High Court appeals Criminal Court's acquittal of Ammaty; passport seized
The Prosecutor General’s Office has appealed the Criminal Court's acquittal of Ahmed Moosa (Ammaty) on 42 counts of fraud related to the SeaLife housing scam to the High Court. While the lower court ruled the matter a civil dispute, prosecutors argue the verdict failed to adequately consider the evidence presented; meanwhile, the High Court has issued a travel ban against Moosa pending the outcome of the appeal.
42 counts of fraud filed against Ammaty. | RaajjeMV | RaajjeMV
The High Court of the Maldives has received an appeal regarding the acquittal of Ahmed Moosa Mohamed (Ammaty) on charges related to the SeaLife Global embezzlement scandal.
The charges against him state that after SeaLife Global Inc. Pvt Ltd was contracted by the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) to develop 3,000 housing units in Hulhumale', the company failed to carry out the physical construction within the stipulated timeframe. Instead, the company allegedly used fraudulent means to collect substantial sums of money from numerous individuals as down payments for the units.
Consequently, in the case involving the alleged embezzlement of these funds, 42 counts of embezzlement were filed against Mohamed, the Managing Director of SeaLife Global Inc. Pvt Ltd, pursuant to Section 215 (a) and (b) of the Maldives Penal Code. These charges were submitted to the Criminal Court on May 30, 2021.
However, following the trial of this case, the Criminal Court ruled on April 9, 2026, that the charges were not proven.
The primary reason cited for the acquittal was that the charges were civil in nature. The presiding judge noted that any actions taken against Mohamed regarding this matter must be pursued through the civil justice system.
The Prosecutor General’s Office maintains that the embezzlement charges brought against Mohamed meet all the legal elements of the offense as defined under Section 215 of the Penal Code.
The Prosecutor General’s Office stated that the Criminal Court’s decision to classify these transactions as civil matters was made without sufficient consideration of the evidence presented to prove the charges. The Office further asserted that the court reached this conclusion by misinterpreting the legal definition of embezzlement as prescribed by law.
Consequently, the Criminal Court's verdict ruling that the charges were not proven has now been appealed at the High Court of the Maldives.
The Prosecutor General’s Office has petitioned the High Court of the Maldives to overturn the lower court's ruling, contending that the evidence was evaluated in violation of legal principles. The prosecution argues that the court erred in classifying the matter as a civil dispute and misapplied the legal elements defining the criminal offense of embezzlement. Consequently, the PG Office is seeking a judgment to set aside the initial verdict and find the defendants guilty of the charges.
Furthermore, following the office's application to the High Court of the Maldives for an order to prevent Mohamed from leaving the country pending the conclusion of the appeal process, the court issued an interim order on April 13, 2024, to withhold his passport.
