'MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR UAE JUDGMENT' FOR SALE'

[First Published on 19 Oct, 2016 Reparation Law News] ‘Download ‘Authentic Copy (PDF: 1200 kb)

MULTI BILLION $USD WORTH ‘JUDGMENT-DEBTS’ OF UAE: – THE ‘UAE JUDGMENT DEBTS’ AGAINST THE ‘ABU DHABI EXECUTIVE BRANCH’ ARE GUARANTEED “TEN TIMES MORE VALUE IN THREE YEARS PERIOD” AND FIVE TIMES MORE VALUE ON YOUR INVESTMENT EVEN IF THE DEBTORS SETTLE IT WITHIN THE FIRST WEEK OF YOUR JOINING! [“SALES BROCHURE”]

1) INTRODUCTION.
Article submitted by Panikkaveetil K. Jabir, Founder-CEO, M/s. Overseas Indians Legal Cell (hereinafter referred to as the Judgment Creditor).

The Judgment Creditor is an Indian National. Despite the social and other difficulties, the Judgment Creditor established a career as Electro-Mechanical Engineer. He had valuable experience in the said field by working in projects of International Repute like Voltas and Lufthansa in Mumbai, India.

In the prime of his youth, when aged 22, he reached Abu Dhabi, the capital of the UAE in 1979. UAE at that time was a fast developing country. He had been an active participant in its developmental activities. Due to tireless efforts and commitment to his profession, he could establish and develop three major business establishments in Engineering, Trading and General Contracting in Abu Dhabi that valued at about a hundred million U.S. Dollars by 1995.

2) BEGINNING OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION.

The Judgment Creditor, on behalf of his principal company, the ‘Premier General Contracting Establishment’, entered into a lease and build-out agreement with Hassan Saeed Hassan, a local Emirati, in September 1995, regarding a nine storied building.

With the rapid progress of the proposed project, Hassan Saeed grew greedy, and conspired to have the lease obligation set at naught with a view to make enormous gains. the Judgment Creditor could not and did not yield to the unjustified demands of Mr. Hassan Saeed, as the Judgment Creditor had already entered into commitments with others on the basis of the planned business deal.

3) FIRST APPROACH TO THE COURT OF LAW.

When Hassan Saeed attempted to break the provisions in the lease agreement, and even sold some of the flats to others violating the terms and conditions of the contract, the Judgment Creditor, as a law abiding citizen, sought legal advice and instituted a civil suit in the Abu Dhabi Court.

Hassan Saeed was, however, reacting in a most unreasonable and arbitrary manner. He threatened the Judgment Creditor with dire consequences if he failed to withdraw the Civil Suit.

The Court was, prima facie, satisfied by the contentions of the Judgment Creditor, and passed an interim order protecting his rights. There was a direction to deposit the contracted value in the Treasury. Hassan Saeed was informed about the direction and the possible serious consequences in the event of his illegal action and violation of the Court order were indicated.

4) THE GRUESOME ACTS OF VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.

The stand taken by the Judgment Creditor was lawful, reasonable, and had the support of the Court’s interim order. ‘But in total negation of the Judicial Order of Abu Dhabi Civil Court, Hassan Saeed continued threatening the Judgment Creditor and planned and executed violent and reckless revenge, defying all legal provisions and principles of fair-play. Certain corrupt police officials colluded with him. In consequence thereof, the Judgment Creditor had to undergo extremes of inhuman and deadly tortures from Abu Dhabi Police which no human being could withstand. However, he was fortunate to be spared from death.

The crude and cruel manner of the attempts to break the contract i.e. the aggression, police-looting and the connivance of local police, illegal arrest, arbitrary detention, malicious claim, torture etc., are detailed chronologically in a Representation [link] submitted to the Ministry of External Affairs, Delhi, on 28 October, 2013 in reply of its Letter [link] No.G/3139/2013/MEA (Gulf Division) dated 10th October, 2013. Some of the events [link] are also featured in the following articles. The Judgment Creditor may continue the narrative in brief herein so as to complete the story.
———————————————————————————————————
[‘Judgment Creditor Booklet to Enforce UAE Judgments’; ‘The Uniqueness of Judgment Creditor’; ‘Abu Dhabi Police-looting’; ‘The Worst Cheating Scandal of Abu Dhabi Debtor‘; “Truth and Justice are being nakedly sacrificed for UAE’s Reputation”; Untold sufferings inflicted as an under-trial prisoner at the brutal ‘Al Wathba Central Prison, Abu Dhabi‘, detailed herein ‘The legacy of torture in the UAE‘ and ‘The Prison-life in Abu Dhabi’; ‘The Loss of Business Firms & Assets of the Judgment Creditor In Abu Dhabi, UAE‘; ‘ And more.’]
——————————————————————————————————–
On Thursday 26th October 1995 around Noon, Hassan Saeed trespassed into the private office of the Judgment Creditor along with his accomplice, a policeman in plain clothes, who held a heavy iron rod of one meter length in one hand and a chained handcuff on the other hand.

