Ariane Lavrilleux: Landmark Judgment for Source Protection to be Appealed by Paris Public Prosecutor

On 9 October 2025, the Paris Criminal Court dismissed the proceedings against French investigative journalist Ariane Lavrilleux in the Egypt Papers case.

During the hearing, the judge also reportedly recognised the public interest of the 2021 Egypt Papers investigation, co-authored by Lavrilleux for the independent outlet Disclose. The investigation exposed a covert French intelligence operation, known as Operation Sirli, in Egypt and alleged French complicity in airstrikes that killed hundreds of civilians.

Following the publication of the report, French authorities placed Lavrilleux under surveillance, detained her, and subjected her to interrogation in connection with a criminal complaint accusing her of revealing a national defence secret (Article 413, Subsections 9-12, of the French Penal Code) – an offence punishable by up to seven years in prison and a €100,000 fine.

“The dismissal of the proceedings against Ariane Lavrilleux is an important victory for press freedom in France,” Disclose’s Executive Director, Mathias Destal, told Media Defence. “It’s the first ruling to enshrine the right to information over defence secrecy in France.”

However, in an unexpected move, the Paris Court of Appeal’s public prosecutor announced on 23 October 2025, its intention to appeal the dismissal – placing Lavrilleux’s freedom back in jeopardy.

“Nothing is certain now,” Destal said. “The Paris Court of Appeal intends to challenge this historic decision.”

Case Background: The Egypt Papers and Operation Sirli 

In November 2021, Disclose published The Egypt Papers, a five-part investigation by Lavrilleux and three other journalists, exposing Operation Sirli, a secret French intelligence mission launched in Egypt in 2016.

Based on hundreds of classified documents leaked by a Disclose source, the investigation alleged that intelligence shared by France with Egypt (2016–2018) was likely misused to conduct arbitrary airstrikes, ordered by the incumbent Egyptian regime, targeting smugglers along the Egyptian–Libyan border under the pretext of counter-terrorism. According to the report, French intelligence was implicated in at least 19 bombings that may have killed hundreds of civilians.

The files also allegedly revealed undisclosed dealings behind French arms sales to Egypt and a shadow diplomacy that appeared to sideline human rights in favour of military profits.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is now examining these allegations following a complaint lodged in early 2024 by two NGOs, Egyptians Abroad for Democracy and CodePink – Women for Peace. The case was communicated by the ECtHR on 30 September 2024 and listed several questions to the parties, including whether military cooperation is subject to legal recourse in France. The case is ongoing.

Judicial Investigation, Surveillance and Detention 

In late November 2021, France’s Ministry of the Armed Forces filed a criminal complaint against Lavrilleux for the ‘appropriation and disclosure of a national defence secret’, and concerns that the publication of the leaked documents could lead to the identification of a protected agent.

Disclose noted that it carefully protected the identities of French and Egyptian agents by redacting any identifying details and had informed the authorities five days before publication of the Egypt Papers to allow security precautions.

A formal judicial investigation into Lavrilleux reportedly began in July 2022. This inquiry was led by the Direction Générale de la Sécurité Intérieure (DGSI)- France’s internal intelligence agency, typically responsible for counter-terrorism and counter-espionage.

As part of this judicial inquiry, at 6 a.m. on 19 September 2023, Lavrilleux’s home in Marseille was raided. DGSI officers searched the premises for ten hours, seizing her computer, USB sticks and mobile devices.

She was subsequently taken into custody for 39 hours and questioned. While in custody the police informed Lavrilleux that she had been arrested as part of an investigation into the compromising of national defence secrets, however she was never formally charged. The allegations concerned several articles in addition to the Egypt Papers report.

Disclose maintains that the aim of the incident was to identify Disclose’s sources in relation to the Egypt Papers publications.

Documents from the judicial investigation later revealed that Lavrilleux had been placed under prolonged surveillance by DGSI agents from the beginning of the investigation. Her movements were monitored, her phone geolocated in real time, her bank accounts scrutinised, and her private communications tracked. The DGSI also monitored Disclose’s offices in the Paris region.

