Geneva – SAM Organization for Rights and Liberties stated that the sentence issued on May 24, 2025, by the Specialized Criminal Court in the capital, Sana’a, against journalist and writer Mohammed Dubwan Al-Maiahi — convicting him of the charges leveled against him and sentencing him to one and a half years in prison, in addition to requiring a written pledge and a financial guarantee of five million Yemeni riyals — represents the peak of a long series of legal and human rights violations he has faced since his arrest on September 20, 2024, up to the issuance of the verdict.
The organization considered recent developments in Al-Maiahi’s case to be a dangerous escalation that exacerbates humanitarian suffering and necessitates urgent international action to put an end to the growing violations.
SAM affirmed that the ruling is a blatant violation of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as guaranteed by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, both of which affirm every individual’s right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial court. It explained that referring the journalist to a specialized criminal court — in effect, an exceptional tribunal — constitutes a legal breach, especially since the charges against him stem from his journalistic work.
SAM stated that the procedures followed since the journalist’s arrest — including his harsh detention conditions and trial before a court lacking jurisdiction — clearly reveal the political nature of the case and expose the judiciary’s instrumentalization as a tool to suppress press freedom and stifle voices. Al-Maiahi was arrested by Houthi-affiliated forces without a judicial warrant, held in solitary confinement, deprived of basic human rights, and interrogated by newly formed security agencies not recognized under Yemeni law, in flagrant violation of the Yemeni Criminal Procedures Law.
The organization noted that the journalist’s lawyer, Mr. Ammar Ali Yaseen, presented solid legal arguments before the court demonstrating the invalidity of the arrest and interrogation procedures and the lack of jurisdiction of the specialized criminal court to handle journalist-related cases. He also highlighted that the prosecution itself had initially acknowledged its lack of jurisdiction, only to reverse its position under unspecified pressure. Nevertheless, the court disregarded these arguments and proceeded with trial procedures that violated fundamental standards of justice.
In a statement to SAM, attorney Ammar Ali Yaseen explained that the prosecution presented new evidence during the session, including an additional report featuring images of social media posts the defense described as "fabricated." The lawyer objected to the evidence, noting that his client's social media page no longer existed, and even if it had, the defense could have submitted alternative posts demonstrating Al-Maiahi’s opposition to aggression and support for resistance — indicating the prosecution selectively presented content.
Yaseen further stated that the prosecution and court responded to their jurisdictional objection by invoking the same argument: that the alleged crimes affect “state security” and involve “broadcasting information disturbing to public order.” The defense countered by pointing out that the Press Law also addresses such matters, categorizing and penalizing them appropriately, and argued that the prosecution’s rationale for the specialized court’s jurisdiction was unfounded and had already been settled by the Press Law.
Al-Maiahi himself spoke during the session, affirming that he resides in Sana’a, abides by its laws, and should be subject to the Press Law. Even if he had committed a violation, he argued, it should be addressed under the applicable press regulations. The attorney emphasized that his client is merely “a writer who shares opinions and ideas,” not someone who disseminates news in the conventional sense — and that he often revisits and revises his thoughts. He considered the selective use of Al-Maiahi’s posts to be an act of slander and incitement by the prosecution.
Yaseen reported that the judge then reserved the case for ruling and closed the defense phase. Later, the defense discovered that the verdict had already been drafted and saved in the judge’s phone notes before the hearing, suggesting that the judge had not even read the full draft to consider the defenses or explain the court’s jurisdiction.
The attorney said the judge read the ruling directly from his phone and told Al-Maiahi before pronouncing the sentence that he had “been considerate” and had tried to be lenient, referencing the legal protection of freedom of expression. The defense viewed this as inaccurate and believed the judge was trying to pressure Al-Maiahi by implying the verdict would be favorable.
The final ruling convicted Mohammed Al-Maiahi and sentenced him to one and a half years in prison. It also ordered the confiscation of his devices — laptop and phone — placed him under security surveillance for three years post-release, and required him to submit a written pledge and a commercial guarantee of five million riyals should he publish again.
