The Dubai Court of Appeals has overturned a life imprisonment sentence imposed by a lower court on a Gulf national convicted of drug possession with intent to distribute.

The ruling came after a review that highlighted contradictions in the testimonies of co-defendants who implicated the accused.

The Public Prosecution in Dubai had charged the Gulf national with drug possession for trafficking, based on statements from two other defendants—one Asian and one European.

According to the prosecution, the Asian defendant admitted during investigations that he was at home with several friends when the police raided the premises and seized a quantity of hashish along with paraphernalia for drug use.

He stated that he had purchased the drugs from the Gulf national for 1,000 dirhams.

The European defendant also confirmed he was with the Asian in the latter's apartment at the time of the raid, testing positive for drug use.

He confessed to obtaining the drugs from the Gulf national for 2,000 dirhams, of which he distributed part to his friend.

Initially, the lower court expressed confidence in the evidence presented against all three defendants and sentenced the Asian and European defendants to life imprisonment along with a 500,000 dirham fine and deportation.

The Gulf national also received a life sentence.

Challenging the lower court's verdict, the Gulf national’s defense attorney, Mohammed Al Awami Al Mansouri, argued that the initial ruling was based on the co-defendants' confessions, which he claimed were insufficient and contradicted by their own statements.

He emphasized the legal principle that testimonies attributing guilt to another person should not be the sole basis for a conviction.

Al Mansouri pointed out discrepancies in the co-defendants' narratives surrounding the drug transactions.

The Asian defendant had stated in police reports that he paid the European defendant for the drugs, leading to uncertainty about whether he interacted with the Gulf national directly.

Additionally, there was no concrete evidence from police investigations specifically implicating the Gulf national—he was arrested at the airport while preparing to perform Umrah, and no drugs or incriminating messages were found on him.

Furthermore, the defense highlighted the absence of bank records supporting claims of money transfers related to drug dealings and noted that a phone number mentioned in the investigations, linked to communications between the Asian defendant and another party, did not belong to the Gulf national.

As a result, the appeal revealed a significant lack of evidence attributing drug possession and intent to distribute to the Gulf national.