Court orders re-arrest of 3 suspects charged with Jailam’s murder

Criminal Court has ordered the re-arrest of three of the four suspects charged with the murder of Jailam Ahmed Shakir who were released from detention by the court in 2018.

Jailam Ahmed Shakir from H. Hundred Flowers in Male’ City was stabbed to death in 2015.

The four suspects charged with his murder are:

• Ismail Aneeq, V. Sinamale 4 04-01
• Naseeb Saeed, Venus Villa, S. Feydhoo
• Ali Irufan, Jamna, Gn. Fuvahmulah
• Mohamed Humaid, Fiyajahaage, G. A. Vilingili

Aneeq, Naseeb and Irufan, though originally kept in jail, were released by the Criminal Court on September 20, 2018.

Criminal Court scheduled a hearing in the case this Thursday following a motion for the re-arrest of the three suspects filed by the State prosecution.

The prosecution filed the motion for their re-arrest with the argument that they were a threat to the peace and security of the community and also cited a confidential intel report.

At the hearing, Prosecutor Aminath Sheeza Ibrahim argued the intel report showed the three suspects had a criminal record for gang violence and were senior members of a criminal gang.

She said the members of the criminal gang they belonged to were threatening the State’s witnesses in the case, leading to their refusal to testify against the suspects.

In response, the defense attorney argued that the State prosecution had not appealed the order issued by Criminal Court to release the suspects from detention. He argued that it was a violation of due process to request the court for an order to arrest his clients without first appealing the court order for their release.

He also argued that none of his three clients were arrested for any crime following their release in 2018, and that the State prosecution needed to present evidence if they are suspected of conspiracy to commit violence, but cannot be arrested based on the current charge against them.

The defense attorney said the delay in the court trial had been due to failure of the State prosecution to present its witnesses to court. He said the identities of the State witnesses were confidential, that his clients were not privy to the identities of the witnesses and could therefore not have engaged in witness intimidation.

Presiding Judge Ismail Rasheed asked the State prosecutor whether they will be able to present the State witnesses to court if the suspects were re-arrested.

The State prosecutor responded that the witnesses and their families had been living in a state of fear following the suspects’ release, and that the State prosecution will be able to present the witnesses to court if they were detained.

Judge Ismail Rasheed, following the response, granted the State prosecution’s request and ordered for the three suspects to be detained.