Cypriot authorities mishandled their investigation into the case of a British woman who was found guilty of allegedly lying about a gang rape attack before her conviction was overturned, the European Court of Human Rights has concluded.

The woman, then 19, told Cypriot police she had been raped in Ayia Napa in July 2019 but retracted the allegation after being held without a lawyer.

The court found “the Cypriot authorities failed in their obligation to effectively investigate the applicant’s complaint of rape and to adopt a victim‑sensitive approach when doing so”.

It awarded the Derbyshire woman €20,000 in damages and €5,000 in costs.

The court found Cypriot authorities breached article 3 – protection from torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment – and article 8 – the right to respect for private and family life – of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The woman originally told police she had been raped by 12 Israeli men and boys.

After the retraction she was tried and convicted of causing public mischief and given a suspended four month sentence.

This was overturned at the Supreme Court in Cyprus in 2022 on the grounds the original conviction for public mischief was unsafe.

The case outraged women’s rights campaigners who felt the woman had been treated like the accused rather than a victim.

Thursday’s judgement, as well as noting issues with the forensic investigation, highlighted “the failure of the authorities in their central task of examining whether there had been consent”.

It also said: “Neither the chief investigator nor the counsel for the Attorney General….engaged in any meaningful examination of the evidence which could signify a lack of consent.”

The judges also felt the authorities took the suspects’ statements that no rape had taken place “at face value”.

The ruling said: “In conclusion, the Court observes that the present case reveals certain biases concerning women in Cyprus which impeded the effective protection of the applicant’s rights as a victim of gender-based violence and which, if not reversed, run the risk of creating a background of impunity, discouraging victims’ trust in the criminal justice system, despite the existence of a satisfactory legislative framework.”

It added: “The investigative and prosecutorial authorities’ response to the applicant’s allegations of rape in the present case fell short of the state’s positive obligation to apply the relevant criminal provisions in practice through effective investigation and prosecution.”

Justice Abroad, which has represented the woman, known as X in court, through the process, welcomed the verdict.

Its director, Michael Polak, said: “This is a landmark decision for victims of sexual violence.

“The ruling reinforces the fundamental principle that allegations of sexual violence must be investigated thoroughly and fairly, without institutional obstruction.

“Following our victory in X v Greece, where the court found that Greek authorities had failed to uphold the rights of a rape victim, this case further strengthens the procedural protections for victims of sexual violence in Europe.

“By holding that Cyprus was in breach of the rights of our client, we hope that the court’s decision will cause the Attorney General of the Republic of Cyprus to reconsider his decision and order a proper investigation using outside investigators.

“A proper framework for the investigation and prosecution of sexual offences needs to be developed urgently in Cyprus.

“Our client has shown immense resilience in her pursuit of justice, and we hope this outcome will empower others to speak out against such offences and demand accountability from authorities.”