Theft and Fraud

Samantha, a foreign expat, is struggling financially. She decides to steal money from her employer, a
large company in Dubai. Samantha creates fake invoices and receipts to cover up the theft. Over
several months, she embezzles over 500,000 AED.

 What crimes has Samantha committed under UAE law?

 What are the potential penalties she faces, including fines and imprisonment?

 Can she be deported after serving her sentence?

Alleged Offences:

Samantha, a foreign expat in Dubai, has committed several crimes under UAE law by embezzling over
500,000 AED from her employer. The specific crimes she has committed are:

1. Embezzlement: Samantha has misappropriated funds belonging to her employer, which is a

criminal offense under UAE law. Article 263 of the UAE Federal Law No. 3 of 1987 (Criminal
Procedure Law) states that "anyone who misappropriates or embezzles public or private
property shall be punished with imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or a fine not
exceeding AED 10,000 or both".

2. Forgery: Samantha created fake invoices and receipts to cover up her theft. This is an act of
forgery, which is prohibited under UAE law. Article 263 of the UAE Federal Law No. 3 of 1987
(Criminal Procedure Law) also covers forgery, stating that "anyone who forges or alters a
document or signature shall be punished with imprisonment for a period not exceeding five
years or a fine not exceeding AED 10,000 or both".

3. Fraud: Samantha's actions constitute fraud, as she intentionally deceived her employer by
creating false documents. Article 263 of the UAE Federal Law No. 3 of 1987 (Criminal Procedure
Law) also covers fraud, stating that "anyone who commits fraud or deception shall be punished
with imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding AED 10,000 or
both".

4. Money Laundering: Although Samantha did not directly launder money, her actions could be
seen as an attempt to conceal the source of the stolen funds. The UAE has strict anti-money
laundering laws, and any attempt to conceal or disguise the source of funds can be considered
money laundering. Article 12 of the UAE Federal Law No. 4 of 2002 (Anti-Money Laundering
Law) states that "anyone who conceals or disguises the source of funds or property shall be
punished with imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding AED
10,000 or both"
Penalties:

1. Embezzlement

Samantha faces imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding AED 10,000
or both, as per Article 263 of the UAE Federal Law No. 3 of 1987 (Criminal Procedure Law).

2. Forgery

Samantha faces imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding AED 10,000
or both, as per Article 263 of the UAE Federal Law No. 3 of 1987 (Criminal Procedure Law).

3. Fraud

Samantha faces imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding AED 10,000
or both, as per Article 263 of the UAE Federal Law No. 3 of 1987 (Criminal Procedure Law).

4. Money Laundering

Although Samantha did not directly launder money, her actions could be seen as an attempt to conceal
the source of the stolen funds. Article 12 of the UAE Federal Law No. 4 of 2002 (Anti-Money Laundering
Law) states that "anyone who conceals or disguises the source of funds or property shall be punished
with imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding AED 10,000 or both".It's
important to note that the penalties mentioned above are the maximum penalties, and the actual
sentence may vary depending on the specific circumstances of the case and the discretion of the court.

Deportation

1. Deportation under UAE Law

The UAE has a specific law regarding the deportation of foreign nationals who have committed serious
crimes. Article 25 of the UAE Federal Law No. 6 of 1973 (Criminal Procedure Law) states that "the court
may, in addition to the punishment, order the deportation of the accused from the country if the crime
is committed by a foreigner and the court considers it necessary for the protection of the country's
security, public order, or morals".

2. Deportation under UAE Immigration Law

The UAE Immigration Law also provides for the deportation of foreign nationals who have committed
serious crimes. Article 23 of the UAE Federal Law No. 17 of 1973 (Immigration Law) states that "the
Minister of Interior may deport a foreigner from the country if the foreigner has committed a crime
punishable by imprisonment for a period of more than one year, or if the foreigner has been convicted
of a crime that is considered a threat to the security, public order, or morals of the country".

3. Deportation under UAE Labor Law

Additionally, the UAE Labor Law also provides for the deportation of foreign nationals who have
committed serious crimes. Article 123 of the UAE Federal Law No. 8 of 1980 (Labor Law) states that "the
employer may request the deportation of a foreign worker who has committed a serious crime or who
has been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a period of more than one year".

Conclusion

Samantha, a foreign expat in Dubai, can be deported after serving her sentence for the crimes she has
committed. The UAE has strict laws regarding the deportation of foreign nationals who have committed
serious crimes, and the court or the Ministry of Interior may order her deportation if it is deemed
necessary for the protection of the country's security, public order, or morals.

Possible Defenses

1. Lack of Intent:

 Samantha can argue that she did not intend to steal the money. She might have made a
mistake or mismanaged the funds, but she did not mean to commit fraud.

 This defense is based on the idea that the prosecution must prove that Samantha
knowingly, willingly took the money or property for personal gain.

2. Insufficient Evidence:

 Samantha can argue that the prosecution lacks sufficient evidence to prove her guilt.
She might point out that there is no clear proof that she intentionally misused or stole
the money.

 This defense is based on the idea that the burden of proof rests with the prosecution in
criminal cases. They must present sufficient evidence to convince the court of guilt
"beyond a reasonable doubt".

3. Duress:

 Samantha can argue that she was under pressure or duress when committing the crime.
For example, she might have been threatened or blackmailed into stealing the money.

 This defense is based on the idea that a person cannot be convicted of a financial crime
if someone coerced them into making the illegal transaction.

4. Entrapment:

 Samantha can argue that she was induced by someone else to commit the crime, which
she would not have otherwise committed.

 This defense is based on the idea that entrapment occurs when a government entity
compels someone to commit a crime they would have otherwise not committed.
5. Incapacity:

 Samantha can argue that she was mentally incapacitated or under the influence of
heavy medication when committing the crime.

 This defense is based on the idea that a person cannot be held responsible for their
actions if they were not mentally capable of understanding the consequences.

6. You Didn’t Take the Money:

 Samantha can argue that she did not take the money she is accused of embezzling. She
might show that the money was used for authorized business purposes, not for personal
gain.

7. Repayment:

 Samantha can argue that she can repay the money she embezzled. This might mitigate
her exposure and reduce the severity of the penalties.

8. Your Employer Gave You Permission:

 Samantha can argue that her employer authorized her to make the transactions. She
might show that she conducted the transaction exactly as her employer instructed.

9. Someone Coerced You:

 Samantha can argue that someone coerced her into making unauthorized transactions.
She might show that she was threatened or blackmailed into using her employer’s
money in ways that her employer did not authorize.

10. The State Only Obtained Evidence by Violating Your Rights:

 Samantha can argue that the prosecution obtained evidence against her by violating her
rights, such as illegal search and seizure. Her lawyer might be able to exclude some
pieces of evidence if there is a valid reason that they are inadmissible in court.