Supreme Court begins trial on action against Yameen's new evidence
Shafeeu further stated that the lower court's decision to admit the evidence could be amended during the retrial process.
Supreme Court on Wednesday began hearing an appeal concerning a High Court decision that excluded new evidence in the retrial of former President Abdulla Yameen’s case.
The High Court had, on April 18, overturned an 11-year sentence handed down to Yameen by the Criminal Court and ordered a retrial. The High Court ruled that some new evidence submitted by the prosecution had been admitted in violation of established procedures and directed the lower court to exclude it during the retrial.
The Prosecutor General's Office (PGO) filed an appeal with the Supreme Court on July 24, challenging the High Court's decision to exclude the evidence. The first preliminary hearing of the appeal was held Wednesday morning, focusing on the arguments raised by both sides.
Prosecution counsel Ahmed Shafeeu argued that the High Court’s exclusion of the evidence contradicted prior decisions by the Supreme Court. The prosecution requested the Supreme Court to:
-
Allow both parties to present arguments on the evidence at trial.
-
Direct the lower court to reconsider the admissibility of the evidence.
-
Ensure that under Article 135 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the defence is permitted to make submissions regarding the evidence.
Shafeeu further stated that the lower court's decision to admit the evidence could be amended during the retrial process.
Representing Yameen, lawyer Hamza Latheef argued against the prosecution’s appeal, asserting that the Criminal Procedure Code does not provide a mechanism for submitting counter-evidence to refute witness statements. He stated that creating such a mechanism would require legislative action by parliament and could not be initiated by a judge.
Hamza also made the following points in defence of the High Court’s decision:
-
The prosecution’s appeal violates procedural rules previously established by the Supreme Court and should be deemed inadmissible.
-
The prosecution has not appealed the grounds on which the High Court based its decision.
-
If the Supreme Court chooses to hear the case on its merits, the High Court’s decision does not require modification.
Hamza emphasised that the excluded evidence was intended to challenge the prosecution’s claim that funds deposited in Yameen’s account were part of a dollar exchange transaction.
The High Court had overturned Yameen’s conviction on bribery and money laundering charges, citing errors in the Criminal Court’s assessment of evidence. Following the High Court’s decision, the Criminal Court began rehearing the case in August.
