The Dubai courts, in their three levels of misdemeanor, appeal, and discrimination, dealt with an “insult case,” in which a woman of Arab nationality was accused, after she insulted a social institution and its director with obscene words.
The Misdemeanor Court ruled that the woman was convicted and punished with a fine of 5,000 dirhams.
The Court of Appeal upheld the ruling, but the Court of Cassation overturned it and ruled that the case be reconsidered before a different judicial body from the Court of Appeal.
The woman was involved in the crime when she was required by a judicial order to bring her 13-year-old daughter to see her father, who was injured in a traffic accident and is being detained for treatment in a hospital in Dubai. She delayed handing over the child to her father, after she arrived at the hospital in the presence of the director of the institution, which is based in another emirate and supervises the operation. The visioning process, and she began making up stories, then insulted the institution, its director, and the child’s father.
The details of the case stated that a report was received from the legal representative of the victim stating that his client was insulted by the accused, recording the offensive phrases she used.
The victim's agent stated that the institution contacted the accused to bring her daughter to hand her over to her father while he was in the hospital, pursuant to an order from the Personal Status Court.
He said that she attended, but delayed handing the child over to her father, fabricated stories, and then went on to insult the institution and its director, as well as her ex-husband.
When asked by the girl’s father, he said that his ex-wife forcefully entered his room, despite the institution’s director warning her and asking her not to enter. Then she forcefully pulled his daughter out of her hand and insulted him and the institution’s director with indecent expressions.
A friend of his who was present in his room by chance confirmed the occurrence of the incident, noting that the accused insulted her child’s father, the institution, and its director due to family disputes between them.
A social worker also stated that the accused uttered offensive words against the director of the institution, when she was asked through the hotline to bring her daughter to hand her over to her father, according to a judicial order.
For her part, the accused denied insulting the victim in the Public Prosecution’s investigations, and stuck to her statements before the court, while her ex-husband decided to give up filing a complaint against her, and submitted a documented acknowledgment of that to the court.
The victim's agent requested that his client be added as a victim, and submitted a memorandum containing documents about the incident.
After examining the case, the court of first instance stated that it was aware of the facts of the case, and was satisfied with the evidence of proof, as it was soundly based and free from any impurity, and its meaning is the validity of the charges against the accused according to the description given by the Public Prosecution of the incident, and it considered that the accused’s denial in the pleading session contradicts the evidence and the court considers it an attack. It is a form of defense to escape the punishment of the accusation, and then it ruled to convict her, but granted her a measure of clemency, sentenced her to a fine of 5,000 dirhams, and referred the civil case to the competent court.
In addition, the accused appealed the initial ruling before the Court of Appeal, reiterated her denial of the accusation against her, and submitted a memorandum in which her lawyer argued that the case would not be accepted for filing it in a manner other than that prescribed by law, due to the lack of a special agency, and the passage of three months since the incident.
He also pleaded the accusation as malicious.
After examining the case, the Court of Appeal concluded that the preliminary ruling covered the incident, and found that the defendant’s requests were not productive in the case, and upheld the preliminary ruling.
The accused continued the litigation process, appealing to the Court of Cassation, which overturned the ruling issued against her, and returned the case to the Court of Appeal for consideration in a different manner.
#woman #insults #director #institution #hospital