The attorney concluded by saying they immediately recorded their appeal in the official record, calling the ruling "unjust and oppressive." He noted that Al-Maiahi was returned to prison shackled, and authorities refused to remove his handcuffs. He was heavily guarded — procedures typical of the Specialized Criminal Court.
Attorney Abdelmajid Sabrah added that the judgment was read directly from the judge’s phone and stated that the entire case against Al-Maiahi stemmed from a post he made calling for a protest in Al-Sabeen Square in retaliation for an insult to a Houthi leader. He argued that the indictment and allegations of communication with Belqees and Yemen Shabab TV channels were merely covers for the true motivation. He cited Judge Rabee' Al-Zubair’s questioning of Al-Maiahi about the protest — a topic not even mentioned in the indictment — as proof.
SAM quoted the Yemeni Journalists Syndicate as strongly condemning the verdict issued by the Houthi-run Specialized Criminal Court in Sana’a against journalist Mohammed Dabwan Al-Miahi, describing it as a continuation of systematic violations targeting press freedom and freedom of expression in areas under the group’s control. The Syndicate affirmed that the use of the judiciary as a tool to suppress journalists and silence critical voices exposes the collapse of the justice system. It further pointed out that the verdict was read from the judge’s mobile phone inside the courtroom—an unprecedented act that reflects the absence of even the most basic standards of a fair trial.
SAM emphasized that this verdict not only violates the rights of journalist Mohammed Al-Maiahi but also poses a direct threat to all journalists in Yemen. It serves as a calculated message of intimidation targeting press freedom in the country. The organization stressed that criminalizing journalism and treating expression of opinion as “state security offenses” is a repressive practice that contradicts the Yemeni Constitution and the applicable Press Law, which clearly states that journalists must be tried before their natural judge — the Press Court — and not before exceptional courts.
SAM strongly condemned the use of the judiciary as a tool for settling scores with dissidents, turning it into an instrument of repression rather than a refuge for justice. It also denounced the use of public trials as a mere formality in the absence of real guarantees for a fair trial, such as judicial impartiality, defense rights, and transparency in investigative procedures.
According to SAM, Al-Miahi was abducted on September 20, 2024, from his home by armed Houthi-affiliated forces without any judicial warrant and was subjected to enforced disappearance for several months. During his detention, he was held in solitary confinement and denied basic human rights, including legal representation and family visits. The charges brought against him stemmed solely from his published writings and social media posts, which criticized the Houthi authorities and expressed independent political views.
SAM noted that Al-Miahi’s prosecution is emblematic of a broader and increasingly repressive climate in areas under Houthi control. Over recent years, the de facto authorities have expanded a network of newly established and legally unrecognized security agencies, which operate outside the bounds of Yemeni law. These bodies have been instrumental in arbitrarily detaining journalists, activists, and dissidents, using intimidation and extrajudicial practices to crush dissent. This systematic erosion of civil liberties, coupled with the weaponization of the judiciary, reflects a deliberate effort to stifle any form of free expression and enforce total informational control.
The organization called for the immediate annulment of the unjust verdict and the dropping of all charges against journalist Mohammed Al-Maiahi. It demanded his unconditional release and compensation for the psychological and physical harm he suffered due to these violations. SAM also called for an independent investigation into the circumstances of his detention and trial, and for all those involved in these legal and human rights abuses to be held accountable.
SAM urged the international community, human rights organizations, and journalists’ unions to take urgent action to pressure the Houthi group to end these repressive practices, to work on protecting journalists in Yemen from persecution and abuse, and to assert that press freedom is not a crime — it is a cornerstone of any democratic society.
SAM concluded its statement by emphasizing that the continued prosecution of journalists in exceptional courts is a troubling indicator of the decline of freedoms and the erosion of the rule of law in Yemen. The organization asserted that any judicial process that does not respect the most basic principles of justice cannot be recognized as legitimate and its outcomes must not be accepted.