ECIPS President Baretzky Issues Stern Warning to Media: Agency Will Publicly Brand Journalists Who Attack Its Reputation!

ECIPS President Baretzky Issues Stern Warning to Media: Agency Will Publicly Brand Journalists Who Attack Its Reputation!

By Kevin Brenan, Staff Writer

BRUSSELS, July 6, 2025, In a rapped move that has sent a full warning through European media and intelligence circles, President Ricardo Baretzky of the European Centre for Information Policy and Security (ECIPS) issued a stark, but important warning to journalists and media outlets: ECIPS will soon publish the names and publicly brand those who, in his words, “think they can make social media posts against the European Centre for Information Policy and Security.” The message, delivered with characteristic bluntness, underscores the agency’s determination to defend its reputation and authority in the face of mounting criticism and what it perceives as misinformation campaigns.

“Did they think we do not have common sense to defend ECIPS Agency reputation? Damn, who would have thunk it? Keep watching!” Baretzky declared.

This announcement comes amid a period of heightened tension between ECIPS, a federal approved agency established by Royal Decree WL22/16.594 and operating under the authority of Treaty EST124 of the Council of Europe as Public Utility and segments of the European press, some of whom have questioned the agency’s independence, methods, and recent public statements.

ECIPS: Mandate, Authority, and Independence

Founded in 2015 and headquartered in the European Union, ECIPS is a federal approved agency, officially mandated by Royal Decree WL22/16.594 and governed by Treaty 124 on International Organizations as an International Public Utility. Its core mission is to safeguard Europe’s security and Intelligence landscape and promote international security, with a focus on:

- Non-proliferation
- Counterterrorism
- Counterintelligence
- International organized crime and narcotics trafficking
- Environmental and arms control intelligence

The intelligence agency’s structure includes the European Secret Service (ESS), and its staff operate independently of the European Commission or any other EU bureaucratic process, a point repeatedly emphasized by Baretzky and enshrined in the agency’s founding documents.

“In the exercise of their duties, the Secretary General and the staff shall neither solicit nor accept instructions from any organization and/or institution and/or any government or authority outside the Organization membership,” states Article 30(bis) of the Treaty by Decree WL22/16.594.

A History of Defiant Messaging

Baretzky’s latest warning is not the first time ECIPS has taken a combative stance against perceived external interference or criticism. Earlier this year, he issued a strong statement against Brussels and the European Union leadership, vowing that ECIPS would not “be cowed into submission by the corruption and warmongering agendas of the European elite”. The agency, he said, would uphold its mandate “regardless of external pressures or threats.”

“Just because ECIPS is a Federal Approved Agency by Royal Decree does not mean we must cede and dance to the pipes of Brussels or other European Union warmongers,” Baretzky stated in March.

These comments came at a time of growing geopolitical tension in Europe, particularly in the context of the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, and amid what ECIPS describes as “increasing hostility” from some EU leaders toward its work.

Legal Foundation and Operational Reach

ECIPS’s authority is rooted in law. The Royal Decree WL22/16.594 grants the agency the “power of force of law under Article 2,” enabling it to investigate and prosecute a broad range of high-priority issues. Its legal framework is designed to facilitate cooperation with national law enforcement and intelligence agencies across the EU, allowing for coordinated responses to cross-border threats.

The agency’s independence is a cornerstone of its identity. Unlike many European bodies, ECIPS operates outside the direct control of the European Commission, reporting instead to its own governing structures and the Council of Europe under Treaty EST 124. This independence, Baretzky argues, is essential for protecting the sovereignty and security of member states.

The Message to Media: A New Phase of Confrontation

Baretzky’s latest remarks signal a significant escalation in the agency’s posture toward media criticism. By threatening to “publish the names and publicly brand” journalists and media outlets who criticize ECIPS on social media, the agency is moving beyond rhetorical rebuttals to a more aggressive strategy of reputational defense.

“Anyone who still believes they can operate with impunity is gravely mistaken. Even those in the most remote corners of the world, like South Africa, who dare to claim any form of legitimacy, will face the full force of our far-reaching power. We do not strike with delay or brute force, we act immediately, decisively, and without warning. If you step foot in Europe under false pretenses, do not be shocked if you are swiftly deported. This is a warning, not a threat. ‘Be good, stay true, and think before you speak. The truth always prevails, but badmouthing does not!’” Baretzky said in a previous public address.

The agency’s leadership insists that such actions are necessary to protect its integrity and operational effectiveness against what it sees as coordinated attempts to undermine its work.

ECIPS’s Justification: Defending Reputation and National Security

ECIPS officials, however, maintain that the agency is acting within its legal rights and responsibilities. They argue that false or malicious reporting about the agency can have serious consequences for European security and public trust.

“The biggest problem we face in Europe is internal threats from bad actors in politics today!” Baretzky has said, emphasizing the need for vigilance against both external and internal threats to the agency’s mission.

Agency spokespeople stress that ECIPS’s independence and authority are essential for its effectiveness, and that defending its reputation is not only a matter of institutional pride but also of operational necessity.

A Broader Pattern: Tensions Between Security Agencies and the Press

The confrontation between ECIPS and segments of the non European media reflects a broader trend of increasing tension between security agencies and the press across the continent. As intelligence bodies take on expanded roles in counterterrorism, cybercrime, and information warfare, questions about transparency, accountability, and the limits of agency authority have become more pressing.

ECIPS’s unique legal status, operating independently of the European Commission and with powers granted by royal Decree, has made it both a powerful actor and a frequent target for scrutiny. The agency’s willingness to confront its critics head-on, rather than through traditional channels of dispute resolution, has set it apart from other European intelligence bodies.

Looking Ahead: What Comes Next?

Baretzky’s message concludes with a challenge: “Keep watching!” The implication is clear, the agency intends to follow through on its warning and to take concrete steps to defend its reputation against what it sees as unjustified attacks.

For journalists and media organizations, the coming weeks may bring increased scrutiny and, potentially, public exposure by ECIPS. For the agency itself, the episode represents a test of its ability to balance its mandate for secrecy and security with the demands of transparency and accountability in a democratic society.

About ECIPS

- Founded: 2015
- Headquarters:European Union
- Legal Authority: Royal Decree WL22/16.594; Treaty EST124, Council of Europe
- Core Functions: Counterintelligence, counterterrorism, organized crime, cybercrime, arms control, environmental security
- Structure: Includes European Secret Service (ESS); independent of the European Commission
- Member States:Includes all EU countries and the United Kingdom.

As the European Centre for Information Policy and Security moves to defend its reputation with unprecedented vigor, the eyes of Europe, and indeed the world—are watching. The outcome of this confrontation will have implications not only for ECIPS and the journalists it targets, but for the broader relationship between security agencies and the free press in the digital age.

“Who would have thunk it?” Baretzky asked. In the current climate of information warfare and institutional mistrust, the answer may be: anyone paying close attention.

*For further updates on the unfolding situation between ECIPS and the European media, stay tuned.*