Yameen loses final appeal on evidence in Fuggiri graft trial
In Riza's case too, the Supreme Court upheld the trial court's and High Court's verdicts.
Top Stories
By
Fathmath Ahmed Shareef
Supreme Court on Monday upheld both Criminal Court and High Court rulings to dismiss pre-trial motion submitted by former President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom regarding evidence submitted by the state against him in connection with the alleged irregularities in the leasing of R. Fuggiri through MMPRC.
Yameen made pre-trial submissions in the Fuggiri case at the Criminal Court, asking the court to reject some of the state's evidence and to disclose the confidential evidence of the state.
Judge Ali Nadeem, who is hearing the case in the Criminal Court, rejected the submissions in February. Yameen filed an appeal in the High Court, which upheld the lower court's decision.
Yameen appealed against the High Court's verdict in the Supreme Court and requested:
-
To set aside the High Court's judgement
-
Dismiss state witnesses, former Vice President Ahmed Adheeb and former MMPRC Managing Director Abdulla Ziyath
-
To direct the trial court to reconsider its decision on individual evidence
-
To provide documents available with the state agencies regarding the case and share the log of the investigation
-
To allow the defence to resubmit pre-trial motions under the newly enacted Evidence Act
In Monday's proceeding, justices Husnu-Suood, Aisha Shujoon and Dr Mohamed Ibrahim unanimously held that there was no place to overturn the decision of the Criminal Court and the High Court.
SC view on reconsidering evidence
-
Evidence not related to the case or the accused has not been submitted
-
There is no reason to reject the evidence
-
The reason for the judge's decision not to accept evidence should be clearly stated separately
-
It is wrong that Judge Ali Nadeem did not explain it, but it is also not clear from the defence's word that it will lead to a complete loss of justice
-
Since it the trial has already begun, it is not possible to direct the trial court to go back to the pre-trial stage
SC view on Adeeb and Ziyath's testimony
Yameen sought rejection of the testimony of Adeeb and Ziyath on the ground that the new Evidence Act lays down the procedure to be followed in relation to the testimony of the accused in the circumstances of deposition, including the offences alleged against them and in the event of their conviction.
The three-judge Supreme Court bench headed by Husnu-Suood ruled that there was no place to ask the trial court to reject the testimony of Adeeb and Ziyath:
-
Laws should start functioning from the date of commencement of it
-
It does not appear that the law can be invoked in this case; the reason is that the alleged acts took place prior to the enactment of the Evidence Act
-
The case is pending before the Criminal Court and since no witness statements have been heard so far, Yameen has not yet been denied the opportunity to examine the testimonies of the witnesses
-
The evidence law will be mandatory in subsequent trials
SC view on disclosure of confidential witnesses
In the pre-trial submission filed in the Fuggiri case, Yameen requested the Criminal Court to disclose five confidential witnesses submitted by the state. Judge Nadeem, however, ruled that the evidence could not be disclosed.
The apex court said that both the trial court and the High Court had taken correct decisions in this regard.
The trial, which took place from 8:30pm to around 10pm, also pronounced the verdict in the appeal filed by Ahmed Krik Riza, a co-accused in the Fuggiri case.
In Riza's case too, the Supreme Court upheld the trial court's and High Court's verdicts.
