Supreme Court Upholds High Court Ruling on Evidence in Yameen Aarah Corruption Case

The Supreme Court has upheld a High Court ruling that additional evidence submitted by the state in the corruption case against former President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom was admitted in breach of proper legal procedures, leaving the prosecution unable to rely on the contested material in the ongoing retrial.

The unanimous decision, delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Justice Aisha Shujune Muhammad , Justice Dr Mohamed Ibrahim and Justice Abdulla Hameed, represents a significant procedural setback for the prosecution’s case concerning the lease of Vaavu Aarah.

Yameen was convicted by the Criminal Court on 25 December 2022 and sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment after being found guilty of accepting US$1.1 million in bribes and laundering the funds in connection with the island’s lease.

The conviction was based in part on additional evidence introduced by the prosecution to rebut the defence’s testimony. However, the High Court later overturned the conviction, finding that the admission of the evidence did not comply with legal procedures and ordering a retrial.

The Prosecutor General’s Office subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the High Court’s ruling and establish that the additional evidence had been lawfully admitted.

In the lead judgement, Justice Shujune said there was no legal basis to overturn the High Court’s decision. She stated that where evidence is admitted in a manner inconsistent with established legal procedures, any procedural defects must be addressed in accordance with the law.

The judgement also reaffirmed the limited circumstances in which additional evidence may be admitted at a later stage of criminal proceedings. According to the court, such evidence must satisfy three requirements: it could not have been obtained during the original trial despite the exercise of reasonable diligence; it must be sufficiently significant to affect the central issues in the case, even if it does not change the eventual outcome; and its authenticity and credibility must be beyond dispute.

The Supreme Court unanimously concluded that there were no grounds to overturn the High Court’s findings on the admissibility of the evidence.

Proceedings in the Criminal Court had been temporarily suspended pending the Supreme Court’s decision. Following the ruling, the retrial is expected to resume without the inclusion of the disputed evidence submitted by the state.