SC rejects state appeal over new evidence in V. Aarah case
Shujoon said it was the responsibility of the state to argue that any procedural defects relating to the submission of evidence could be remedied.
The Supreme Court has upheld the High Court's decision to exclude additional evidence submitted by the state in the V. Aarah corruption case, allowing the retrial ordered by the High Court to proceed without the new material.
The additional evidence was submitted by the Prosecutor General's Office following the High Court's decision to order a retrial in the Criminal Court. The state argued that the evidence was intended to show that testimony given by defence witnesses during the original trial was false.
After the High Court declined to admit the evidence, the state appealed to the Supreme Court. Proceedings in the Criminal Court were subsequently suspended under a stay order pending the outcome of the appeal.
Delivering the judgment on Wednesday, presiding judge Aisha Shujoon Mohamed said it was the responsibility of the state to argue that any procedural defects relating to the submission of evidence could be remedied.
The court found that:
-
The state's claim that it had no opportunity to raise the issue before the High Court had no legal basis.
-
If there had been a procedural defect in the Criminal Court regarding the admission of the evidence, it was for the state to raise that issue before the High Court.
-
Under established principles governing appeals, issues not raised in a lower court can only be considered where there was no opportunity to present them earlier.
"Even in a situation where the High Court decides that the evidence was submitted in violation of due procedure, the state did not argue at all before the High Court that these procedural defects could be remedied under the principles established in the Ali Zubair case," Judge Shujoon said.
Judges Abdulla Hameed and Dr Mohamed Ibrahim agreed with the judgment, resulting in a unanimous decision by the three-member bench.
The evidence excluded from the retrial includes:
-
Maldives National Defence Force attendance records of Ahmed Nareesh, an adviser to the Minister of Youth and a defence witness, covering the period of his employment.
-
Minutes of meetings of the Economic Youth Council, a Cabinet committee at the time.
During the original trial, Nareesh testified that he had personally delivered Maldivian rufiyaa to former parliamentarian Yoosuf Naeem in connection with a dollar exchange. The Criminal Court's original judgment concluded that his testimony was false.
