The UAE’s highest court ruled that the appellate court failed to properly consider and address key arguments raised by the defence.
The UAE Federal Supreme Court has overturned an appeal court ruling that upheld the death sentence of a man convicted of murdering a woman and attempting to kill another man, finding that his right to a fair defence had been compromised.
The country’s highest court referred the case back to the Court of Appeal for a fresh hearing before a different judicial panel after ruling that the appellate court had failed to properly consider and address key arguments raised by the defence.
According to court records, the Public Prosecution charged the defendant with three offences, including premeditated murder. Prosecutors alleged that he had planned the attack in advance, purchased a pair of sharp scissors, concealed the weapon, and waited until he was alone with the victim in the stairwell leading to the rooftop of the residential building where they lived.
Prosecutors alleged that the defendant repeatedly stabbed the woman with the scissors, inflicting fatal injuries. He was also charged with attempting to murder another man by stabbing him several times with a sharp object. The second victim survived after receiving medical treatment. A third charge related to an illicit relationship with the deceased woman, although the trial court later amended the legal classification of that offence.
The Court of First Instance unanimously sentenced the defendant to death by qisas for the murder, life imprisonment for attempted murder, and one month in jail on the third charge. It also ordered the confiscation of the scissors used in the crime, imposed court costs, and ruled that the defendant be deported after completing his custodial sentence.
Both the defendant and the Public Prosecution appealed the ruling.
The Court of Appeal unanimously upheld the trial court’s judgment in its entirety, confirming the death sentence, life imprisonment, the one-month jail term, confiscation of the weapon, court costs, and deportation following the completion of the prison sentence.
The defendant subsequently challenged the ruling before the Federal Supreme Court, arguing that he had no intention to kill. He also requested a psychiatric evaluation to assess his mental state at the time of the incident, claimed he had acted under provocation, and sought to have the charges reclassified, maintaining that the specific intent required for a conviction of premeditated murder had not been proven.
The Federal Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal had failed to consider these requests or provide sufficient reasons for rejecting them, despite their potential impact on the case.
The court reiterated that, under Article 253 of the Criminal Procedure Law, every death sentence is subject to automatic review by the Federal Supreme Court before it can be carried out. It emphasised that protecting a defendant’s right to a fair defence requires courts not only to hear the arguments presented but also to properly examine and rule on substantive requests that could influence the outcome of the proceedings.
Concluding that this legal standard had not been met, the Federal Supreme Court quashed the Court of Appeal’s judgment and referred the case back for a fresh hearing before a different panel of judges.
