Suhaib Hasan Gives His Views on Masjid Tawhid Dispute

Suhaib Hasan, longtime Imam at Masjid Tawhid in Leyton and whose family has been at the centre of a long-running dispute there, has published his version of events on a rival ‘official’ mosque website.

There had been an arbitration process which sought to bring the two factions together but it has broken down. Suhaib Hasan says “Justice Nizar Boga [the arbitrator] had asked us not to make comments on this dispute in public, whether to the media or from the pulpit. We have abided with this agreement, but Mr Sethi’s party broke the silence.”

Is this true? According to an email from Nizar Boga dated June 8th 2012 which has been published on the ‘official’ website of the rival faction, he says he ended the arbitration process because the Charities Commission had announced that they were launching their own investigation into Masjid Tawhid. The CC investigation came after a letter which had been written to them by Usama Hasan, the son of Suhaib Hasan alleging that the mosque had been taken over by extremists – just days after he resigned as a trustee of the mosque. Usama – now a full-time employee of the Quilliam Foundation – repeated these claims just yesterday on his blog in which he described a number of his opponents as being extremists and ‘terrorism-sympathisers’.

By the way, it is important to note that Friday June 8th date. In his published statement, Suhaib Hasan says:

“Taking advantage of the fact that I was leading Jumah at the Rabita Al Alami headquarters on Friday 8 June2012, Talat Sultan [from the rival faction] took the microphone after prayer and launched into a personal and filthy criticism of me, my wife, my daughter, my son and my son-in-law.”

Coming back to the June 8th date – what happened on that day? Well, Tom Harper, a vile journalist from the Evening Standard wrote a story about Masjid Tawhid entitled ‘Mosque near Olympics site in ‘terror link’ investigation’. The story contained a quote from Usama Hasan welcoming the Charities Commission investigation in order to “deal with extremism”. See this fine analysis by Islamophobia Watch into the ES story.

In his email – sent the same day as the ES story – ending the arbitration process, Nizar Boga clearly says that the reason he was ending the arbitration was because of the CC investigation which had ‘undermined’ his own arbitration process.

Meanwhile, the rival faction which has control of the mosque (for how long?) says that they have held a public consultation event and want the community to be more involved in the running of the mosque.

There are plenty of lessons to absorb from the Masjid Tawhid dispute. Meanwhile, one can only hope that Friday prayers are performed peacefully tomorrow.

This entry was posted in Islam and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Suhaib Hasan Gives His Views on Masjid Tawhid Dispute

  1. Nasir says:

    Hasan Family getting very desperate now!
    Page 9 of the transcript :
    Dr Suhaib : the charity commission has no right to ask us about Anwar Awlaki. I take the full
    responsibility as the chair.

  2. Pingback: All eyes are on Friday prayers at Tahrir Square…. I mean, Masjid Tawhid, Leyton! | Peace, Bruv

  3. abunuha says:

    Dr Shuhaib Hasan is repeating his son’s claim when he states:

    “The Charities Commission has received a number of complaints from local people (Quilliam et al) about the kind of violence and hatred this group preaches”

    At the same time “” which is under the control of the Hasan family asks who these trustees are and states:

    ‘Since these individuals are only Jumah attendees, they are unknown entities. but not anymore…….’

    So what are they? preaching violence and hatred or mere Jumah attendees?

    Someone should tell the Hasan family that one can’t have one’s cake and eat it too

