weddings and brothels
(1) Any person carrying or transporting a knife without a pointed end at a wedding, festival, brothel or licensed premises is guilty of a misdemeanour.
(2) Any person carrying or transporting a knife with a pointed end at a wedding, festival, brothel or licensed premises is guilty of a misdemeanour and liable to two years' imprisonment.
(3) Where a lesser penalty is imposed, the court must state the reasons for doing so.
(4) A person shall not be guilty of an offence under this section if they satisfy the court that the knife was carried in the course of their trade or profession.
Article 86A - Possession of handcuffs
Any person who imports, manufactures, sells, offers for sale, displays for sale, possesses or transports handcuffs without the permission of the Chief of Police is guilty of a misdemeanour and liable to six months' imprisonment, a fine of five hundred pounds, or both.
The restriction does not apply to the Republic's security forces, the National Guard or the Prisons Department.
Article 95A - Breaking tableware in public entertainment venues
(1) Any person who intentionally breaks glass, porcelain or other fragile tableware in a public entertainment venue is guilty of a misdemeanour and liable to six months' imprisonment.
(2) The owner or manager of the venue who provides the means for committing the offence is guilty of a misdemeanour and subject to the same penalty.
Article 96 - Destruction of official notices
Any person who wilfully and without lawful authority tears down, damages or destroys a notice, announcement or document posted or intended to be posted on a building or public place under any law, regulation or order of a public authority is guilty of a misdemeanour and liable to a fine not exceeding seventy-five pounds or imprisonment for one month.
Article 188 - Idle and disorderly persons
The following persons shall be deemed idle and disorderly and liable to one month's imprisonment or a fine not exceeding seventy-five pounds or both:
- A common prostitute behaving in a disorderly or indecent manner in a public place.
- Any vagrant or person residing in a public place for the purpose of begging or collecting alms, or encouraging a child to do so.
- Any man seeking customers or persistently soliciting for immoral purposes in a public place.
- Any person who, without lawful excuse, commits an indecent act in a public place.
Article 223 - Duties of a master
Any person who, in the capacity of a Master, has undertaken by contract to provide a servant or apprentice under the age of 16 with food, clothing or accommodation has a duty to do so and shall be deemed responsible for any consequences to the servant's life or health arising from failure to fulfil that duty.
Article 268 - Theft by clerks and servants
Where a person guilty of theft is a clerk or servant, and the property stolen belongs to the employer or came into the offender's possession on behalf of the employer, that person is liable to imprisonment for 14 years.