The policeman enquired as to the original documents of the contract which the Judgment Creditor refused to disclose. On this, the entire office was ransacked, drawers opened by force and files thrown out. Thereupon, the policeman forcibly broke open the office locker with the iron rod in his hand and looted US$.4m worth money and valuables and the Judgment Creditor was severely beaten in cold blood and his fingers were smashed with iron rod.

At this juncture, the younger brother of the Judgment Creditor arrived at the office with lunch. As he arrived the Judgment Creditor asked him to close the door and call the police. By then, the policeman in plain clothes managed to get out of the office with the stolen money and valuables; however, Mr.Hassan Saeed was unable to leave.

It was noticed by the Judgment Creditor that the policeman in civil dress had returned and was shouting and striking on the door with the heavy iron rod of one meter length he held in his hand. By then an inquisitive crowd had gathered around the office of the Judgment Creditor. The policeman was shouting and warning anyone from coming near to him and was saying rather rudely “Pakistani, Bengali, Indian all are thieves and procurers”.

After some time, the police patrol team arrived at the spot as per the request made by the Judgment Creditor. But instead of protecting him from the trespassers, they joined hands with the trespassers, acted like mere savages, and the victims (the Judgment Creditor and his brother) were shackled, brutally tortured and were literally dragged out of the office through the street to the police vehicle in the presence of known friends and bystanders and taken to an underground detention centre. They were abused and assaulted there again and the Judgment Creditor fell unconscious. Eventually they were taken to hospital emergency.

5) ARBITRARY ARREST AND DETENTION – A VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.

The wanton acts of infraction of damage to the Judgment Creditor, his office and equipment were temporarily halted only when, pursuant to a telephone call of the Judgment Creditor’s brother, a police team arrived at the scene. In the mean time, a large crowd had gathered at the scene, and there were very many respectable persons from different parts of the world who could witness the incident.

Unfortunately, the police team acted in accordance with the dictates of Hassan Saeed, due to extraneous considerations and undue influence, money and otherwise. Hassan Saeed manipulated, with the connivance of police, the arrest and detention of the Judgment Creditor.

Thus the business deal bona fide entered into, and scrupulously adhered to by the Judgment Creditor, led to very serious deprivation of his liberty, which consisted of a series of violations of Human Rights such as a forcible destruction of his property with the connivance of corrupt police officials, illegal arrest, torture of the worst order leading to his unconscious condition, perilously near death, incarceration in prison, and other physical and mental sufferings. It took about six months for the Judgment Creditor being brought before a Court of law of Abu Dhabi, UAE.

6) A CONTENTION ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION ARISING FROM THE ARREST.

It is respectfully submitted that this default in not producing the accused promptly before a competent judicial authority, by itself is a serious violation of the rights guaranteed to a victim under the fundamental principles of international law. The Judgment Creditor was not produced before a Court, i.e. within a day, or some of the weeks. It took a long period of six months thereafter, for the Judgment Creditor to have his first appearance in the Court.

He was held incommunicado for about a month in different detention centres, often in solitary confinement, and finally taken to the central prison. During this long spell of illegal detention, he was treated in the most cruel manner, subjected to brutal torture and blackmail, causing him irreparable mental and physical injuries. The Judgment Creditor was exposed to such a gross violation of Human Rights which the competent authority could take serious notice of. Each day of such illegal incarceration is to be reckoned while devising the remedial measures.
——————————————————————————————————–
Article 9 (3) is particularly relevant and read:

“Any one arrested or detained on a criminal charge shall be brought promptly before a Judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release”. [Link: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations].

