On 9 October 2025, the Paris Criminal Court dismissed the proceedings against French investigative journalist Arianeย Lavrilleuxย in theย Egypt Papersย case.
During the hearing, the judge also reportedly recognised the public interest of the 2021ย Egypt Papersย investigation, co-authored byย Lavrilleuxย for the independent outletย Disclose. The investigation exposed a covert French intelligence operation, known asย Operation Sirli, in Egypt and alleged French complicity in airstrikes that killed hundreds of civilians.
Following the publication of the report, French authorities placedย Lavrilleuxย 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 โฌ100,000 fine.
โThe dismissal of the proceedings against Arianeย Lavrilleuxย is an important victory for press freedom in France,โย Discloseโsย Executive Director, Mathiasย Destal, told Media Defence. โItโs the first ruling to enshrine the right to information over defence secrecy in France.โ
However, in an unexpected move, the Paris Court of Appealโs public prosecutor announcedย on 23 October 2025, its intention to appeal the dismissal – placingย Lavrilleuxโsย freedom back in jeopardy.
โNothing is certain now,โย Destalย said. โThe Paris Court of Appeal intends to challenge this historic decision.โ
Case Background: Theย Egypt Papersย and Operation Sirliย
In November 2021,ย Discloseย publishedย The Egypt Papers, a five-part investigation byย Lavrilleuxย and three other journalists, exposingย Operation Sirli, a secret French intelligence mission launched in Egypt in 2016.
Based on hundreds of classified documents leaked by aย Discloseย source, the investigation alleged that intelligence shared by France with Egypt (2016โ2018) wasย likely misusedย to conduct arbitrary airstrikes, ordered by the incumbent Egyptian regime, targeting smugglers along theย EgyptianโLibyanย border under the pretext ofย 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 thatย appeared to sidelineย 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,ย Egyptians Abroad for Democracyย andย CodePinkย – Women for Peace.ย 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 Detentionย
In late November 2021, Franceโs Ministry of the Armed Forces filed a criminal complaint againstย Lavrilleuxย for theย ‘appropriation and disclosure of a national defence secretโ, and concerns that the publication of the leaked documents could lead to the identification of a protected agent.
Discloseย 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 theย Egypt Papersย to allow security precautions.
A formal judicial investigation intoย Lavrilleuxย reportedly beganย in July 2022. This inquiry was led by the Direction Gรฉnรฉrale de laย Sรฉcuritรฉย Intรฉrieureย (DGSI)- Franceโs internal intelligence agency, typically responsible forย counter-terrorismย andย counter-espionage.
As part of this judicial inquiry, at 6 a.m. on 19 September 2023,ย Lavrilleuxโsย home in Marseille was raided. DGSI officers searched the premises for ten hours, seizing her computer, USBย sticksย and mobile devices.
She wasย subsequentlyย taken into custody for 39 hours and questioned. While in custody the police informedย Lavrilleuxย 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 theย Egypt Papersย report.
Discloseย maintainsย that the aim of the incident was toย identifyย Discloseโsย sources in relation to theย Egypt Papersย publications.
Documents from the judicial investigation later revealed thatย Lavrilleuxย had been placed under prolonged surveillance by DGSI agents from the beginning of the investigation. Her movements wereย monitored, her phone geolocated in real time, her bank accounts scrutinised, and her private communications tracked. The DGSI also monitoredย Discloseโsย offices in the Paris region.
Legal Proceedings, Dismissal, and Appealย
In January 2025,ย Lavrilleuxย was summoned before a counter-terrorism judge in Paris, facingย 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,ย various national outletsย reportedย thatย the proceedings against her had been dismissed. During the hearing, the judge underscored the clear public interest served by theย Egypt Papersย investigation.
However, later that month, French dailyย Libรฉrationย reportedย that the Paris public prosecutor intends to appeal the ruling, a reversal of its earlier stance.
โThe prosecutorโs office had notย soughtย to have Msย Lavrilleuxย placed under formal investigation and had itself requested a dismissal due to insufficient evidence,โย saidย Christophe Bigot,ย Lavrilleuxโsย lawyer. โThis relentless pursuit is incomprehensible and shocking.โ
The prosecutorโs officeย statedย that it was necessary for the Court of Appeal โto rule on the legal questions raised by this case, in particular the balance between press freedom and national defence secrecy.โ
Legal Harassment of Independent Media in Franceย
Since its founding in 2018,ย Discloseย 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 mostย frequentlyย targeted media organisations in France.
Earlier reporting byย Discloseย on French arms sales to Saudi Arabiaย led to investigations of three of their journalists for โrevealing state secretsโ.ย After aย yearย the investigations were dropped due to a lack of substantive evidence.
France ranks 25th out of 180 countries in RSFโs 2025 World Press Freedom Index. While the legislative frameworkย generally protectsย press freedom and journalistsโ rights, shortcomingsย remainย in addressing gag lawsuits and safeguarding the confidentiality of journalistic sources.
Franceโs Laws on National Defence Secrets and Source Protectionย
Under Franceโs 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, aย 2010 amendment,ย allows investigators to infringe source confidentiality โdirectly or indirectlyโ if there is an overriding requirement in the public interest.
In addition, compromisingย national defence secretsย remainsย a criminal offence – even for whistleblowers or journalists acting in the public interest.
Disclose acknowledged that publishing theย Egypt Papersย carried legal risk, butย maintainedย that sinceย Operation Sirliโs funding, was โhidden within Franceโs overseas operations budgetโ,ย it had evaded democratic oversight and therefore needed to be exposed to uphold the publicโs right to know.
According to the outlet, even Members of Parliament, including the National Assemblyโs intelligence and defence committees, were never informed of the operation.
Misuse of National Security Laws to Target Journalistsย
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 โcatch-allโ national security offenses to convict journalists, moving beyond their legitimate purposes and what isย permittedย 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.
Inย Lavrilleuxโsย 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 Forwardย
Lavrilleuxโsย ordeal – surveillance, detention, interrogation, and now an appeal –ย demonstratesย 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 onlyย Lavrilleuxโsย future but the direction of investigative journalism in France.
โIt took three years for justice to recognise what should have been obvious,โย Discloseย wrote. โThat informing the public must never become a punishable offence.โ
Media Defence provided financial support forย Lavrilleuxโsย legal costs and will continue to supportย herย in any future proceedings.