Prosecution faults court for neglecting charge on aiding murder
Defence counsel Hamza Latheef contested the prosecution’s claims, asserting that the charge of aiding and abetting was not addressed at any point in the lower c
Prosecutor General's Office (PG) argued in High Court on Wednesday that the Criminal Court had erred in considering the charge of aiding and abetting blogger Yameen Rasheed's murder in its verdict.
PG appealed to the High Court, challenging the Criminal Court's ruling in the murder case of prominent blogger Yameen.
The prosecution had originally charged six individuals with the murder of Yameen.
The Criminal Court acquitted four of the accused, while Mohamed Dhifran, Gdh. Gahdhoo, Sindhubaadhuge, and Ismail Rasheed of M. Thaaif were found guilty of aiding and abetting the murder. The two convicts have since appealed to the High Court to contest the judgement.
Although the prosecution charged six people in the case, only two were convicted of directly killing Yameen. They are:
-
Ismail Haisham Rasheed, H. Annaarumaage
-
Ahmed Zihaan Ismail, Hulhumalé Lot 11399
Both men have appealed to the High Court. As they are appeals from the same incident, the trial is being conducted together in the High Court.
At Wednesday's High Court hearing, the state's counsel, Ahmed Naufal, said that the Criminal Court had misapplied legal standards when considering the charge of aiding and abetting the murder. He argued that the judge had wrongfully factored in a secondary offence not formally charged by the prosecution.
According to Naufal, under the Criminal Procedure Code, if the court finds evidence of another offence during trial, it must adhere to specific procedural safeguards. He outlined three essential steps the judge should have taken:
-
Notify both parties of the potential charge in advance.
-
Provide an opportunity for both the defence and prosecution to respond to the new charge.
-
Allow the parties to re-present witnesses if they wish to contest the new charge.
Naufal argued that none of these steps were followed in the lower court, which he asserted was a serious oversight that affected the fairness of the trial.
Defence counsel Hamza Latheef contested the prosecution’s claims, asserting that the charge of aiding and abetting was not addressed at any point in the lower court. He noted that:
-
The prosecution had neither raised the charge of aiding and abetting nor sought to pursue it during the trial.
-
The Criminal Court judge had overstepped his role by unilaterally convicting the defendants of a crime the prosecution had not charged.
-
The lower court's judgement, therefore, contradicted the established
Latheef further highlighted that the prosecution, during the trial, had indicated it did not wish to investigate the charge of aiding and abetting further.
In its ruling, the Criminal Court had convicted Dhifran and Ismail Rasheed of aiding and abetting, while acquitting the other four accused.
The court also noted shortcomings in both the investigation and the prosecution’s approach, stating that certain aspects of the case had gone “unnoticed.” The court attributed part of the prosecution's failure to negligence in pursuing critical leads.
Yameen, a well-known critic of radicalism and outspoken advocate for freedom of expression, was brutally murdered on April 23, 2017. He was stabbed multiple times in the stairwell of his residence in Male, sparking widespread outrage both locally and internationally.
The investigation revealed that Yameen had been targeted by a radical group that accused him of defaming religion. Despite the high-profile nature of the case, the prosecution’s handling of the investigation has been subject to scrutiny and criticism.
