Dubai Discrimination upheld his conviction in both cases

A manager takes advantage of his “position” to offend the modesty of two female employees

The accused repeated actions and words that would offend the modesty of an employee and get her to comply with his wishes.

Graphic image from "Getty Images"

The Dubai Court of Cassation upheld a verdict of the Criminal and Appeals Courts convicting a manager in a private institution, who used his position to harass two female employees working under his management after the divorce of one of them and the death of the other’s husband. It was set up by the second victim.

The second case papers included, from the reality of the investigations of the Public Prosecution, and as established in the conviction of the court, a direct description of the accused’s behavior, as it said, “It was proven from the seizure incident that lusts aspired him, and he was engulfed by madness of desire, and his demon tyrannized him until he became uncontrollable, so he took advantage of his authority over the second victim, being As her manager at work, he continued to harass her by repeating actions, words and signs that would offend her modesty and make her comply with his wishes.

According to the details of the two lawsuits, in the first incident, the accused targeted an employee working under his management, and lured her to an empty room, claiming that he wanted her in an urgent matter, and then physically harassed her. about the incident.

The Court of First Instance convicted him and the Court of Appeal upheld the primary ruling, so the accused appealed to him before the Court of Cassation, arguing that there was no coercion, threat, criminal intent, and the elements of the offenses of insult and threat, noting that what happened was with the consent of the victim, and that her statements were marred by unreasonableness, especially as she was lax in reporting. And she practiced her work normally after that, and the initial ruling supported by the Court of Appeal was based on suspicion that it should be set aside.

For its part, the Court of Cassation considered the appeal, and confirmed that the initial ruling detailed the incident, and that what the appellant was complaining about was not appropriate, noting that the victim’s inaction in reporting the incident did not prevent the appellant from being held accountable for what was attributed to him, as long as the court considered that he had committed the crime. .

While the other victim stated in an independent lawsuit, that she was working under his management in the institution she joined for 10 years, until her husband died, then the accused began chasing her with unnecessarily contacts in matters not related to work, and issued insinuations related to her feeling of loneliness, and then developed The matter led to her being harassed with crude statements, and she decided to report against him after she learned what he had done with her colleague.

After examining the case, the Court of First Instance convicted him and fined him 10 thousand dirhams. He appealed the ruling before the Court of Appeal, which rejected his appeal and upheld the ruling.

In addition, the accused appealed before the Court of Cassation, arguing that the impugned judgment lacked causation, due to the lack of the elements of the crime of harassment in the absence of technical evidence or witnesses confirming its occurrence in the papers, and that the victim’s statements were sent and her communication was malicious with the aim of assisting the first victim in her lawsuit , as well as its inaction in reporting for a period exceeding three years.

After examining the appeal, the Court of Cassation confirmed that the primary ruling surrounded the incident with all the available legal elements, and stated that it was established against the accused as compelling evidence, noting that the material element of the crime of harassment in the Penal Code is the perpetrator’s doing any material act that would further harassment The victim, by repeating actions, words, or signs that would offend modesty, and it is proven against the accused.

• The court punished the accused with imprisonment, a fine and deportation.

Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news