The evidence against Ibhais was his confession, and evidence provided by the testimony of five witnesses. The court refused to examine Ibhais’s allegations that his confession was coerced...

...The testimony provided by witnesses shows that neither the Supreme Committee nor the police found any evidence that Ibhais had committed any crime. In his witness testimony in the first trial, the Supreme Committee’s internal investigator, Khalid Al-Kubaisi, acknowledged that their internal report did not conclude that Mr Ibhais had committed any crimes...

The Supreme Committee has repeatedly made claims in public and in private that it has evidence that Ibhais was involved in wrongdoing. In a statement to the BBC the Supreme Committee, for example, it said that it had collected “audio and visual documentary evidence” to support the allegations against him.

In the appeal hearing, Ibhais’ lawyer asked the appeal court to review the evidence that the Supreme Committee claims exists as proof of Ibhais’ wrongdoing...The appeal court refused, saying that it was satisfied with the evidence provided to the Court of First Instance despite the fact that the Court of First Instance did not consider this evidence...

The Supreme Court has made redacted copies of the internal investigation available to select journalists, but not the evidence it says supports its claims...

The evidence shows that a young man with a wife and two young children is facing three years in a Doha jail despite no evidence he has done anything wrong and a grossly unfair trial...there is a considerable body of consistent evidence to support Ibhais’s version of events, there is literally no evidence to support the SC’s claims against him.