Rilwan's abduction: defence challenges validity of 'hair strand' evidence

Aalif Rauf, the individual accused of being an accomplice to journalist Ahmed Rilwan's disappearance, has challenged the validity of the 'hair strand' evidence against him.

The chain of custody form of the hair strand found in the car that allegedly belongs to Rauf was not submitted, and Rauf had challenged the validity of the evidence based on this. .

A chain of custody report references a document or paper trail showing the seizure, custody, control, transfer, analysis, and disposition of evidence.

Rauf, native to Malé, and Mohamed Nooradeen, native to Gaaf Dhaal Vaadhoo, are charged with terrorism over the abduction of Rilwan in August 2014.

In the hearing held in the terror case against Aalif on Sunday, an expert had been presented for the hearing to elucidate some factors about the hair strand found in the trunk of a red car supposedly belonging to the accused.

Madhih Mohamed Saleem was the man who lead the production of a report on the hair strand following analysis conducted on the hair strand abroad.

While the state had produced the hair strand that matched Rilwan's mother's DNA, as evidence against Aalif Rauf for abducting Rilwan, it remains the strongest evidence in the case thus far.

However, since a chain of custody report had not been submitted to authorities, defense attorneys had questioned the matter and posed queries to the witness, Madhih.

As such, attorneys had questioned Madhih if the Forensic Department had taken the hair strand after making sure a chain of custody report had been submitted to which Madhih had responded that they were'nt aware if a report had been submitted at the time the hair strand was brought into the police laboratory.

Madhih added that the police would not take responsibility of any specimen if they knew a report had not been filed.

Lawyer Noorul Salaam had posed questions on the specimen due to the absence of the chain of custody report, saying that it is not clear where the hair strand had even come from.

In reponse to the lawyer's query, state said that the chain of custody report in the case was complete and that it has not been submitted yet because it is one which must be presented if any questions arise on the evidence.

The state had said that it had not been submitted under the procedures followed when the case had been lodged in court.

However, according to the state, since queries have been posed, state will in the near furture present the chain of custody report.

The judge presiding over the case, Adam Arif said that that state must take note in making sure all the documents and evidences in a case has been presented upon pressing charges.

Arif appealed to not make documents related to the case ones that must be presented upon queries.

Only one witness is yet to be presented to court regarding the case.

The witness who is to give their testimony in secrecy has not been presented to court for a statement yet and that court had in Monday's hearing appealed to summon the witness to court to take his statement under the regular procedures followed by court, appealing to make sure secrecy is maintained.

Three were charged with terrorism in total over Rilwan's abduction, however, two are now being tried after the third suspect, Mohamed Suaid was reported dead after fleeing to Syria to join in the conflict.

The other two, Aalif Rauf and Mohamed Nooradeen are currently being tried for allegedly abducting Rilwan near his apartment building in Hulhumale’ in the early hours of 8 August 2014. The state alleged that the suspects had carried off Rilwan inside a car.

Rauf and Nooradeen currently remain free.