Gayoom and Justices sentenced to over a year for obstruction of justice

Former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, Chief Justice Abdulla Saeed, and Justice Ali Hameed have been sentenced to one year, seven months, and six days for obstruction of justice.

They were charged with obstruction for refusing to handover their phones right after their arrest on February 6.

The presiding judge over the case was Hassan Najeeb, who was only recently appointed to the Criminal Court. He convicted the defendants after a short break after hearing the summary statements.

At the hearing, Judge Najeeb said that Gayoom will not be allowed to give religious sermons and the two justices will not be allowed to practice law after the conviction. He also said that the state has proven that the three had phones based on the witness testimonies presented by the state.

The state has said that they needed the phone for the investigation into Gayoom and the two justices over their alleged involvement in a conspiracy to overthrow the government. At the hearing, the presiding judge said that witness testimonies had confirmed that the three had their phones which would have contained evidence for the case.

Gayoom and the jailed justices were without legal representation at the hearing but the presiding judge said that they had been given the opportunity to appoint legal representation and that they were given additional time to seek attorneys after their lawyers withdrew from the case.

Giving his summary statement, Gayoom said that secret witness testimonies are against the religion and that the state has been unable to justify its use according to Islamic law. He also said that the witness testimonies show that he tried to give his phone to the authorities. In the previous hearing, the witnesses testified that Gayoom had said that his phone was not with him during his arrest and had suggested that the police check with his wife and daughter. But the phone was never found.

Gayoom also said that while a state of emergency was declared during his arrest, the police regulations were not suspended and that therefore police needed a court warrant to enter his home. Since the police arrested him after entering his home illegally, their investigation would also be invalid.

Before issuing the conviction, the judge said that he had decided not to hear the witnesses submitted by the defense after concluding that they would be unable to contradict the testimonies of the state witnesses.