Thursday
25th Apr 2024
Dhivehi Edition
Dr.Ahmed Abdullah Didi
Criminal Case Against Yameen Was State's Attempt To Isolate Him From Political Arena: Former Chief Justice Dr Didi
Former Chief Justice with Speaker of the Parliament.
The former Chief Justice Dr Ahmed Abdullah Didi has stated that the Supreme Court's verdict to acquit the former President Yameen of the 2019 Criminal Court verdict that had sentenced him to five years in prison demonstrates that the Solih administration had worked to isolate the opposition leader from the political arena.
Dr Didi made this statement via Twitter in relation to the former President's Supreme Court acquittal at noon yesterday.
In his tweet, he had stated that the verdict showed that the current government had worked to isolate the former President from the political arena through the abuse of the judicial system by building a weak and flimsy case against him.
He had also stated that the State's decision to keep the former President in custody during the appeals process contravened best practices. He said that once he was acquitted, the State should compensate him with the harm that it had caused him. He said that such verdicts had also been issued by the European Court of Human Rights.
He also stated that the reforms to the Maldives' criminal justice system needed to come quickly and without delay. He said that the first institutions that needed that reform were the Judicial Service Commission and the Prosecutor General's Office.
The Supreme Court had issued a verdict overruling the Criminal Court case on the basis that the evidence brought against the former President by the State was weak.
The hearing, which ran for little over three hours, was presided over by a judicial panel headed by Judge Mahaz Ali Zahir.
Judge Mahaz had noted that due to the discrepancy that existed with regards to the cheque number as it appears on the cheque that had allegedly been used to deposit the funds from MMPRC to SOF Pvt Ltd and as it appears on SOF’s financial statement. Judge Mahaz stated that this discrepancy cast a doubt over the prosecution’s claim that the funds transferred to the appellant’s bank account by SOF Pvt Ltd were funds that rightfully belonged to the State.
Judge Mahaz stated that as the prosecution had provided no supporting evidence to corroborate the testimony given by former Vice President Ahmed Adeeb and former Managing Director of the Maldives Marketing and Public Relations Corporation Ahmed Ziyath, their testimony would not be admissible as evidence against the appellant. Judge Mahaz had also noted that the State had not provided any evidence to support the claim that the appellant had called Ziyath with regards to the transferred funds.
Judge Mahaz expressed his “surprise” at the State’s decision to neither investigate SOF Pvt Ltd not press charges against the company.
The Supreme Court had pointed out that the State had built the Criminal Court case against the former President on weak evidence. The Court had also noted that no supporting evidence had been provided to corroborate the evidence.