& the UAE had breached Articles 9 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) that condemns arbitrary arrest: ‘No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. [Link: Universal Declaration of Human Rights]
——————————————————————————————————–
7) THE LEGAL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE, ABU DHABI, UAE.

The Human Rights Violations, the assault, arbitrary detention etc as narrated above were scrutinized by the Court. The Court had the opportunity to have evidence before it from witnesses belonging to different nationalities.

The witnesses of foreign nationals (other than Indian) were in a position to give evidences, despite the fear of a possible harassment by Abu Dhabi Police and public prosecution. This ensured the independent quality of the evidence.

The arrest and detention were against the basic principles of law. The arrogant policemen of Abu Dhabi, however, committed the atrocities in full view of the public. This proved to be their undoing.

8) THE REACTION OF THE COURT.

The Court expressed its shock while noticing that a victim who sought for police help from trespassers was arrested and detained by the police!

9) THE JUDGMENT AND FINDINGS OF THE COURT.

The Judgment of the ‘Legal Court of First Instance’ was pronounced on 10-04-1996.

The Judgment Creditor and his brother who were charged with offences by the Abu Dhabi Police, were acquitted. The Court directed the Authorities, to prosecute the policeman involved in the illegal activities. It was found that Hassan Saeed was guilty of deception and assault. The Court criticized the Public Prosecution for concealing the assault of the policeman on the Judgment Creditor, and its tampering of evidence. Some of the material findings of the Court are:-

i) The policeman and Hassan Saeed had committed the offences of trespass and assault.

ii) The Judgment Creditor had only exercised his legal right, and he and his brother were attacked by the policeman and Hassan Saeed by taking the law into their hand.

iii) The police, which was expected to help the victims, unjustifiably protected the trespassers who were the law breakers.

iv) The Criminal Court observed that, the Interim Judgment of the Abu Dhabi Civil Court, ruled that the Judgment Creditor was the really aggrieved person and had deserved help.

v) The conduct of the police clearly proved the malicious motives in initiating the criminal complaint against the Judgment Creditor.

vi) Ultimately, the Court found that the policeman indulged in the illegal criminal act due to his greed, and that the police framed false charges against the Judgment Creditor to save their face.

10) DIRECTIONS OF COURT – AN ENQUIRY INTO THE CONDUCT OF POLICE.

The Court took a serious view of the entire events. It ordered an enquiry into the conduct of the police. The records were forwarded to the Public Prosecution for facilitating the investigation.

The order of the Court, regrettably enough, was ignored by the UAE authority. No investigation was conducted by the prosecution. The irresistible inference is about an active Police-partisanship to help the law-breakers, who wanted to make wrongful gains, utilizing their influence, and access to the ruling power.

The State has to bear the responsibility for such illegal actions indulged in by servants and officers and for helping anti-social elements with the full connivance of its policemen and other officials.

The claim of the Judgment Creditor is based on solid judicial verdict of a Court of the very country in which the illegal actions took place. [Link: The Judgment of the 'Court of First Instance - Final Decree' ]

11) SERIOUS VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY THE CHARTER OF THE U.N.

The Judgment Creditor was NOT released from prison in spite of his acquittal by the Criminal Court of First Instance, in total violation of the order of a judicial authority.

At the same time, there was an alleged omission to proceed against the perpetrators of the crime, in spite of the directions of a judicial authority. This too is a serious violation of Human Rights guaranteed by the law, both the domestic law and the charter of United Nations.

12) CONTINUATION OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE APEX COURT.

Ultimately, the prosecution filed an appeal in the Supreme Court of Abu Dhabi. The case was posted for hearing on 18-04-1996.

13) APEX COURT ORDER GRANTING BAIL TO THE ‘JUDGMENT CREDITOR’.

The Court granted bail to the Judgment Creditor on the day the prosecution filing an appeal. However, despite the bail and sureties the Judgment Creditor was not released from the prison.

14) INTERVENING EVENTS CONFIRMING VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADMISSION OF POLICE ABOUT SUCH VIOLATIONS.

In the meantime, policeman Ahmed Abdulla Abdul Kadir filed a declaration dated 17-03-1996, attested by a Notary, where-under he dropped the contentions in his complaint. Hassan Saeed followed the suit and admitted his guilt. The two other policemen submitted that they were misguided by Ahmed Abdulla Abdul Kadir in committing arrest and torture against the Judgment Creditor with a view to extort money.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court advised the Judgment Creditor to sue against the perpetrators of the crime for damages and malicious actions.