  4. Gaz says:

    Transparency At Work 🙂

    In the name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful
    Masjid And Madrasah al-Tawhid Trust (MAT) Ch. No. 1070735
    Detailed minutes of Emergency four day notice meeting of all invited Trustees held at MAT 80 High
    Rd, Leyton, E15 2BP on Thursday 14th June 2012 at 7pm. Meeting called by the chairman, Dr Suhaib
    Hasan on Sun 9th June 2012.
    Invited Trustees:
    Dr Suhaib Hasan (SH), Mr Muhammad Tahir (MT), Mr Raja Wali Mohammad (RWM), Ms Nazima
    Sheikh (NS), Dr Liaquat Ali (LA), Mr Mehmud Fazal Patel (FP), Mr Mohamed Hanif Patel (HP), Mr
    Idrees Sethi (IS), Mr Talat Sultan (TS), Mr Zahid Ahmed (ZA).
    Dr Suhaib Hasan (SH), Mr Muhammad Tahir (MT), Mr Raja Wali Mohammad (RWM), Ms Nazima
    Sheikh (NS), Dr Liaquat Ali (LA), Mr Mehmud Fazal Patel (FP), Mr Mohamed Hanif Patel (HP), Mr
    Idrees Sethi (IS), Mr Talat Sultan (TS), Mr Zahid Ahmed (ZA).
    1. To discuss the present situation
    Chairperson: Dr Suhaib Hasan
    Minutes of any previous meetings
    N/A as Emergency meeting.
    1. Discuss present situation
    SH: As this is an emergency meeting we will only discuss the present situation.
    We are going through a crisis situation at present and so it would be best if we speak to each other
    with mutual respect and understanding.
    Recitation of the verse: Ya ayyuhal lazeena amanu awfu bil wuquf. Oh you who believe, be mindful
    of the agreements you have made and fulfil them.
    Our current situation is such that we have gone through an arbitration process and during this we have
    come to an agreement on several matters. Amongst these matters was also the agreement that any
    speech or statement will not be issued without consultation and the agreement of the chairman and the
    vice-chairman. It went further and stated that even the secretary Dr Liaquat Ali is not to issue any
    statement or send out letters without the agreement of the chairman and vice-chairman.
    It is also stated in the arbitration agreement that there will be no speech given from the pulpit against
    anyone or any Trustee directly or indirectly. All these things have taken place last Friday including a
    speech after the prayer and a press release. By such actions several clauses of the arbitration
    agreement have been breached.
    I wish to inform you that although we have had disagreements in the past it has never been to the
    extent that we try to inflict damage on someone, someone’s relations, someone’s family members or
    any individual.
    During the arbitration agreement it was presented to me that I should be chairman for three months
    and someone from the other party should be the chairman for three months. Several of you are my
    witnesses when I stated that if you insist on making someone from your side the chairman then that
    person should be someone from that group on the basis of seniority and someone of equal age and that
    it should be Mr Sethi. This would be more respectful to both me and him. This suggestion was
    presented by me. I don’t know if this suggestion reached you or not but you did not choose to appoint
    Following that we said that the chairman and vice-chairman will issue statements jointly. Following
    the arbitration agreement Fazal Patel (vice-chairman) and myself (SH) wrote to the charity
    commission with both our signatures regarding the agreement. Along with that letter I attached the
    new seven point policy on inviting speakers to the Trust which we agreed upon in the last Trust
    meeting with some minor elaborations. The main seven points remained the same. The elaboration
    was to clarify the points so that our policy on terrorism and extremism becomes crystal clear.
    However Fazal Patel read the policy and stated that you have added so much to the policy and that for
    this reason you cannot send it and it will need to be discussed further in the Trust meeting. I tried to
    convince him that there is nothing new in this policy from that which we agreed in the Trust meeting
    on 3.6.2012. He insisted that the policy is not sent. Due to this, only the letter to the charity
    commission was sent with the following having to be tipex’d out : ‘please see attached our policy’.
    The policy for this reason was not attached. Fazal again insisted that ‘you are not going to send a copy
    of the policy to the charity commission’. I replied that as I have given you my word that I will not
    send it and so was not sent. I wish to bring this to your attention, all those present here, so that you are
    aware of this.
    Now the action that some of you have taken in front of everyone last week is all very clear. You are
    aware that this dispute has been going on for 18 months. The people are not interested in my looks or
    your looks or who stands at the front. Some people respect me and want me and perhaps some people
    want you but one thing is clear that what the people don’t want is fighting or quarrelling. When it was
    announced about the arbitration agreement and that the two parties are closer together, the people
