The Criminal Court has decided to accept the defence evidence submitted by former President Abdulla Yameen to exonerate him from corruption charges related to the lease of Vaavu Aarah.
On December 25, 2022, the Criminal Court sentenced Yameen to 11 years in prison after finding him guilty of accepting $1.1 million in bribes and laundering those funds during the Aarah lease transaction.
The lower court’s conviction followed the acceptance of new evidence submitted by the prosecution to rebut the defense's claims. However, upon appeal, the High Court ruled that the inclusion of the prosecution's rebuttal evidence was procedurally flawed and ordered a retrial of the case.
In addition to Yameen, former Felidhoo MP Yoosuf Naeem is also being prosecuted in connection with the case.
Both Yameen and Yoosuf Naeem have maintained in their defence that the funds deposited into Yameen’s account were part of a legitimate currency exchange transaction. They further asserted in court that the equivalent Maldivian Rufiyaa for the US dollars was handed over to Yoosuf Naeem in cash.
To substantiate this claim, Yameen’s legal team presented several witnesses, including former Malé City Deputy Mayor Ahmed Nareesh, Vilimalé MP Mohamed Ismail, Hulhudhoo MP Mohamed Shahid, and an individual named Abdulla Rasheed. Additionally, a document purportedly confirming the currency exchange was submitted as evidence.
The prosecution had filed pretrial motions requesting the court to reject this evidence.
However, the presiding judge ruled to accept the defence's evidence, noting that the prosecution's objections pertained to the weight and credibility of the testimony. The court determined that assessing the weight of evidence is a matter to be decided by the bench after the testimony has been heard, rather than at the admissibility stage.
Yameen’s defence also moved to block several key prosecution witnesses, including former Vice President Ahmed Adeeb and former MMPRC Managing Director Abdulla Ziyath.
The defence argued that under the Evidence Act, the testimony of these individuals should be inadmissible as their integrity is compromised, rendering them unreliable witnesses.
Despite these objections, Judge Ali Nadeem ruled that the testimonies of Adeeb and Ziyath are essential to the case and will be heard.
Of the evidence submitted by the prosecution, the court only rejected the testimony of Dhiggaru MP Ahmed Nazim.
