The Federal Supreme Court overturned a verdict ruling that a two-month employee be imprisoned, on charges of threatening and insulting others via e-mail, and decided to refer the case to the Appeals Court for further consideration, on the basis of the failure to issue a verdict of unanimous conviction after revoking the acquittal ruling issued by the Court of First Instance.
In the details, the Public Prosecution referred a person to trial on charges of threatening another insult using the information network, and he attributed to him an incident that made him subject to punishment and contempt from others, asking him to be punished, according to the Information Technology Crimes Law issued by Federal Law Decree No. 5 of 2012.
The Federal Misdemeanor Court ruled that the accused was acquitted of what was attributed to him and rejected the civil lawsuit, then the Court of Appeal again ruled that the accused be punished with two months imprisonment for what was assigned to him with the obligatory fees, and refer the civil lawsuit to the competent civil court.
The convicted person did not accept this judgment, and he appealed against him before the Federal Supreme Court, explaining that the letter on which the case was based on the accusation was sent from the email of the company he works in, and there is no evidence that he sent it, pointing out that the court ruled his conviction despite Unavailability of the elements of the crime attributed to him, there is nothing in the letter sent from the company in which he operates any phrase that insults or defects the company or the people working in it. On the contrary, the message was very courteous, which negates the material and moral elements of the crime.
For its part, the Supreme Federal Court overturned the verdict, and decided to refer the case to the Court of Appeal for further consideration, noting that if the appeal was filed by the Public Prosecution, the court may endorse, cancel or amend the appealed judgment, whether against the accused or for his benefit, provided that it is not permissible to cancel the verdict of the acquittal Except by unanimity, and accordingly - and according to what was decided by the jurisdiction of this court - that the legislator required an investigation of justice and protection for the benefit of the accused convict upon the annulment of the innocence judgments, which stipulated his issuance of unanimous opinions, and that the absence of the provision arranges its nullity in relation to the public order to violate it. Fundamental promising from the rules of sentencing.
She pointed out that the constant of the appeals judgment records that he canceled the preliminary ruling that acquitted the accused from the two charges assigned to him and ruled that the verdict was null and void, and the defendant was imprisoned for two months for what was assigned to him, which means that they harmed the accused, and he required that the ruling state that it was issued unanimously, especially that the will The Court of Appeal tended to condemn the accused, and not to stipulate that it was passed unanimously that one of the judges of the Court of Appeal joined the opinion of a first-degree court judge, which favors the opinion of the first-degree judge who acquitted.
The defendant confirmed that there was no evidence that he had sent the message through the company "email".
The Federal Supreme Court overturned the ruling because the conviction was not issued unanimously.