    were full of joy and happiness. The message we want to portray to the public is that we can overcome
    our differences and get back together again. And we have indeed given this message to the public.
    Now after all that some of you have stood up and issued a statement even though you had no right to
    do so. You have in your statement mentioned my name and my family’s name. Tomorrow to settle the
    score, I can say so much about some of you, but I am not going to do that because the people don’t
    come to the Mosque to listen to disputes. The reputation of the Mosque is being damaged immensely
    and I do not want to make this any worse because of someone’s foolishness. Despite all this I am still
    insisting that we deal with this matter with wisdom and intelligence and try to find a way out of this
    Now you can say that Usama has given an interview and that is why this has happened. The reality is,
    as Usama has mentioned, that he wrote a letter to the charity commission in April prior to the
    arbitration. An enquiry by the charity commission is never on the basis of one letter. An enquiry does
    not take place unless there are numerous complaints to the charity commission. I don’t know how
    many complaints have been lodged with the charity commission. In the Independent it has been
    stated ‘numerous complaints’. I have knowledge of this kind of situation with another organisation
    where there was an in depth investigation but only after numerous complaints. Everyone was
    questioned in detail and came out untarnished.
    At this time, to say that all this has happened because of Usama or on the basis of his complaint, well
    that is not so. Say someone complains to me about a student or an Imam. Say numerous complaints
    are presented to me and they are asking me to do something. Now it is my decision to decide what I
    should do. Shall I expel the Imam; shall I discipline the Imam or do nothing etc. The charity
    commission has received complaints and they have decided to investigate. This is their decision. It is
    not up to Usama. I am against the charity commission’s decision to investigate. I don’t think the
    charity commission should have gone to this length to investigate. I am against this, but they have
    taken this step.
    Now that they have taken this step we are all in the same boat. Now we have to sail through this.
    Making statements and issuing press statements in the way they were done was against the arbitration
    agreement. The other astonishing thing is that you have even kept your previous solicitor, even now,
    after the arbitration agreement, to fight your case even though we are legally bound to work together
    as a new set of Trustees. Since April and following the Arbitration agreement we have had absolutely
    no contact with our solicitor as it is not appropriate or in keeping with the arbitration agreement. In
    contrast you are saying that you have involved your solicitor on behalf of the Trust. On behalf of
    which Trust is it that your solicitor is acting? The Trust is this set of ten new Trustees. Why do you
    falsely say that the statement is on behalf of the Trust. He is only acting for you five Trustees. The
    other five have no idea or say in what statement you are releasing what so ever.
    I am therefore again requesting that you calmly ponder on these facts. There are only two
    possibilities: 1. Either we all cooperate. Cooperate and challenge the charity commission investigation
    to a satisfactory conclusion or 2. That you target me and my family with all your efforts, to such an
    extreme, that I have no option but to start saying things against you so that it becomes clear to the
    charity commission that we are two extreme groups. What will be the conclusion of this? Only god
    knows best.
    I still feel there is time for us to get together, cooperate and come out of this dispute. As far as Usama
    is concerned he has resigned and he is no longer accountable to the Trust anymore. Despite this and I
    have a copy of the interview Usama has given to the BBC there are no damaging remarks in that
    interview towards the Mosque. Usama and Fazal have appeared on Islam Channel. I have no idea why
    Islam Channel or yourselves have called him. There was no need for Usama and Fazal to debate the
    issue head to head on Islam Channel. Your Solicitor was also there too. This is clearly against the
    arbitration agreement. The BBC did contact me too but I declined to give an interview as it would
    have been against the arbitration agreement. They stated that we did not get a response from the
    Mosque. I could have responded but I did not. It was because of the arbitration agreement. You
    yourselves are conducting affairs against the arbitration agreement and then asking how we should
    resolve this.
    These were some of the things I wanted to clarify and make you aware of. I am happy to take your
    comments and listen to what you have to say.
    IS: Thank you Dr Hasan. The points you have made were from your point of view. You cannot say
