Former President Abdulla Yameen told the High Court on Wednesday that he did not attempt money laundering or know that USD 1 million deposited to his account by former MP Yoosuf Naeem was ill-gotten.
Yameen denies the bribery and money laundering charges raised against him and maintains that the transaction with Yoosuf Naeem was a currency exchange. The Ruifyaa he paid to purchase dollars came from contributions for political work by well-wishing business owners, he said.
At yesterday’s hearing, the court heard arguments on Yameen’s point of appeal concerning the money laundering charge. After defense lawyers spoke, Yameen asked for an opportunity to speak and repeated denials of any involvement in the Vaavu Aarah resort lease.
“That a letter came to the President’s Office to take Aarah, that the island was about to be leased to a particular person - this wasn’t to my knowledge,” Yameen said.
The money would have been deposited to a shell account if there was an intent to hide its source, Yameen said, which he said would not have been possible under the country’s sound banking and financial system.
“A person who wanted to do money laundering would not deposit money to their own account, especially an account opened in the Maldives,” Yameen said. “Things that happen within the banking system in the Maldives cannot be concealed.”
The central bank would be alerted to deposits above MVR 200,000, Yameen noted, saying repeatedly that the alleged transaction would not have been possible in the country.
Yameen said the US dollars in question were converted from accumulated Dhivehi Rufiyaa donations for political activities, which was deposited for investment in a personal account because he believed it was legitimate.
“The money is still there in that account. How has it been concealed?” he asked.
Political contributions from business donors and their use to cover expenses were not illegal and disclosure was not compelled by any law, he said.
“Because I’m in politics, people who wish me well, various business people who support me, have always given me large sums of money.”
State’s counter
Responding to Yameen’s argument, state prosecutor Hussain Samy said Yameen had been unable to establish the source of the funds. Evidence and surrounding circumstances make it clear that it was a bribe, he said.
Yameen was unable to provide evidence to show that an equivalent amount was given to Naeem in Dhivehi Rufiyaa, he said. The president’s asset disclosures did not include such a large amount either, he added.
Political activity by parties and candidates is monitored by the Elections Commission (EC) under the system, he said.
“It’s not a system without any oversight or responsibility, the way the system for political activity, system of political parties, is devised in the Maldives,” Samy said.
Prosecutor Ahmed Shafeeu said attempts of concealment include transfers from one personal account to another.
“The transaction not remaining secret is not a reason that negates the attempt to conceal,” he said.
After hearing from both sides, the judge’s bench said the defense’s rebuttal to the state would be heard at the next hearing followed by summary closing statements.
Aarah case
According to the charges raised by the state, Vaavu Aarah was transferred to the tourism ministry on August 9, 2015. A company called 2G Pvt Ltd with a 99 percent stake owned by the co-defendant Yoosuf Naeem was created on August 13, 2015.
On September 8, 2015, 99 percent of shares in 2G Pvt Ltd were sold to LA Resorts Pvt Ltd.
When the MMPRC handed over Aarah to 2G on September 9, 2015, LA Resorts gave a check of USD 1 million to the MMPRC as the island’s lease acquisition cost and a check of USD 1 million to Yoosuf Naeem.
On September 13, 2015, when the money was deposited to Yoosuf Naeem’s account, a check for USD 1 million from the account was given to President Yameen on September 15, 2015. Two days later, the money was deposited to an account opened under Yameen’s name at the HSBC Bank, according to the prosecution.
Both Yameen and Yoosuf Naeem pleaded not guilty to the charges. The transaction between them was a sale of US dollars for Dhivehi Rufiyaa, they said, claiming it was unrelated to the leasing of Aarah and denying any act of corruption.
