Advertisement
Yameen's chief attorney, former Vice President Dr Jameel. (Atoll Times Photo)

Jameel accuses state of seeking to send Yameen back to prison

Jameel also linked the resumption of hearings to the political relationship between Yameen and President Dr Mohamed Muizzu.

2 hours ago

Former Vice President Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed has accused the state of being determined to send former President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom back to prison, following the resumption of hearings in Yameen’s V. Aarah bribery and money laundering case.

Jameel, who leads Yameen’s legal team, made the remarks in an interview with Dhauru outside the Criminal Court following a hearing on Monday.

Two cases against Yameen relating to the lease of islands through the Maldives Marketing and Public Relations Corporation (MMPRC) remain before the courts. They concern the leases of V. Aarah and R. Fuggiri, with the state alleging bribery and money laundering in both cases.

The Criminal Court previously convicted Yameen in the Aarah case and sentenced him to 11 years in prison in December 2022. The High Court later overturned the conviction and ordered a retrial. The Supreme Court subsequently upheld the High Court’s decision that certain new evidence submitted by the prosecution could not be admitted during the retrial.

Monday’s hearing dealt with pre-trial submissions in the Aarah case. The hearing was held after proceedings had remained stalled while the dispute over the admissibility of prosecution evidence went through the appeal process.

Speaking after the hearing, Jameel alleged that the proceedings demonstrated what he described as the state’s determination to pursue Yameen through the case.

“What we saw from today’s hearing was the extent to which the state is determined, in a case against an individual — particularly President Yameen — to pursue this matter,” Jameel said.

He also accused the state of failing to give sufficient consideration to constitutional protections, including the presumption of innocence. These were claims made by Jameel, and no finding has been made by the court that the current proceedings violate Yameen’s constitutional rights.

Jameel said Yameen had spent about eight years dealing with the proceedings and argued that the length of the case showed what he described as a coordinated effort by state institutions.

“The biggest thing I have observed from this case, both today and previously, is that eight years is not a short period,” Jameel said. “President Yameen has spent eight years dealing with this case, and even today there is no conclusion.”

Jameel also linked the resumption of hearings to the political relationship between Yameen and President Dr Mohamed Muizzu. He noted that Muizzu campaigned in the 2023 presidential election while Yameen was in prison and referred to the involvement of Yameen’s wife in that campaign.

He claimed that the resumption of proceedings demonstrated Muizzu’s approach towards Yameen. This is Jameel’s political interpretation of the timing of the proceedings; the court proceedings themselves do not establish such a motive.

Asked whether he believed the hearings had resumed to prevent Yameen from contesting the next presidential election, Jameel said the current court schedule indicated that hearings could now proceed without lengthy interruptions.

He said a further hearing has been scheduled for 12 October for the court to decide on pre-trial submissions. Jameel said this suggested the court intended to move ahead with the case without another prolonged delay.

During Monday’s hearing, the prosecution asked the court not to admit defence evidence submitted to support Yameen’s claim that USD 1 million deposited into his account was related to a US dollar exchange transaction rather than a bribe.

The state alleges that Yameen accepted USD 1 million as a bribe in connection with the lease of V. Aarah through MMPRC and laundered the proceeds. Yameen denies the allegations and maintains that the money arose from a dollar exchange transaction.

During the earlier proceedings, the prosecution sought to introduce additional evidence to rebut testimony presented by Yameen’s defence. The High Court ruled that the evidence could not be admitted, and the Supreme Court upheld that position on 1 July 2026.

The Aarah retrial is continuing before the Criminal Court.

Comments

profile-image-placeholder