Appeal hearings to begin tomorrow for Humam

The first hearing of the appeal case filed by Hussain Humam Ahmed of Henveyru Lobby, after he was found guilty of the murder of religious scholar Dr Afrasheem Ali and given the death sentence by the Criminal Court, has been scheduled for tomorrow.

High Court has scheduled the hearing of the case for tomorrow at 11:15 a.m. A hearing of this case is going to be held for the first time tomorrow after a long time since it has been filed to High Court.

Verdict issued by the Criminal Court stated that Humam's confession and witness statements proved that he was guilty of murdering Dr Afrasheem by attacking with a sharp object on 1 October 2014 between 11:30 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. at Henveyru Funvilu with some other people.

It was stated in the verdict that Humam was questioned repeatedly during the trial and he had confessed that he did commit the murder of Dr Afrasheem, and that he had admitted to committing the murder in the statement he gave in the trial held on 7 December 2012 at Criminal Court on his own without any force, and that the statement given that day was a valid statement.

The verdict also stated that Humam denied the charges again at the next session of the trial, and when asked why, he said that he was forced to confess by the police investigation officers, however, the verdict specified that it could not be a coincidence that the statement given by Humam on the previous day, the testimonies given by witnesses, and the investigative reports on the murder were so similar.

The witness submitted by the state said that he met Humam on the day before Dr Afrasheem was murdered, and Humam told, “Mission is prepared”. According to the witness, Ali Shan of Henveyru Hicost was also present there that time.

Witness also said that he had seen Humam and Ali Shan entering Henveyru Funvilu at around 11:30 p.m. on 1 October 2012 and at the same time he saw Dr Afrasheem entering that house with some books.

The witness submitted by the state said that he had seen a knife with blood in Humam’s hand just after Dr Afrasheem entered the house, and blood stains were evident on Humam’s hands, and also he had seen Dr Afrasheem with injuries, lying on the ground near the staircase of the house.

According to the verdict, DNA analysis submitted after forensic investigation was valid evidence and it had proved that there were traces of blood of Dr Afrasheem in the jeans Humam wore that night.

Though Humam’s lawyer said that the witness who gave testimonies could not be considered as a qualified witness as stated in Islamic Sharia, the verdict stated that the witness who gave testimony did not have records of offence of any kind. It was also stated that there is no way to escape from the confession Humam made on the previous day.

In addition to referring to Islamic Sharia, the Criminal Court also referred to precedents by courts of democratic countries, before issuing its verdict on this case.