Lawyers of jailed former President Mohamed Nasheed declared Sunday that Nasheed’s case should be reviewed, taking into considered the letter sent by jailed former Vice President Ahmed Adheeb to the Supreme Court in which he claimed that Nasheed’s jail sentence of 13 years for terrorism was not penned and issued by a judge of the judiciary.
Noting that reviewing cases upon discovery of new evidence is a procedure practiced by the judiciary, Nasheed’s lawyer Hisaan Hussain stated that as Adheeb was seen as the most influential minister during his time in government, his willingness to testify in Nasheed’s case places the responsibility of reviewing the case again on the judiciary.
Some points highlighted by Nasheed’s lawyers include,
- Adheeb’s claim that Nasheed has not committed a crime and therefore it is not a valid sentence.
- Adheeb’s claim that Nasheed received a jail sentence in retaliation for the political works he commenced in defence of the former Minister of Defence Mohamed Nazim, who is convicted to eleven years in jail over illegal weapons’ possession.
- Adheeb’s affirmation that the first draft of former Nasheed’s verdict sentenced him originally to 10 years, which were to be implemented after three years. However, he claimed that the verdict was later changed to 13 years on the orders of an unnamed individual, whose identity Adheeb said he is willing to expose with substantial proof
- Nasheed’s verdict is assumed to be invalid as his trials were rushed
Moreover, the chairperson of main opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Hassan Latheef accused the Prosecutor General of unlawfully fulfilling the government’s motive by changing the initial charges on Nasheed of unlawfully arresting Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed to terrorism charges, for which he is sentenced for 13 years in jail.
Furthermore, responding to a question of a journalist, lawyer Riffath proclaimed that the courts have accepted testimonies of convicts.
Noting that Subject 17 of the Constitution states that no citizen should be differentiated, Nasheed’s lawyers called for justice for Nasheed.