All charged for Nadeem’s murder acquitted
The two witnesses claimed that seeing Mafaz was based on "conjecture", that they had thought they did.
Top Stories
-
Around 90 single parents register for govt allowance each month
-
ACC seeks prosecution of 4 Addu hospital staff over procurement
-
Ministry signs agreements with MTCC for 22 development projects
-
DNR report submitted as evidence in case against Thinadhoo mayor
-
Govt to add Maldivian heritage, traditional values to curriculum
By
Aman Haleem
Criminal Court on Monday acquitted all the suspects on trial for the murder of Nadeem Abdul Raheem.
In July 2017, Nadeem was murdered by two men, who had come on motorcycles with their faces covered, had barged into the Terminal Cafe and stabbed him in the head. The accused in the case are:
-
Mohamed Mafaz Hussain Saleem, G. Sharaz
-
Ali Nifaz, Vidhaathari/L. Gan
-
Hussain Shamin, Samantha/R. Innamaadhoo
-
Mohamed Karam Suhail, Hawaas/G.A. Gemanafushi
-
A juvenile (his case is pending in juvenile court)
Mafaz was charged with murder with a sharp object, while the rest were charged with involvement in the murder.
Police charged Mafaz of the murder account by stabbing Nadeem in the head, but he has denied this. Judge Ahmed Faiz Rashad said at the hearing held on Monday to deliver the verdict eight months after the conclusion of the hearings:
-
Two of the secret witnesses retracted their statements
-
The two witnesses claimed that seeing Mafaz was based on "conjecture", that they had thought they did
-
Both the witnesses sought to give statements again
-
The state contended that it was the result of acts of intimidation and coercion
-
The state submitted an intelligence report to prove it
The two secret witnesses who withdrew their testimony had said they had seen Mafaz's face at the scene of the attack on Nadeem. There was no further evidence to show that Mafaz had been seen there. Besides, four confidential witnesses, who were supposed to present witness statements in the case, told the court that they did not want to depose.
Claiming that all these acts were done under intimidation and influence, the state counsel urged the judge to pronounce the verdict on the basis of statements made during the investigation.
Judge Faiz, however, noted that the state’s opinion would not stand in court. He said the police and the PG office had not done enough to substantiate the claims made in the case.
Apart from the loopholes in the testimony of the witnesses, the DNA of Mafaz was also not found on the knife that had been used to attack Nadeem, or on the mask used at the time of the attack.
