UAE: Ajman Court fines influencer Dh30000 for Snapchat defamation

The Ajman federal appeal court has convicted a 48-year-old Gulf national social media influencer of cyber defamation after finding that she used the social media platform Snapchat to publish defamatory content intended to harm the reputation and marital stability of her former friend.

In a verdict issued on February 4, 2026, the court found the defendant guilty of insult and defamation through information technology, in violation of Federal Decree Law No. 34 of 2021 on Combatting Rumours and Cybercrimes.

The court imposed a fine of Dh30,000, ordered the confiscation of the mobile phone used in committing the offence, directed the deletion of all defamatory material under the supervision of the Public Prosecution, and obligated the defendant to pay court fees.

The complainant was represented by lawyer Mohammed Al Awami of Al Awami Al Mansoori Law Firm and Legal Consultancy.

In his submissions, he argued that the offence constituted a continuing cybercrime and that the statutory limitation period must be calculated from the date the victim became aware of the defamatory content. The court accepted these submissions following legal clarification by the federal supreme court.

According to court records, the case arose from a personal dispute that escalated on December 15, 2024, when the defendant posted videos on her Snapchat account containing insinuations and allegations accusing the complainant of immoral conduct, despite her being married and a mother. Prosecutors said the posts included repeated claims that the defendant possessed “evidence, chats and videos” allegedly proving the accusations, along with references to unidentified men.

During questioning, the defendant stated that she had previously lived with the complainant and claimed that tensions arose after she informed her of her intention to move out. She alleged that the complainant refused to return her personal belongings and that the criminal complaint was filed out of spite.

The complainant’s husband, however, testified that the defendant deliberately sought to initiate marital discord by making statements that accused his wife’s honour and dignity. He said the defendant claimed to possess compromising images and videos and threatened public exposure but failed to produce any evidence despite repeated demands.

He further told investigators that a third party later, a woman , contacted him via WhatsApp on the defendant’s behalf, urging him to refrain from pursuing legal action and warning that he would be “exposed” if the case proceeded.

Prosecutors argued that the online content was designed to provoke family conflict and subject the complainant to public contempt, in breach of social values and family integrity protected by law.

The defendant denied committing defamation, claiming the videos were old recordings made in another Gulf country during an earlier personal dispute. However, forensic analysis of her mobile phone and a flash memory device revealed that the disputed clips were stored in Snapchat’s “Memories” feature and directly linked to her account.

In one clip recovered by forensic experts, the defendant was heard mocking the complainant, alleging that she had engaged in an illicit relationship despite being married with children, and claiming that her husband was unaware of her alleged conduct. She further threatened public exposure, asserting that she possessed “evidence, chats, videos and numbers of men”.

The case had initially been dismissed by both the court of first instance and the appeal court on the basis that the complaint was lodged outside the three-month limitation period stipulated under the criminal procedure law. However, in a ruling issued on December 24, 2025, the federal supreme court overturned those judgments, holding that in cybercrime cases the limitation period commences from the date the victim becomes aware of the defamatory content.

The supreme court relied on an official police certificate confirming that the complainant only discovered the Snapchat posts on April 2, 2025, after being alerted by a third party. As the complaint was filed within three months of that date, the case was deemed admissible and remitted to the appeal court for retrial.

The criminal conviction also gives rise to civil liability. The complainant has filed a civil claim seeking Dh51,000 in temporary compensation for moral and psychological harm, stating that the defamatory drive nearly led to the breakdown of her family. The court accepted the civil claim in principle and referred it to the competent civil court for adjudication.

The court held that criminal intent in insult and defamation offences is established when statements or insinuations are deliberately made to harm honour or reputation, ruling that indirect references are equivalent to explicit accusations when clearly understood. It found the evidence sufficient and conclusive, convicted the defendant under the Law on Combatting Rumours and Cybercrimes, fined her Dh30,000, ordered confiscation of the phone used, deletion of the content under Public Prosecution supervision, and imposed court fees .