Famous social media figure fined Dhs300,000 for violating public morals
- 23 Apr 2020
Aya El Deeb, staff reporter
The Abu Dhabi Court of Appeal upheld the judgment issued by the Court of First Instance, which convicted a famous social media figure over charges of misusing social media websites.
The convict reportedly posted videos prejudicing public morals, in addition to defaming the national currency.
The Court also upheld fining the convict Dhs300,000, preventing him from appearing through the social media for a year, closing all his electronic accounts and confiscating the phones used in the crime.
The Abu Dhabi Prosecution confirmed that the legislations in the UAE criminalize all practices that prejudice public morals through modern technology and social media.
The Article 17 of the Federal Law No. 5 of 2012 of cybercrimes stipulates anyone who produces, transmits, publishes and exploits through an electronic site gambling and/or pornographic material or any other material that may prejudice public morals.
In addition, any person, who establishes, operates or supervises an electronic site and/or transmits, sends or publishes through an electronic site; gambling and/or pornographic materials shall be punished by imprisonment and a fine of not less than Dhs250,000 and not exceeding Dhs500,000 or by one of both.
The case dates back to the time, when the Public Prosecution in Abu Dhabi referred the convict to trial over the charge of spreading video clips that contain behaviors violating the public morals, in addition to appearing in one of the clips while burning incense using the UAE currency.
According to the evidence provided by the Public Prosecution, the Misdemeanor Court in Abu Dhabi ruled to convict the defendant and sentenced him to a fine of Dhs300,000 over the charges.
The Court also ordered to suspend all his electronic accounts, prevent him from appearing through social media and confiscate the devices used.
The Public Prosecution appealed against the judgment requesting to toughen the sentence, but the Court of Appeal upheld judgment of the Court of First Instance.
