After a series of long winded investigations, the veracity of which has been questioned by Yamin Rasheed's family, the Criminal Court convicted only two defendants; forced to free the rest due to investigative and prosecutorial irregularities.
Source - @WeAreYaamyn via Twitter
On 19 January, close to five years since the brutal murder of prominent blogger and human rights defender, Yameen Rasheed, the Criminal Court convicted Ismail Haisham Rasheed (21), and Ahmed Zihaan Ismail (22), for his murder. The Court, however, acquitted the other four individuals charged, ruling that the prosecution had not submitted enough evidence to prove the charges against them.
Yameen's murder, on 23 April 2017, came three years after the forced disappearance of his friend and Minivan News reporter Ahmed Rilwan, and amidst several threats against Yameen himself. He was at the forefront of the campaign calling for investigations into, and justice for, Rilwan.
The police, on 25 April 2017 said that they had identified two individuals involved in the murder but would fail to arrest them even one week later. In May 2017, the Police said that evidence collected during its investigation had been sent to various laboratories in ASEAN as well as in European countries, for additional investigations. On 5 June 2017, the Police said that everyone involved in Yameen's murder had been arrested, and that they were working to submit the case to the Prosecutor General's Office. On 18 June, the Police released the names of three individuals they alleged had murdered Yameen – Ismail Rasheed, Haisham Rasheed and Zihan Ismail. They said that a total of seven people had been arrested in the matter. The case against those arrested was filed at the Prosecutor General's Office on 20 July, and charges filed in court on 1 August 2017 — a fairly expedited affair, especially by Maldivian standards.
All this happened amidst allegations from Yameen's family of the Police destroying forensic evidence, calls to reveal the motive of those who had killed Yameen, as well as allegations of the investigation being delayed and police negligence; on which the family filed a case against police which was rejected by the court. The family called for justice to be delivered and for those behind the attack and those who funded it to be brought to justice. They faced resistance from state powers as well, with police obstructing protests and walks held calling for justice — in all incidences prominent members of the current administration, then in the opposition, took centre stage while they wore concerns for Yameen’s family prominently on their sleeve for all to see while criticising the government of the day for their inaction. Yameen's family have also rejected claims by the state that he had been murdered over religious differences, by those who believed his views were against religion — questions were raised as to some of the suspects having records of drug abuse and other crimes, and calls continued for those behind the attack and those who funded it to be brought to justice.
President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, in the lead up to the 2018 presidential election, vowed to establish a presidential commission to investigate forced disappearances and unresolved murders (DCom), which he did the day he was sworn in. The President appointed Husnu Suood, who incidentally represented Yameen's family in their case against the Police on allegations of negligence, as the president of the DCom. Both the President and the DCom have, however, failed to deliver on their promises. The DCom started out hopeful and the current government pushed the bill required to give it additional powers and authority to conduct its investigations. President Solih, First Lady Fazna Ahmed and government ministers and senior officials were at the frontlines of a walk held in April 2019, to mark two years since Yameen was brutally murdered. Disappeared reporter Rilwan's family later, however, alleged that President Solih and the current government had traded on Rilwan and Yameen's memory to come to power. The DCom is apparently still continuing its investigation into those behind the attack, although there has not been anything concrete to show for justice having being delivered in this case.
The Court's ruling on 19 January shows the state and prosecution's negligence in its investigations into the case and how they approached it. The charges against all six defendants had been that of using a lethal object to murder someone. However, the prosecution was not able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the four, who were acquitted, had been actively involved in the actual murder of Yameen. Witness statements and evidence showed they had been involved and carried out the surveillance and other aspects surrounding the murder but not the actual act of murder.
The court in its ruling, in fact, highlighted that the prosecution had failed to make lesser charges that would have resulted in a conviction — reports show that this issue had been highlighted at various points in the trial, including during preliminary hearings, but that the prosecution had refused or been blind to amending the charges.
The ruling also indicated failures by the Police in their investigations, including failure to obtain DNA evidence for a scratch on Haisham's neck, failure to investigate transactions and calls made through phones used by the perpetrators in the lead up to and during the murder, and failure to ensure chain of custody of video footage and other evidence. It is little wonder then that the Police managed to send the case to prosecution within a zippy three months!
As a result of prosecution and police negligence, four allegedly involved in a murder have gone scot free. Although the prosecution has said that two being convicted was a victory and that the acquittal of the four will be appealed at the High Court, such failures raises questions as to the competence of these institutions in which the public have to place their trust in to ensure protection and justice. In terms of the appeal to the High Court, given the points of procedure and irregularities covered in the verdict by the Criminal Court, it seems unlikely that the appeal will come through in the state’s favour — this could well be an exercise in futility as Yameen’s family, friends, loved ones and well-wishers, continue to be denied the justice that is deserved.
