Other cases in Dubai

Other cases in Dubai

It is internationally accepted that the Dubai Courts, and this includes the DIFC Courts are not only not independent but are subject to nepotism and corruption. The facts, speak for themselves.

The Deputy Chief Justice of one of the Dubai Courts (DIFC Court), Justice David Steel, has set down in a judgment in 2015 what is required for a fair trial in Dubai Criminal Courts. We quote these below. It is clearly at odds with the realities of the country in which he is one of the most senior judges, a country in which he does not live as the below facts and cases show.

“[For] A fair trial before the [Dubai] criminal court. The dominant issue is availability of legal assistance. The other important feature is interpretation [translation]”  

Dubai Court (DIFC Court) Deputy Chief Justice David Steel CFI 2014/20 28 June 2015

The statements and documents [in the Dubai Criminal Court] are almost entirely in English [all the documents are in fact in Arabic as is the whole process]

Dubai Court (DIFC Court) Deputy Chief Justice David Steel CFI 2014/20 28 June 2015

[Arbitrary Detention] is not a feature which has any direct bearing on the availability of a fair trial. [In Dubai this means no access to pens, paper and virtual no access to lawyers and documents]

Dubai Court (DIFC Court) Deputy Chief Justice David Steel CFI 2014/20 28 June 2015

The aim is to make this page a repository of reports and studies of the lack of fair trials in Dubai and the wider UAE, please help us help others and send us your information, stidies, documents and judgments to info@justice4haigh.com

REPORT 1

The United States of America, State Department Bureau of Democracy, Human rights and Labour, concluded in its Country report on the UAE for 2015, that there was:

  1. Police and prison guard brutality;
  2. Lack of judicial independence;
  3. Legal discrimination on basis of sexual orientation;
  4. Reports of disappearance of individuals;
  5. Torture and ill treatment of prisoners;
  6. Authorities do not always provide an interpolator or the quality was poor;
  7. The civil Court like all courts lacked independence;
  8. Diwans (large ruling families) reviewed criminal and civil offences and returned cases to courts if they did not agree with verdict;
  9. Right to legal counsel is limited;
  10. Not entitled to counsel at police station or prosecutor.

REPORT 2

The Emirates Centre for Human Rights – A culture of Abuse at Dubai Central Prison of 2013 concluded that:

  1. 75%of those interviewed in Dubai Central jail claim to have been physically abused by authorities after arrest;
  2. 96% say a lawyer was not present when the police interviewed them;
  3. 94% say a lawyer was not present when the prosecutions interviewed them;
  4. 85% say the documents they were asked to sign were not translated into a language they understood;
  5. One inmate said “Police said it is their country and so they can kill me and throw my body in the dessert as I’m foreign.

 

CASE 1 

Magistrates Court 5th August 2016

UAE v “BS”

The UAE lost a request to extradite Mr. “BS” with District Judge Purdy finding that in the UAE and its judicial and justice system there is:

  1. A real risk of inhumane and degrading treatment in the UAE
  2. A real risk of unfair trial process

CASE 2

Westminster Magistrates Court 22nd December 2015 August 2016

UAE v Michael Haliday

The UAE lost a request to extradite Mr. Haliday, a Gay British Man to the UAE with District Judge Coleman finding that in the UAE and its judicial and justice system there is:

  1. A real risk of torture, inhumane and degrading treatment in the UAE
  2. A real risk of unfair trial process
  3. UAE could not give sufficient assurances that human rights would be protected

The court heard that in the last 5 years there were 43 complaint of torture and mistreatment by Dubai Authorities to British nationals in the UAE justice system

CASE 3

High Court of Justice of England and Wales

“L” V UAE et al

The UAE lost a request to extradite Mr. L with the English High Court of Justice over concerns about abuse of Mr. L’s human rights and a fair trial.

More to come as we build this repository