15) JUDGMENT OF UAE SUPREME COURT WHICH AFFIRMED THE LANDMARK RULING OF LOWER COURT.

The final Judgment of the Supreme Court was rendered on 19-05-1996. The Hon’ble Supreme Court declared that the Judgment Creditor was totally innocent of the charges. The case hoisted against the Judgment Creditor was wholly false, baseless and fabricated by the police for personal gains. The Court observed further that all the pieces of evidence proved propriety in the acts and conduct of the Judgment Creditor.

The conduct of the Prosecutor was strongly condemned. Referring to the principles of Islamic Law, the Supreme Court of Abu Dhabi observed that the law had honoured the man who protected his freedom, his honour, his property and his soul. A person dying while protecting that freedom is considered a ‘martyr’.

With regard to the facts of the case, Supreme Court observed that it was proved that the policemen and other officials sought to arrest the Judgment Creditor without any right and that they curtailed his freedom.

[Link: The Judgment of the 'Apex Court of Abu Dhabi, UAE]

16) UAE GOVERNMENT CONTINUED VIOLATION OF COURT ORDERS AND PERPETRATED VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.

The defiant Executive, however, continued the violation of Human Rights. Despite the acquittal by the Trial Court, the grant of bail by the Supreme Court and dropping the charges by his complainant, and finally, the Supreme Court’s declaration precisely in line with the Lower Courts that the Judgment Creditor was totally innocent of the charges, the ongoing arbitrary detention of Judgment Creditor and his brother continued indefinitely.

17) CONTENTION AGAINST THE NON ENFORCEMENT OF UAE COURT’S DECISIONS.

The eminent Jurists Panel of Apex Court cross-examined all aspects of the case and found that the accused was innocent; rather ‘a martyr’. This judgment of the very country in which the police and the Executive Officers perpetrated violation of Human Rights against the Judgment Creditor, held that the Police was answerable for their criminal action.

The ‘Debtor’, the Government of Abu Dhabi, UAE, is responsible for such a grave violation of Human Rights and reparation is legitimately to be reckoned for every day of the deprivation of liberty and violation of Human Rights by the officers and servants of the UAE.

18) AGGRAVATED VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS BY [FRAUD] DEPORTATION RESULTING IN LOSS OF HIS DIGNITY, RESPECT AND ENTIRE PROPERTY.

Strangely enough, and shocking, the judicial conscience, and giving a jolt to the basic concept of Human Rights, the Judgment Creditor was deported on 28- 09-1996 to India with false and fabricated records without any asset, dignity and respect whatsoever. [Link: The ‘Executive Order of Deportation’ – an ‘extremely fraudulent misrepresentation’, dated 28-09-1996 Abu Dhabi, UAE]

Yet another gross violation of Human Rights was the dare devil action of the Executive of deporting the Judgment Creditor from the country as if the Judgment Creditor was convicted for a crime by the ‘Court of Law’, ignoring the concurrent judicial declaration of the Courts in UAE, the Court of First Instance and the Supreme Court. While so deporting the Judgment Creditor, the Executive Branch was well aware that ‘the reason shown in the deportation order was against the truth.

The deportation order was prepared with the false and fabricated statement, with an intention to save face and simultaneously to avoid paying any reparations. The fraud committed by the Executive Branch of Abu Dhabi has caused grave injury to the Judgment Creditor, that has left him in the worst position than he was in before the fraud.

The U.S. Supreme Court has quoted that, “There can be no doubt that the continuation of a malicious prosecution beyond the initial act of instigation may inflict additional damage upon the victim”.

The competent authority could be justified to pass further orders appropriately dealing with the concerned officers and compensating the Judgment Creditor by awarding compensation which will take in the value of his businesses, freedom or dignity and the assets, lost by him due to the criminal actions of the administration and other officials of the UAE, along with other heads of damages permissible under law.
——————————————————————————————————–
The U.S. Supreme Court has quoted that, “There can be no doubt that the continuation of a malicious prosecution beyond the initial act of instigation may inflict additional damage upon the victim”; [Ray Wong v. Earle C. Anthony, Inc. (1926) 199 Cal. 15 [247 P. 894]. ‘The term ‘prosecution’ is sufficiently comprehensive to include every step in an action from its commencement to its final determination…’ (Lujan v. Gordon, 70 Cal.App.3d 260.)
——————————————————————————————————–

19) CONTENTIONS REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF UAE GOVERNMENT.