    with simplicity that Usama is not at fault. When we were going for the arbitration meeting Usama
    added a 9 page blog at that time. After that he withdrew his blog. Then he ended up writing to the
    charity commission. We are not concerned about how many people have written to the charity
    commission. Usama has himself admitted that he complained to the charity commission. He was then
    asked to withdraw the charity commission complaint. I knew, if he did that, the charity commission
    will say ‘go to hell, we will continue with our enquiries’. After that it was the BBC.
    Dr Hasan, whatever has been happening for a long time we have kept silent and refused to talk to the
    media. The media came to me, came to Fazal and came to all of us. We bluntly refused it. BBC, ITV,
    Fox TV and all the newspapers. We completely refused all of them. For so many years you have been
    the chairman here and you have the mic in your hand. Whatever you have said last Ramadan and
    since then we have tolerated it. Last week even if you were here the explanation would have gone to
    the public. All the channels and newspapers have reported it so the public has to be informed. You
    cannot say with simplicity that Usama is saying it in the interests of the Mosque. What kind of interest
    is this. The Mosque has been tarnished and had its legs broken. Once sheikh Sudais asked why did Dr
    Suhaib take me to Clapton Mosque. The reason I come to this Mosque is because it is Masjid Tawhid.
    Now this Mosque has been labelled as an extremist Mosque in the whole world. Every child now
    knows this. And you say that Usama hasn’t done anything and that now he has left the Trust. Let him
    speak about any other Mosque like that and see how they will treat him. This is not a joke Dr Hasan.
    We are all sitting in this room. We have listened to you and you are listening to us. If you had been
    fair right from the beginning we would not have reached this far. You are saying Usama hasn’t done
    anything. We have only used the mic once and you are saying this is a great offence. This has been
    going on for quite some time against me, the Mosque and against my colleagues. How long can we
    tolerate this. As far as arbitration is concerned Mr Nizar Boga has said that arbitration has been
    frozen. We are not interfering with arbitration. Whatever we have done has been done according to
    the rules.
    TS: I just want to say a couple of things. You stated that Usama went to the charity commission
    before arbitration. When did he go to the BBC? During. So as far as we are concerned this is a clear
    and blatant attempt to undermine the arbitration. He is disgruntled that he had to resign from the
    Trust. He should have accepted that. He is trying to meddle with that process. On the Friday it was
    right to make a statement to the community. What will they be thinking watching their Mosque on the
    news and in the papers with such allegations as Abu Qatada and Anwar Awlaki at this Mosque. Make
    it very clear the lies that he has made. You have not said that these were lies. You have not stood up at
    the pulpit and said that these were lies. I am in front of the public and say I am going to abandon the
    views of my son. He is a heretic. A clear heretic. His views are well known. Islam Channel contacted
    him directly and asked him to come to the programme and that’s within their right. They are press too.
    You seem to be saying it is ok for him to go and say things to BBC and everyone else. They
    independently did that. That’s got nothing to with me or anybody else and neither can we interfere
    with that process. Very very clearly the statements he has made, we would like you to make very clear
    who the organisers were in the Mosque which was yourself, Dr Liaquat and Usama Hasan. They are
    very well aware when Anwar Awlaki came in 2003. Can you state that? Pause…..
    SH: I’m listening to you.
    TS: I want you to… who were the organisers…
    SH: I will respond to you in the end.
    TS: This will clearly tell us which side of the fence you are on. With the Trust or standing for your
    family and your own agenda.
    SH: Look Talat you have to speak gently…. You are a newcomer to the Mosque. You were not a
    Trustee at the time… I can talk to these three people but your tone and language is inappropriate.
    Please tell him to speak gently…You are a newcomer to the Trust and yet you speak like this. I can
    tolerate this kind of talk from the others who have been in the Trust longer but not from you…. You
    are making slanderous remarks…
    TS: Our press release was very very clear. SH: Your press release is a slandering one. TS:Your
    respected wife who is a manager in the Mosque…
    SH: Your remarks are very slanderous and you are trying to provoke anger. This is your agenda. You
    have made your point….
    TS: As the Trust we want to know in 2003 very clearly from yourself and Dr Liaquat sitting there
    very quietly you were the organisers at the event.
