Police officer in vape case claims he never took oath

A special constable accused of selling e-cigarettes has told the High Court that, although he attended his police swearing-in ceremony, he did not actually take the oath because he was afraid.

Special Constable Mohamed Sajid Ahmed was arrested last month after a court-ordered search of his home and motorcycle uncovered a large quantity of tobacco, nano sticks, vapes, vape cartridges and 191.92g of suspected drugs.

He was taken into custody but later released by Thinadhoo Magistrate’s Court.

At Thursday’s High Court hearing, prosecutors argued that e-cigarettes are prohibited under Maldivian law and that additional charges can be brought against a sworn police officer for engaging in prohibited activity.

Defence counsel Ahmed Yameen countered that Sajid had never taken the official oath, despite joining the police on 7 May last year, and was therefore not bound by it. Sajid did not wear a uniform and the swearing-in was never completed, the defence said.

Prosecutors maintained that Sajid was a sworn member of the Special Constabulary and had signed an affidavit to that effect.

Questioned by Justice Deebanaz Fahmy, Sajid admitted he had attended the ceremony but said he refrained from reciting the oath.

“There was a constabulary oath ceremony. I went there too. But I didn’t take the oath,” he said.

“I was a little scared because it was an oath taken in the name of Allah.”

When asked what he did while others took the oath, Sajid said he stood with his hands in front of him. He said he had remained in post and collected his salary despite never taking the oath.

Chief Judge Mohamed Niyaz challenged the claim, saying it was implausible for someone to attend the ceremony, take part in official duties for months, and then insist they had never taken the oath.

“That is saying a big lie,” he said.

“If we allow this interpretation, how can we trust the police, MNDF or any sworn officer?”

When the defence suggested the dispute was a matter of semantics, Judge Niyaz rejected the argument, insisting a legally required oath could not be reinterpreted.

He also questioned how such claims could be verified in large ceremonies and warned that accepting them would undermine public trust in all sworn professions, including the legal sector.

The hearing concluded after the exchange, with the bench set to announce a verdict at a later date.