Cyprus is failing to meet its European obligations amid significant changes in the media ownership landscape. EU legislation stipulates direct and easy access to media ownership information for citizens. However, this is not being implemented in practice in the Republic of Cyprus. Neither the government nor the media outlets have taken any steps to align with legal obligations for transparency.
In August, the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) has come into force with direct effect in EU Member States. Among other key provisions, the European legislation requires media providers to disclose their ownership in a manner that is directly and easily accessible to the public. It also obliges the state to create a public database on the ownership status of the media to facilitate monitoring. The legislation is binding for Cyprus, but nothing is being implemented in practice.
According to EU Regulation 2024/1083, media outlets should disclose their direct and indirect owners and identify those, who can influence their journalistic (editorial) or strategic decisions. To date, Cypriot citizens are still not able to know who owns the media and who is behind the news.
The need for transparency in media ownership was brought highlighted in 2024 by the Cyprus Investigative Reporting Network (CIReN). CIREN published an updated report last Thursday (January 8, 2026) titled “Who owns the media” in Cyprus. This research was conducted amid significant changes in major media groups in the Republic of Cyprus, some of which announced the entry of new strategic investors into the sector.
CIReN looked at the ownership status of media outlets and cross-checked it with data from the Registrar of Companies for verification purposes. This data is not easily accessible to the general public. European Commission is addressing the issue, having noted the gaps in transparency and pluralism in Cyprus, and will meet with stakeholders this month to draft its annual report on the rule of law in Cyprus.
Why it matters
The EU has adopted the EU Regulation 2024/1083 on the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) to make transparency in media ownership mandatory, and strengthen editorial independence. Whoever owns the media is in a position to influence the content of news. Therefore, without transparency, public debate risks being distorted, undermining pluralism and trust in journalism.
Cyprus is in an alarming situation according to international assessments. The Republic of Cyprus slipped 12 places in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index of RSF (Reporters Without Borders). It ranks 77th out of 180 countries in the international ranking. RSF underlines the influence that the government and the church have over the media, as well as the close ties between media owners and the political elite and powerful economic interests. The lack of transparency in media ownership in Cyprus was assessed as a high risk (90%) to pluralism by the European Monitor on media pluralism. The situation in the northern part of Cyprus is even worse.
In its 2025 report, CIReN has updated the media ownership data and included all Cypriot television channels and newspapers, as well as additional online media outlets and radio stations. Through its research, CIReN seeks to fill the information gap and record changes in ownership, as well as check whether announcements about strategic investors correspond with official corporate records of shareholders and beneficial owners.
A legal obligation
A new reality now prevails in the EU with regard to media transparency. By law, Cypriot citizens have the right to know who owns the media. But so far, European legislation has not been adopted.
EMFA was adopted in April 2024 and entered into full force with direct effect in the Member States on 8 August 2025. The immediate legal effect is carried by two o most essential provisions: first, ensuring editorial independence in journalism and, second, ensuring transparency of media ownership.
The Republic of Cyprus has so far not implemented the legislation, citing internal arrangements required by the Regulation, such as the establishment of a common framework for supervision and the assignment of tasks to national institutions for media services. However, these do not negate its explicit obligation to implement EU law. This delay has left institutions that now supervise the media in limbo, while media owners avoid or circumvent their legal obligation to provide citizens with easy and direct access to information about their ownership status.
The obligations are explicitly set out in EMFA, Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1083. Media service providers are required to “make easily and directly accessible to the recipients of their services up-to-date information” concerning their ownership structure.
More specifically, they must disclose “the names of their direct or indirect owners, including beneficial owners, and the names of natural or legal persons who are able to exercise influence over the operation and strategic decision-making of the media service provider.”
Through the same regulation, media service providers are also required to disclose “any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could influence the provision of news and current affairs content.” They are further obliged to make public “the total amount of public funds allocated to them for state advertising over the previous year and the total amount of advertising revenue received from public authorities or entities of third countries over the previous year.”
Public database
Under Article 7 of the Regulation, the Cypriot government should have designated national or regulatory authorities for “the development of national databases on media ownership containing the information” required under the European Media Freedom Act.
This responsibility appears like it will be assiged to the Radio-Television Authority, but only once the pending legislation is adopted.
Public consultation on the EMFA has been limited so far. Last April, a draft bill was submitted to stakeholders by the Ministry of the Interior, which drew strong criticism from journalists themselves, press freedom advocacy groups, and legal experts, who warned that it could threaten media freedom rather than protect it.
The Union of Cyprus Journalists told CIReN that it participated in another meeting in May at the Ministry of Interior, alongside the Committee on Journalistic Ethics and the Publishers Association, and submitted written recommendations in June, expressing “serious reservations regarding the protection of journalists and journalistic sources.”
The Ministry of Interior stated that the final draft was submitted in July to the Law Office of the Republic, requesting “urgent legal review.” In a more recent request for further information, in the light of the publication of CIReN’s 2025 media ownership report, the Ministry said that the relevant “proposal has been submitted to the Council of Ministers and included in today’s meeting agenda” (14.1.2026).
CIReN also requested information on the ownership status of the media, but the Ministry of the Interior referred to a centralized list of media outlets held by the Radio and Television Authority and the Press and Information Office. However, these lists only contain basic contact details and no information on ownership status is provided.
CIReN also contacted the Radio and Television Authority, which replied that “to date, it does not maintain any memorandum, list, or other electronic/printed file in which the ownership details of the supervised broadcasting organizations are collected and updated” and that “at this stage, there is no data available to send or share.”
Based on existing legislation, the Authority keeps records and examines requests for changes in the shareholding structure of media outlets. The Authority responded to CIReN that it requests interested parties to immediately notify it of any changes. However, it admitted that “not all organisations comply with this obligation, with the result that the Authority does not always have official and complete information on new shareholders”.
Furthermore, the Authority said that “in some cases, companies proceed with changes in their shareholding structure without the prior approval of the Authority, in violation of the applicable procedures.” In such cases, the Authority conducts an investigation, identifies possible violations, and imposes penalties. Thus, the Authority acknowledges that “the available information may not always be fully up to date or reliable.”
Transparency in media ownership is no longer optional. Under the EMFA Regulation, these obligations are explicit, directly binding, and self-executing under EU law. They bind media service providers regardless of whether national legislation has been adopted. The Cypriot government should have by now have designated national or regulatory authorities for “the development of national databases on media ownership containing the information” as required under the EMFA.
Transparency in ownership is vital to democracy, as it strengthens public trust, ensures fair competition, and prevents manipulation. Through transparency, the public is able to evaluate the media, who controls the information, biases, conflicts of interest, and in this way, hold media owners accountable to society.