It may be recalled that the UAE government was blamed of having been instrumental in defrauding or cheating the Judgment Creditor to avoid honoring its moral obligations and assigned responsibilities. The Judgment Creditor was subjected to total deprivation of his liberty, his business establishments, loss of his accumulated savings and properties, and a great suffering in his dignity as a human individual. Each deprivation by itself justifies the strongest action by the competent authority, in the light of the solid evidence placed before it.

Deprivation of the entire property and life savings constitute a grave violation of Human Rights and the very Right to Life. There are multiple infractions of Human Rights, which constitute a more serious case calling for strongest action on the part of the competent authority. The right to livelihood cannot be subjected to individual fancies of the person in authority.

20) ATTRIBUTION OF CONDUCT TO THE STATE.

The ‘Debtor, the Government of Abu Dhabi, UAE‘ will stand as the fiscally responsible party until the Court Judgment is satisfied. His responsibility to do so will pass on to his successor-in-office; the successor regime is obliged to compensate the victim of state wrongs.

Under international law, the state is responsible for all actions or omissions of its officials and organs. This is the function of the basic rules of international law concerning the responsibility of States for their internationally wrongful acts and the legal consequences which flow therefrom. The ‘successor governments’ also remain bound by the acts incurred by the ‘predecessor governments’.

A three-judge Supreme Court bench in India has observed recently that Decree Holders must enjoy the fruits of the decree obtained by them in an expeditious manner – “It is necessary to remember that success in a suit means nothing to a party unless he gets the relief”. [Reference to the links below].
——————————————————————————————————–
‘HERE WE TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT’S THE LEGAL POINTS OF INTEREST’:

* The Constitution of the UAE and the ‘Arab Charter on Human Rights’ envisages many protective measures under the law. The Article 26, of the Constitution of the UAE it reads:

‘Personal liberty is guaranteed to all citizens. No person may be arrested, searched, detained or imprisoned except in accordance with the provisions of law. No person shall be subjected to torture or to degrading treatment’.

But what the UAE government practice is exactly the opposite of what they preach; making the UAE Constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery!

[Link: http://reparationlaw.com/caselaw/constitution-of-the-u-a-e/ ]

* The Arab Charter on Human Rights, adopted on 15 September 1994 by the League of Arab States, where the UAE is a party. [Link: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b38540.html ]

*Wife of the late King of Saudi Arabia has won the right to sue his son, Saudi prince for breaching a contract [Link:“The Doctrine of State Immunity” ]

* “Decree Holders Entitled to Enjoy Fruits of the Decree Expeditiously” – Says Supreme Court of India ! Link: ‘Supreme Court Judgment’

* “How does fraud affect a victim? ‘The impact of fraud on victims’ – Supreme Court of India  [Link: ‘Supreme Court Judgment’ ]
——————————————————————————————————–

21) DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE OF TORTURE – HOSPITALIZATION AFTER REACHING IN INDIA.

The Judgment Creditor was admitted in ‘Hinduja hospital’ Mumbai, by the very next day of his release from UAE Prison. There he was treated by different doctors at different specialties including psychiatrists. The Judgment Creditor had a greater degree of psychological stress and physical harm as a consequence of brutal methods used by the Abu Dhabi police under detention. He was advised Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments, Diabetic treatments etc., due to the Pancreas disorder symptoms.

22) PURSUIT OF LEGAL REMEDIES IN INDIA.

The Judgment Creditor fought for justice by invoking all legal flora, including the High Court of Delhi and the Supreme Court of India. The various legal proceedings, costly and time-consuming, are chronicled in [Links] Part A & Part B of the Annexures. They cover events commencing from filing the Writ Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 1996. The Supreme Court found merit in the case suggested that the Delhi High Court could be approached in the matter under Article 226.

The Delhi High Court by its judgment dated 20-11-1997, directed the Government of India to settle the issue within two months of the date of the judgment. [Link: In the High Court of Delhi, Appellate Civil Jurisdiction]

There was continuous and contumacious delay on the part of the Government of India. No order was passed as directed by the Delhi High Court. This necessitated the Judgment Creditor to approach the Delhi High Court again in 2003. There was an interim order on 28-1-2004 that the Government should intimate the Court of the steps taken to protect the rights of the Judgment Creditor.

