A fine of 5,000 dirhams is the penalty for an offensive post on an Instagram account in the UAE
The Court of Cassation in the Emirate of Dubai announced that it had imposed a fine of 5,000 dirhams as a penalty due to an offensive post on the Instagram account published by a woman and insulting a private hospital.
In the United Arab Emirates, the penalty for making a threatening or abusive post on an Instagram account is a fine of 5,000 dirhams.
Because of an inflammatory post that was made on an Instagram account that was published by a woman and insulted a private hospital, the Court of Cassation in the Emirate of Dubai declared that it had imposed a punishment of 5,000 dirhams as a penalty in response to the offensive post.
A “influential” fine on “Social Media” for insulting a private hospital
A reprimand on "Social Media" for being "influential" and disparaging a private hospital, The Dubai Court of Cassation upheld a ruling by the Courts of First Instance and the Court of Appeal, convicting a Gulf influencer on social media platforms, on charges of insulting a private hospital in Dubai, through her account on “Instagram”, and punishing her with a fine of 5,000 dirhams, after using clemency with her, and obliging her to delete the video clip that It includes insulting phrases, in addition to referring the case to the competent civil court.
Insulting expressions on social media sites are considered a crime punishable by law in the Emirates
In the United Arab Emirates, using insulting language on social media networks is considered a criminal offense that is penalized by law, In the seizure report and the investigations of the Public Prosecution, a reporter from the hospital administration stated in detail that the accused had posted comments and video clips on her account on the Instagram network, which included expressions that offend the hospital, such as describing it as "the worst" and that it "does not deserve to be a hospital," and denounced its granting of accreditation. The expressions that offend the hospital included describing it as "the worst," and that it "doe It also abused the staff and management, and it published a poll for its followers asking them to vote yes or no if they see it as the worst, and it incited them to abuse it. This was done because her mother was admitted to the hospital, and she was exposed to bleeding under the skin while having a sample of her blood taken, as well as by asking the accused in the case to abuse it. She contested the accusation that was brought against her in the investigations conducted by the Public Prosecution and the arrest report. She indicated that she had posted comments on her Instagram account about an incident that occurred with her mother, which the hospital regarded to be an insult to him. The accused stated that she had filed a complaint against the hospital, and after approximately two weeks she called to follow up on the situation, and they responded that it was a "frivolous complaint", and that there was no mistake on their part, and that it is normal for the skin color to change after obtaining the needle, so she took the initiative, on her part, to remove the publication, delete the videos, and the referendum which she posted to her followers.
A court ruling against a woman in Dubai due to an angry post on social media
A woman in Dubai was found guilty by a court because she had made an angry post on social media, According to the article, she is not accustomed to sharing unpleasant things through social networks; nonetheless, she has decided that she would not keep quiet about this institution. In addition to other allegations that were presented to the court, she brought up indirect and derogatory discussion about his medical professionals. The defendant, for her part, did not agree with the preliminary finding and therefore challenged it before the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal affirmed the ruling and explained in its merits that the defendant's denial and the defense she offered is another matter that the court does not analyze or consider. She put her trust in him because it was just an attempt to avoid being punished after she was surrounded by evidence that the court reassured her of. Since the accused continued down the path of litigation, she challenged the initial judgments and the appeal before the Court of Cassation, which came to the same conclusion and upheld her conviction.
