Lawyers respond to allegations
On January 12, 2026, lawyers representing Nicoletta Tsikkinis sent a detailed letter to constitutional lawyer Achilleas Emilianides, who acts on behalf of Philippa Karsera. The letter addresses complaints regarding alleged defamatory Facebook posts.
Tsikkinis’ lawyers categorically rejected the claims, citing European Court of Human Rights rulings, as well as Cypriot and European law. They argued that the posts constitute legitimate political criticism and public discourse, without false statements or personal attacks.
Specific posts addressed
The letter examines each contested post individually and asserts that the original complaint constitutes a chilling effect against freedom of expression. Lawyers maintain that the correspondence aims to intimidate and silence Tsikkinis’ critical voice through threats of legal action.
Background: “videogate” controversy
The contested posts relate to recent events surrounding the so-called “videogate” and public statements by the President of the Republic and Ms. Karsera. According to the letter, public reaction reflected widespread concern over the scandal and triggered significant institutional consequences, including Karsera’s resignation from her presidency at the relevant body, the resignation of a senior Presidential official, and the President’s announcement of possible organizational restructuring.
Tsikkinis’ lawyers noted that these developments occurred in the context of intense public debate on social media and traditional media, where various opinions, criticisms, and discussions circulated widely.
Legal and factual defense
The January 12 letter explicitly refers to a statement by Karsera dated January 11, 2026, in which she described what she called a personal attack on her family via social media, involving allegedly false or defamatory posts. Tsikkinis’ lawyers argue that such posts were part of a legitimate public discussion and did not include malicious or false content.
They emphasize that Karsera’s legal complaint followed her consultation with legal counsel, which underscores the correspondence’s purpose as a defensive and deterrent tactic rather than evidence of defamation.
Tsikkinis’ legal team maintains that all posts fall within the rights of citizens to engage in political and public commentary. They urge that the complaint be viewed as an attempt to suppress lawful expression rather than a valid legal grievance.
Also read: Phedonos: I welcome the probe; then it will be my turn to speak
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel
