The Deputy Attorney General Abdulrahman Al Sayyed, stated that the Court of Cassation ruled today, Monday 1st October 2012, on the appeals filed in the case of physicians who had violated laws, and decided to uphold the previous ruling to convict nine accused as charged, according to Information Affairs Authority (IAA) statement.
The Court sentenced Ali Al-Ekri five-years imprisonment for possession and concealment of white weaponry to serve a terrorist purpose, and for illegal assembly; Ebrahim Damastani three-years for possession of a white weapon and illegal assembly; Ghassan Ahmed Dhaif one-year imprisonment for holding public officials hostage, inciting hatred against a certain sect, and illegal assembly; Saeed Al-Samaheeji one-year imprisonment for holding public officials hostages, inciting hatred against a certain sect, and illegal assembly; Mahmood Asghar six-months imprisonment for illegal assembly; Dhia Abu Edris two- months imprisonment for illegal assembly, and destruction of SMC owned non-stationary property; Bassim Dhaif one-month imprisonment for illegal assembly; Nader Diwani-one month imprisonment for illegal assembly; Abdul Khaleq Ali Hussain Al-Oraibi one-month imprisonment for illegal assembly
Ali Hassan Al-Sadadi and Qassim Imran are both fugitives and the verdicts issued against them were not appealed; both are sentenced to 15 years in prison.
The facts of this case date back to the events of February and March 2011, where the accused, who were at the time staff members at Salmaniya Medical Complex, took over the complex, detained and imprisoned kidnapped persons, and transformed the hospital to a place of illegal gatherings and strikes, in violation of laws. They used the security conditions that prevailed at the time, and violated the duties and ethics of their sacred profession, and undermined the security, safety and unity of the Bahraini people.
The accused were all sentenced by the Court of National Safety to prison terms ranging between five and fifteen years.
“In line with the Public Prosecution’s commitment to ensure the right of each of the accused to a fair trial in law courts following the lifting of the state of national safety, Public Prosecution appealed the sentences in favor of the accused, and asked for retrial for the charges made against them, allowing them to defend themselves before civil courts. The accused similarly appealed their sentences,” the IAA statement added.
“The High Civil Court of Appeals reviewed the case in 16 hearings, during which the accused and their attorneys filed all forms of defense, all of which were admitted by the Court in a public trial attended by representatives of embassies of a number of countries, as well as representatives of domestic, regional and international civil rights organizations, and heavy local and foreign media coverage. The Court heard lengthy defenses by the accused, either in person or through their attorneys. All exhibits, technical or medical reports and witness statements were, upon their requests, admitted into evidence.”
“Convictions and sentences carried by this ruling related to five charges only as stated in the referral order, which consists of 14 counts, namely promoting the change of the political regime by force and through illegal means, illegal detention of persons, instigating sectarian hatred, destruction of public property, calling for, organizing and participating in illegal demonstrations. None of the accused was tried or sentenced for any crime related to their practice of medical profession, although the Court found in its ruling that the accused failed to fulfill their job duties and professional standards, and recommended that they be held accountable administratively, not criminally. The Court relied in its causes of conviction of the accused on testimonies of witnesses, and the physical and technical evidence of the case. It did not rely on any evidence based on the confessions made by the accused during investigations, and dropped all charges related to freedom of opinion and freedom of expression, as requested by Public Prosecution during the trial to drop those charges.”
“The sentence of the Court of Cassation, the highest court of the land, fully closes this case, and is considered to be an admission by the Court of Cassation of the validity of the sentence appealed against and its validity. It is also considered as an acknowledgment of the integrity of court proceedings and that all of the accused have received all legal guarantees during the trial, without prejudice to their legal rights.”