Dozens of Opinion Prisoners in the UAE Endure 250 Days in Solitary Confinement
Human rights advocates have disclosed that numerous individuals detained in the UAE on charges related to advocating for reform have endured 250 days of solitary confinement.
On the previous Thursday, the Abu Dhabi Federal Court of Appeal’s State Security Department conducted the sixth hearing of the trial involving 84 Emiratis associated with the “Justice and Dignity Committee,” commonly referred to in the media as the “Emirates 84.”
The Public Prosecution wrapped up its presentation after two sessions, emphasizing the distinct nature of this case in comparison to Case No. 79 of 2012, commonly referred to as the “UAE 94.” It clarified that this trial does not constitute a retrial of the defendants for the same charges.
The prior case involved an alleged attempt to overthrow the government, while the ongoing proceedings revolve around the formation of a terrorist organization aiming to cause destabilization and spread hatred. This constitutes a distinct offense with more severe penalties, potentially leading to life imprisonment or capital punishment, as stated by the UAE Detainees’ Advocacy Center.
In its argument, the Public Prosecution sought to rationalize the initiation of the new trial by invoking Article 88 of the UAE Crimes and Penal Code, which asserts that if multiple offenses are committed with a unified objective and are closely interconnected, they should be treated as a single crime, with the penalty determined by the severest among them.
It additionally referenced Article 90 of the same legislation, which mandates that if a perpetrator is initially tried for a crime with a lesser penalty under Article 88, they must subsequently face trial for the offense carrying the harshest punishment. The court will then enforce the sentence determined based on what was already implemented in the previous verdict.
However, the Public Prosecution’s citation of these two articles contradicts its ongoing claim in the previous two sessions that the new case is separate from the old one and unrelated. This is because the mentioned articles deal with offenses that are closely linked. This suggests a critique of the court for potentially misapplying the law and failing to convict the defendants of new charges.
In the sixth session, the Public Prosecution focused on the money laundering charge and claimed that members of the Justice and Dignity Committee established two companies as fictitious economic arms to launder money collected through the monthly subscriptions of the organization’s members, in addition to illegally collecting donations.
This evidence mirrors what was presented in the earlier case, resulting in the defendants’ conviction in 2013 for establishing a clandestine organization aimed at toppling the government.
In the session, one of the detainees requested to speak, highlighting that he has spent 250 days in solitary confinement, praying without knowledge of prayer times, and expressing that his psychological condition has deteriorated to the extent that he can no longer recall anything from the Qur’an, despite having previously memorized it.
His speech raised the astonishment of the judge, who asked the prosecution to submit a report on the reasons that required keeping the defendants in solitary confinement.
According to information received by the UAE Detainees’ Advocacy Center, the judge continued his biased behavior toward the defendants and ignored the defendants’ requests to obtain paper and pens to record notes and respond to the Public Prosecution’s allegations.
Some information obtained by the center indicates that the State Security apparatus eavesdrops on conversations among the families of detainees and discussions within the courtroom through microphones installed in the ceiling.
It is worth mentioning that the court has decided to adjourn the next session until March 7th to hear the defense lawyer’s pleadings and the defendant’s responses to the prosecution’s accusations.