The second Judgment of Delhi High Court was rendered on 19-9-2007. It recorded a letter of the Ministry of External Affairs dated 29-7-1998 reading:-

“We are taking up the matter with our Embassy in Abu Dhabi once again, requesting them to pursue the case at appropriate level”. [Link: Second Judgment of the Delhi High Court - 2007]

The Government of India, did not take any action on the order of Delhi High Court, as well as repeated representations and communications from the Judgment Creditor, despite the fact that the most cruel violation of Human Rights and deprivation of freedom or property of the Judgment Creditor had been repeatedly established by judicial verdicts in a foreign country.

23) FURTHER REPRESENTATIONS FOR DIPLOMATIC ACTION BASED ON VIENNA CONVENTIONS.

The International Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations, outlines the rules of law for safeguarding the interests of NATIONALS of the sending States and the treatment of envoys between states. Both the States, India and the UAE are parties to the present Conventions. The functions of Diplomatic Missions according to the Vienna Convention is listed below.
——————————————————————————————————–
Article 5 & 36 of the ‘Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) 1963’ specify the duties of consular officials’ when citizens of their country face difficulties in a foreign State.

Representation to Government of India: [Link: ‘Indo-Gulf Reparation Mechanisms’ Timeline Highlighting Submissions & Responses]

[Link: Article 5 & 36 of the ‘Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) 1963’] – Done at Vienna, Austria on 24 April 1963. It consist, inter alia, in: (e) helping and assisting nationals, both individuals and bodies corporate, of the sending State.

And also under the Article (3)(b) in the ‘Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (VCDR) – Done at Vienna on 18 April 1961′; the functions of a diplomatic mission under VCDR consist in: (b) Protecting in the receiving State the interests of the sending State and of its nationals, within the limits permitted by international law.

How Far Must We Protect Our Citizens Abroad? Edwin Montefiore Borchard (1884-1951)
——————————————————————————————————

24) INDIA HAD BREACHED ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS.

The government of India is in clear breach of its international obligations under the Article (5)(e) Consular Functions of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) 1963’ – Done at Vienna, Austria on 24 April 1963.

The victim here a citizen of India who has been suffering all through ever since he was a victim of a violent extortion racket in Abu Dhabi police that targeted him. he was illegally arrested, brutally tortured, arbitrarily imprisoned and being held incommunicado and deported illegally from the UAE without any asset whatsoever to India.

The Dignity and Rights of the ‘Judgment Creditor’ was not restored by the Executive authority of Abu Dhabi, as directed by both the Courts, the Court of First Instance and the Supreme Court, Abu Dhabi, UAE.

The Government of India has not been able to get justice for the Judgment Creditor so far, except a cruel and deliberate betrayal over the past two decades”. Virtually, the Judgment Creditor was transferred from one cage to another, his freedom or dignity and his professional life continues to be denied indefinitely despite his running from pillar to post, to restore his dignity and respect and to recover his assets.

Further about the UN Articles on Diplomatic Protection, it has been codified by the existing customary International Law on the protection of NATIONALS abroad or whose Property Rights have been unlawfully violated abroad by a foreign government. [Link to the Article is given below].
——————————————————————————————————–
The doctrine of ‘international responsibility’ [Link: The ‘Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power’ (Adopted by General Assembly resolution 40/34 of 29 November 1985)

The Articles on Diplomatic Protection: In May 2006, the International Law Commission (ILC) has adopted the Articles on Diplomatic Protection, These articles largely codify existing customary international law on the protection of nationals abroad by means of diplomatic protection. [Link: Articles on Diplomatic Protection]

Indian expatriates are exposed to the extreme degree of Human Rights Violations in the Arab Gulf. [Link: India's National Shame!]
——————————————————————————————————-

25) FURTHER FACETS OF VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.

The brutal torture of the Judgment Creditor at the Abu Dhabi prisons have caused him irreparable and serious physical ailments. As a result, at his advanced age, he is suffering now great strain, physically and mentally. the Judgment Creditor’s two children and wife who are also subjected to great sufferings as a result of the unjust deprivation of his entire property and their sustenance and facilities of life. The unabated agonies of the Judgment Creditor continues for over two decades. the Judgment Creditor’s younger brother who suffered great physical pain and mental anguish has also taken its toll on his life.

