73. 尽管对两起案件中向法官出示的不利于 Mahloof 先生的证据进行评估不是工作组的任务，但工作组注意到，Mahloof 先生因两项罪行之一获判了可能获判的最严厉刑罚，并因另一项罪行获判了相当重的刑罚。尽管 Mahloof 先生的行为从不具暴力性质，尽管他从无前科，尽管他事实上是一位极受尊重的社会成员并作为民选代表在立法机关中代表马尔代夫人民，他还是获判了上述刑罚。政府一直未能就针对两项罪行施加最高惩处给出任何其他合理解释。因此，工作组得出结论认定，Mahloof 先生遭逮捕及随后遭拘押属于工作组在审议提交其处理的案件时所指的第二类任意拘留情况。
73. Although it is not for the Working Group to assess the evidence that was presented to the judges in the two cases against Mr. Mahloof, it notes that for one of those offences, Mr. Mahloof received the harshest possible sentence and a considerable sentence for the other one. This was despite the fact that his actions were never violent and that he had had no prior convictions and was in fact a highly respected member of society, representing the Maldivian people in the legislature as an elected representative. The Government has been unable to show any other plausible explanation for the imposition of the maximum penalties for both offences. The Working Group, therefore, concludes that the arrest and subsequent detention of Mr. Mahloof fall within category II of the arbitrary detention categories referred to by the Working Group when considering cases submitted to it.