High Court dismisses Bassam’s appeal over claim that case cannot proceed without FIFA statement
The High Court dismissed Bassam's appeal because his arguments merely repeated lower court claims without explaining legal errors
Former President of the Football Association of Maldives (FAM) Bassam Adeel Jaleel speaking to press
The High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Bassam Adeel Jaleel, former President of the Football Association of Maldives (FAM), in relation to a case involving the alleged embezzlement of FAM funds.
Bassam had argued that the case could not move forward without a statement from FIFA.
He submitted the appeal after the Criminal Court refused to accept his defense argument that charges concerning the alleged embezzlement of FIFA funds could not be adjudicated without FIFA’s input.
The appeal was filed on 19 November 2025.
According to the High Court Registrar’s decision, asserting that the trial judge made a legal error, failed to adequately consider evidence, overlooked arguments, violated rights, or obstructed justice does not, on its own, meet the legal threshold required for the High Court to hear an appeal.
The decision also cited a Supreme Court ruling requiring appellants who make such claims to clearly specify the legal arguments underpinning them.
The Supreme Court’s position in the case of Fact Maldives Pvt Ltd v. the State of Maldives (Maldives Police Service) clarified that the purpose of having a case progress through all three judicial stages is not to have the same charge reconsidered three times in identical form.
Of the three points Bassam raised in appealing the Criminal Court’s pre-trial decision, the High Court concluded that the first and third merely repeated arguments made in the lower court.
These points also failed to explain how the lower court’s ruling on those arguments was legally incorrect.
The High Court further noted that Bassam’s request for disclosure of evidence under Section 119(a)(6) of Act No. 12/2016 (Criminal Procedure Act) was denied because no written request had been made under Section 129 of the same Act.
Although Bassam argued that the refusal violated Articles 42 and 143() of the Constitution, the Registrar found that he provided no explanation beyond stating the claim.
Bassam was previously sentenced to a total of nine years in prison for embezzlement of FAM funds and money laundering.
He initially received a four-year sentence for embezzlement and money laundering on October 8, followed by an additional five-year sentence on October 30 in a separate embezzlement and money laundering case.
