Faris Maumoon's terror trial: heated argument between judge and defence
Both the individuals exchanged a heated discussion due to a disagreement regarding the gaps in the Criminal Procedure Act
Attorney Maumoon Hameed addressing the public
Criminal Court's chief judge Ahmed Hailam and attorney Maumoon Hameed had a heated argument at the hearing held regarding terrorism allegations raised against Dhiggaru constituency MP Ahmed Faris Maumoon.
Both the individuals exchanged a heated discussion due to a disagreement regarding the gaps in the Criminal Procedure Act, on taking secret witness testimonies without presenting them to court.
Referring to the Criminal Procedure Act, Maumoon Hameed said that the regulation only allows taking secret witness testimonies with a disguised voice and without having the witness present at court only in certain conditions, and added that those conditions are not specified in the regulation. The attorney stated that the court cannot decide when to take secret testimonies since the regulation does not specify them.
Attorneys from the Prosecutor General's (PG) Office also agreed with Maumoon Hameed.
Prosecutor Ahmed Naushan said that they too have noticed that the regulation does not specify the conditions in which secret witness testimonies are acceptable and added that it has depended on the court's judgment in previous cases.
Judge Hailam responded saying that the court has the legal and constitutional right to determine certain things in case the regulation does not specify details. He added that it is the judge's responsibility to carry out the activities of the civil justice system to ensure public safety and protection.
Maumoon Hameed countered the chief judge's argument by saying that the court cannot make such decisions based on external factors outside of the trial at hand.
The attorney was interrupted by judge Hailam who stated that the judge has to take responsibility if releasing a convict leads to public endangerment and therefore judges must prioritize nation's best interest during trials.
Criminal Court has released a permanent order to seal the identities of the secret witnesses upon state lawyers' request. The court order included 17 witness statements and several intelligence reports with three other reports.
