Ajman Court of Appeal overturns Dh500,000 fines in Snapchat case

Ajman: An Ajman appeals court has overturned Dh500,000 in fines imposed on a man and a woman over Snapchat communications, ruling that prosecutors had failed to provide conclusive technical or physical evidence linking either defendant to the accounts at the centre of the case.

The Ajman Court of Appeal acquitted both defendants after finding that the mere appearance of a person’s name on a social media account, or the circulation of content through it, was not enough to establish who owned or operated the account.

The case began with a complaint filed by the woman’s husband against her and the other defendant. He accused them of communicating repeatedly through social media, particularly Snapchat, without a lawful relationship between them.

Prosecutors charged the pair under Article 37(4) of Federal Decree-Law No. 34 of 2021 on Countering Rumors and Cybercrimes. The provision criminalises the use of information networks or technology to condone, incite or promote sins, with penalties that can include imprisonment and fines ranging from Dh250,000 to Dh1 million.

Both defendants denied the allegations. Their lawyers argued that the case lacked definitive evidence linking them to the accounts and challenged the reliability and origin of the digital material.

One defence lawyer also pointed to a forensic laboratory report that, according to the defence, found that the Snapchat accounts in question were not present on the defendants’ phones. The lawyer further argued that the complainant’s account of how he accessed the conversations was inconsistent and said existing civil, family and criminal disputes between the parties should be considered when assessing his evidence.

It found that the prosecution’s case rested largely on the husband’s statements and electronic material whose source and ownership had not been conclusively established. A police communication showed that investigators had been unable to obtain the data identifying the owners of the Snapchat accounts.

The court said the existence of online content, or an account carrying a particular name, did not by itself prove that the named person owned or was using the account when the material was sent or published. Electronic evidence, it said, must be technically linked to the accused with sufficient certainty.

The judges also found that the husband’s testimony could not, on its own, sustain a criminal conviction when the underlying digital evidence remained disputed and no conclusive technical evidence established a connection between the defendants and the accounts.