Former SC judge Ali Hameedh explains money transfers at trial

Former Supreme Court Judge Ali Hameedh. (Sun Photo/Fayaz Moosa)

Former Supreme Court judge Ali Hameedh has explained how money was transferred from a court phone to his son’s phone at a trial held in the Criminal Court today.

Ali Hameedh was charged with misusing state property and was charged with the same offense on two previous occasions as well. The state accused that Ali Hameedh had transferred MVR 2232 to his children’s phones between 2010 and 2011.

Ali Hameedh is being charged under Article 14 section (A) subsection (D) of the Law on Prevention and Prohibition of Corruption. He could face a punishment of three years, exile or house arrest and would also have to pay back the funds misused if he is found guilty.

Hameedh stated in today’s hearing that his children had transferred the money on different occasions on their own without his knowledge from his phone while the sim issued by the Court was inserted. He also stated that his phone was not kept hidden and that his children were not capable of contemplating their actions.

When enquired, his children had told Hameedh that they do the same with the phones of their mother and sisters, said Hameedh in court today.

Hameedh stated that the ACC had mistaken that the money transfers had been conducted repeatedly since the bills had been issued late and stated that this was not the case and that the money transfers were not repeated. He also stated that he had paid back the Supreme Court at once when he became aware of the transfers, including the bills issued late. He also stated that his actions proved his good intentions.

Criminal Court judge presiding over the case Judge Ahmed Hailam stated that a decision on the Mens Rea and the Actus Reus of Hameedh in the case will be made based on the statements and presentations made by Ali Hameedh before the trial.

Hameedh’s lawyer stated that the charges should be brought under the Penal Code and since the crime is not named in the Penal Code, Hameedh could not be charged. But this was refuted by the Prosecution who stated that charges are brought from other acts and laws for crimes that were not included in the Penal Code.

The next hearing of the case will see both sides present their arguments before the trial.