News Desk
Male’ — On a quiet evening in February 2024, Hussain Shameem, the Maldives’ former prosecutor general, was attacked near his home. A man wielding a hammer struck him, leaving him bruised but alive. The assault, captured on CCTV, seemed like an open-and-shut case. Seven men were arrested, charged with attempted murder, and put on trial. Yet, this week, the Criminal Court acquitted all seven, citing a glaring flaw in the prosecution’s evidence: the timestamps on the CCTV footage didn’t add up.
The ruling has sparked debate in this small island nation, where political violence and gang activity have long cast shadows over public life. For Shameem, who served as prosecutor general from 2019 to 2023, the attack was personal. He had spent years pursuing high-profile cases, often targeting powerful figures. The acquittal, though, raises questions about the justice system and the challenges of prosecuting violent crimes when evidence falters.
The attack unfolded on February 1, 2024, in the capital, Malé. Shameem was near his residence when a man struck him with a hammer. CCTV cameras recorded the incident, showing a chaotic scene: a cycle, a fleeing attacker, and a car parked nearby. Within hours, police arrested two suspects. By February 18, another man was detained for allegedly keeping watch on Shameem. Four more were rounded up later, bringing the total to seven.
The accused faced serious charges. Prosecutors alleged that Midhath Adam carried out the assault, with others aiding him were charged with orchestrating the attack and aiding the getaway. The case moved to the Criminal Court in August 2024, and Shameem himself took the stand, recounting the night that left him shaken.
The trial, which began in September 2024, hinged on the CCTV footage. Prosecutors presented clips from multiple cameras, arguing they showed the attack and the suspects’ movements. But the defense zeroed in on a critical flaw: the timestamps on the footage didn’t align. Clocks on different cameras showed conflicting times, casting doubt on the sequence of events.
In its ruling on April 21, the court was blunt. “The sequence of the footage must be considered broken,” the judgment read. The prosecution, it said, failed to explain why the timestamps varied or how they related to the actual time of the attack. Without that clarity, the footage—described as the “most important piece of evidence”—lost its weight.
Judge Ahmed Hisham, who presided over the case, wrote that the discrepancies created “reasonable doubt” about the defendants’ guilt. He noted that the prosecution didn’t address the issue during the trial, leaving the court with no choice but to question the evidence’s reliability. “If this had been clarified, the outcome might have been different,” the ruling stated.
Legal experts in Malé say the case highlights a broader issue: sloppy evidence handling. “CCTV is powerful, but only if it’s presented correctly,” said a lawyer. “The prosecution needed to anticipate these questions and address them head-on. They didn’t.”
The Maldives is no stranger to political violence. In recent years, attacks on public figures have raised alarms. In 2021, former President Mohamed Nasheed survived a bomb attack linked to extremist groups. In 2014, journalist Ahmed Rilwan vanished, later presumed murdered by criminal gangs, his body still missing to this day. Shameem’s assault fits this pattern, though no clear motive has been established.
During his tenure, Shameem prosecuted cases tied to corruption and gang activity, earning both praise and enmity. Some speculate the attack was retaliation, though the court’s ruling leaves that question unanswered. The acquittal has fueled frustration among those who see it as a failure of justice. “It’s disheartening,” said a Malé resident who asked not to be named, citing safety concerns. “If you can’t convict with video evidence, what hope is there?”
The prosecution has not said whether it will appeal, and Shameem has remained silent since the ruling. For now, the seven men are free, and the case serves as a cautionary tale. In a country where trust in institutions is fragile, the verdict risks deepening skepticism. For Hussain Shameem, the scars of that February night remain, but justice, for now, is out of reach.
Image: Hussain Shameem: social media
