The Federal Supreme Court rejected the appeal of three defendants on an appeal judgment, which he spent four months in prison, on charges of promoting drugs on social networking sites, through a video explaining how to abuse, confirming the evidence against them. A report by the Drug Enforcement Administration about a video posted on a social networking site showed one of the defendants taking drugs and how to promote them through information technology.
The defendants admitted in the investigation that they agreed on the issue of communicating a message to the community about the harm of drug abuse by preparing an educational video consisting of three intermittent scenes and the necessary tools (two guns, a lighter, two toy guns, a baby powder and a camera) were prepared and roles were distributed among them. So the first and second defendants acted and the third took the filming, using a «laptop» for the editing and dubbing.
The first scene included the presence of gangs selling drugs and a fight between two teams, as well as the appearance of the first and second accused of singing and chanting the word (Coca) a metaphor for the drug cocaine, and put the first powder on his hand and inhaled.
The second scene included the appearance of the defendants singing and repeating the words «Hashish and Marijuana», while the former smoked a cigarette.
The first defendant created a channel through the website `` YouTube '', and published the first and second scenes on the site and the duration of each scene about three minutes, while the third scene included the police caught the gang and it was agreed to publish in October 2018, but they were caught.
Investigations showed that they did not have a license to publish by the competent authority.
The prosecution referred the three defendants to trial for the crime of disseminating information on the Internet on YouTube, promoting drugs and how to use them, and publishing what would infringe public morals, and improve the incontinence and incitement to commit them, where they published information to incite others to use drugs.
The Court of First Instance sentenced the defendants to two years' imprisonment for what was attributed to them, confiscated the devices and means used to commit the crime, and obliged the convicts to pay the due fee.
The Court of Appeal ruled that the first sentence should be amended and that defendants should be sentenced to four months' imprisonment for the charges against them.
The defendants did not satisfy the judiciary and appealed against it before the Federal Supreme Court.The defense stated that the elements of the crime of promoting or facilitating the use of narcotic drugs were not realized through the use of information technology and the absence of their criminal intent, as well as the crime of improving sin.
The Federal Supreme Court rejected the appeal, asserting that the judge in the penal articles has wide authority and full freedom in order to understand the reality in the lawsuit, and to assess the evidence of the indictment and to determine the relationship of the accused and its relevance to the crime. He may base his belief in the image surrounding the case and reflect the legal facts relating to it from the intercourse of the elements raised by inference and extrapolation and all mental possibilities, as long as his proper extraction does not deviate from the mental and logical necessity. The accused in all the different aspects of his defense and to respond to every request or suspicion raised by the independence.