Legal Proceedings, Dismissal, and Appeal 

In January 2025, Lavrilleux was summoned before a counter-terrorism judge in Paris, facing possible indictment. She became the first French journalist to be interrogated by a counter-terrorism judge – a move widely denounced for potential to chill investigative reporting.

In early 2025, the judge declined to indict her but noted that she was still a suspect within the investigation.

In October 2025, various national outlets reported that the proceedings against her had been dismissed. During the hearing, the judge underscored the clear public interest served by the Egypt Papers investigation.

However, later that month, French daily Libération reported that the Paris public prosecutor intends to appeal the ruling, a reversal of its earlier stance.

“The prosecutor’s office had not sought to have Ms Lavrilleux placed under formal investigation and had itself requested a dismissal due to insufficient evidence,” said Christophe Bigot, Lavrilleux’s lawyer. “This relentless pursuit is incomprehensible and shocking.”

The prosecutor’s office stated that it was necessary for the Court of Appeal “to rule on the legal questions raised by this case, in particular the balance between press freedom and national defence secrecy.”

Legal Harassment of Independent Media in France 

Since its founding in 2018, Disclose has faced sustained pressure from French intelligence services. Four of its journalists have been intimidated or interrogated by the DGSI, making it, according to the outlet, one of the most frequently targeted media organisations in France.

Earlier reporting by Disclose on French arms sales to Saudi Arabia led to investigations of three of their journalists for “revealing state secrets”. After a year the investigations were dropped due to a lack of substantive evidence.

France ranks 25th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2025 World Press Freedom Index. While the legislative framework generally protects press freedom and journalists’ rights, shortcomings remain in addressing gag lawsuits and safeguarding the confidentiality of journalistic sources.

France’s Laws on National Defence Secrets and Source Protection 

Under France’s 1881 Press Freedom Law, journalists cannot be compelled to reveal their sources. Data seized during a search targeting a journalist must be sealed and can only be opened if authorised by a judge.

However, a 2010 amendment, allows investigators to infringe source confidentiality “directly or indirectly” if there is an overriding requirement in the public interest.

In addition, compromising national defence secrets remains a criminal offence – even for whistleblowers or journalists acting in the public interest.

Disclose acknowledged that publishing the Egypt Papers carried legal risk, but maintained that since Operation Sirli’s funding, was “hidden within France’s overseas operations budget”, it had evaded democratic oversight and therefore needed to be exposed to uphold the public’s right to know.

According to the outlet, even Members of Parliament, including the National Assembly’s intelligence and defence committees, were never informed of the operation.

Misuse of National Security Laws to Target Journalists 

The tension between national security and freedom of expression is not unique to France. National security laws are often used to muzzle critical voices around the world. There is an increasing reliance on “catch-all” national security offenses to convict journalists, moving beyond their legitimate purposes and what is permitted under international legal standards.

International human rights law recognises that national security may justify restrictions on expression, but only where measures are lawful, necessary, and proportionate, and not misused to suppress dissent.

In Lavrilleux’s case, invoking national security appears less about protecting the state than about shielding potential wrongdoing and exposing sources. Investigating public-interest journalism under a national security mandate in France also grants the DGSI the full range of intrusive surveillance powers, creating a climate of fear for media outlets investigating state actions and deterring sources and potential whistleblowers.

Moving Forward 

Lavrilleux’s ordeal – surveillance, detention, interrogation, and now an appeal – demonstrates how national security laws can be wielded against those exposing potential state misconduct. As France weighs the balance between national security and press freedom, the outcome will shape not only Lavrilleux’s future but the direction of investigative journalism in France.

“It took three years for justice to recognise what should have been obvious,” Disclose wrote. “That informing the public must never become a punishable offence.”

Media Defence provided financial support for Lavrilleux’s legal costs and will continue to support her in any future proceedings.