26) THE UN WORKING GROUP ON ARBITRARY DETENTION (UNWGAD).

In February 2016, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) announced its decision finding that the detention of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is unlawful. The United Nations Working Group has ordered that the Swedish and British authorities to end Mr. Assange’s deprivation of liberty, respect his physical integrity and freedom of movement, and afford him the right to compensation.

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) had given inspiration to the suffering individuals in various parts of the world by its glorious Judgment in Assange’s case. A laudable principle was also declared. Various forms of deprivation of liberty “constitute a form of arbitrary detention”. [Link: The Judgment in Assange’s case]

An illustrative precedent of UN Working Group in meting out justice to a person whose Human Rights had been violated are grave criminal acts and serious violation of Human Rights justifying the intervention of the UN Working Group.

Assange lost in all legal proceedings including the appeal to the highest Court in United Kingdom. The UN Working Group, however, meted out justice to the deserving individuals, when fact established beyond doubts the violation of Human Rights.

27) CONCLUSION.

In the case of the Judgment Creditor, there has been integrated and connected activities on the part of the policemen and the officials of Abu Dhabi, UAE and the UAE Government itself in arresting without justifiable reasons; malicious and deliberate misuse of power, subjecting him to torture, violating the provisions of production of an accused in a Court of Law, prolonged arbitrary detention, disregarding the verdict of the judiciary on the innocence of the victim, and violating the basic principles of a civilized Government of honouring verdict of the judiciary, Executive abiding by such verdict.

The Legal Court of First Instance of Abu Dhabi was declared that the conduct of the policemen clearly proved the malicious motives in initiating a criminal complaint against the Judgment Creditor. However, an order of enquiry passed by the Legal Court [Link] against the conduct of the Policemen was ignored by the UAE authority. The conduct of the Prosecutor too was condemned.

The relevant portion of the Final Judgement [Link] of the Supreme Court of Abu Dhabi, praising the qualities of the Judgment Creditor and condemning the malicious actions of his ‘debtors’ is reproduced here for ready reference:-

“All the pieces of evidence proved propriety in the acts and conduct of the Judgment Creditor. With regard to the facts of the case, the Supreme Court observed that the law had honoured the man who protected his freedom, his honour, his property and his soul. A person dying while protecting that freedom is considered a martyr. And it was proved in this case that the policemen and other officials sought to arrest the ‘Judgment Creditor’ without any right and that they curtailed his freedom”.

The illegal deportation of the Judgment Creditor by the Executive of Abu Dhabi, UAE, on fraudulent grounds has multiplied the devastating effects on the victim, such as:-

His dignity and freedom remained lost arbitrarily as he was deported on a ‘fraudulent order’ [Link] issued by UAE Administration purposefully in order to avoid honouring its obligations. His entire assets and properties remained lost; as he was denied access to his three major business establishments [Link] and assets in Abu Dhabi, UAE, that caused ‘Multi-billion Dollars’ worth of damages;

His dignity, respect and all his assets remains lost even after two decades of passing the ‘Historic Judgments of the Highest Court of Abu Dhabi, due to non-enforcement of Judgments. The anguish resultant from the deprivation of his freedom, dignity and property, as such the huge business assets, earned only through his untiring personal efforts causes mental depression which will virtually make the life only a vegetable existence.

Thank You!

Panikkaveetil K. Jabir,

Founder-CEO, M/s. Overseas Indians’ Legal Cell.

[Reparation Law News] ‘Download ‘Authentic Copy (PDF: 1200 kb)

VISIT ARCHIVES:-
Archive – Judgments and documents relating to ‘Judgment Creditor’

LET'S JOIN; TELL YOUR FRIENDS TO SUPPORT JUSTICE
"Alliance Judgment Recovery Networks"

ENDNOTES:-

CROWDFUNDING STRATEGY TO ENFORCE UAE JUDGMENTS

"Support the "Judgment Creditor" to strengthen the Integrity of the Judiciary and people’s confidence in our Justice System”. "Invest In 'Justice' 1,000% Returns! - Read Brochure"

BUY JUDGMENT PORTFOLIO NOW:-
Funds are proposed to be raised by distribution of shares. "JFS - Funds Transfer"

FREE REFERRAL PARTNER PROGRAMME:-
How do I become a referral partner? "Referral Partner Program is Absolutely Free to Join"

Quick Link

Partners