    LA: Let me ask you. Where were you at the time? Were you a Trustee?
    TS: No
    LA: Who were the Trustees at the Time.
    TS: You were. LA: Who else? TS: Sheikh Suhaib was. LA: Just us two? TS: Usama Hasan was.
    LA:Yes. TS: And there were others. LA: Who else?
    FP: Myself, Mr Sethi..
    LA: Yes. So why don’t you ask the other Trustees that you are communicating with as to who was in
    charge at that time? Ask them. They should be able to answer your questions.
    TS: They can answer it very well but we want to hear it from yourselves. Because it is your son that
    you are trying to protect. LA: Do you know what my role was at the time. TS: is making an allegation
    that Abu Qatada organised several lectures in the Mosque.
    LA: Do you even know what happened at the time? I was around and I know exactly what happened
    at the time.
    TS: Number two. LA: Answer my question now. TS: Number two. Anwar Awlaki was invited by
    yourselves the posters are out there. Very clearly. LA: Who invited him? Who invited Abu Qatada?
    Who invited Abu Qatada? Who invited Him?
    TS: None of the Trustees did. None of the management did. LA: So why are you pointing the fingers
    at Me and Sheikh Suhaib. TS: Well Usama Hasan.
    LA: Usama Hasan invited him did he? TS: Have you released any press statements?
    SH: What is the date when he was invited? Because Usama wasn’t even in the country around 2002
    and 2003…. Speak out of evidence.
    TS: You are not answering our questions. You are just reading out your statement. Your statement
    was well organised and a heart-felt speech.
    SH: These are my notes which I just prepared a few minutes ago. I am not like you that I prepare a
    report and then read it out to the public.
    TS: We are answerable to the public and to the congregation. We are a charity. I ask again very
    clearly. We have evidence that in the first Trust meeting, that we have just had, two weeks ago. SH:
    Mr Sethi. Please either ask him to be quiet because we want to resolve this issue here or I will speak
    openly against everyone. You have said what you wanted to say. There is a chair here. There is a chair
    here. Now I am the chair. Whose the next one?
    FP: I want to put the record straight about that policy you wrote out the other day. That policy you
    wrote out, I read it. Whether I agree with it or disagree with it makes no difference. It has to go before
    the full committee before we send it off. Did I say that or not but you did not mention that? You did
    not mention that in your report. I said that I do not agree with it. You said too much. I said to you that
    this policy you have made is not just your or my decision. We have to put it through the full
    committee. Get it approved before sending it to the charity commission. Did I say that or not?
    SH: I am saying the same thing!
    LA: Can I make a point….
    SH: My point was that I honoured your saying that I did not issue a statement with out consulting
    each other. You did not agree with it. You said we are going to discuss it in the meeting. Alright so I
    did not send it. But you did not consult me about your statement.
    FP: I’m coming to that next, right. I just wanted to put the record straight before I go any further. As I
    said to you, I said it, has to go before the full committee, full Trustees committee before it is
    LA: So why did your public statement not go before the full committee? Pause…So why did your
    public statement not go before the full committee?
    FP: I’m coming to that.
    LA: One policy for you and another for us!
    FP: You were supposed to be doing the Friday sermon yeah. You didn’t turn up this week. Yeah. You
    decided to send somebody else yeah. Did you tell me? No. Did you tell me or no that you are coming?
    SH: You don’t know that every second week of the month I go to Rabita?
    FP: You never ever tell us. I’m sorry there is no rota written there.
    SH: Every second week I go to Rabita. That has been for years and years.
    FP: So Usama has definitely picked the right time to put the media report out then, because you were
    not going to be here on Friday.
    SH: I don’t know anything about that.
    FP: Ok Ok. Lets go further. You saw the headlines everywhere. In the TV, in the papers and here
    there and everywhere. Did you make any attempt to respond to your worshippers here in the Mosque?
    What must they be thinking? Going through their head. Did you want to address them at all? You
    could have told me I’m not coming to the Mosque and that you must make them feel at ease.
    SH: Who is the spokesman. The spokesman is either the chairman or the secretary. Even the vicechairman
    cannot act until the chairman is absent say travelling and he can then delegate…
    FP: So what you are suggesting is that if this Mosque was on fire tomorrow, I will wait for you before
    we throw the water to put the fire out.
    SH: It is not fire!
    FP: It was fire. Yes.
    SH: No it was not fire. The fire is extinguished.
    SH: Why don’t you accept that this was done against the arbitration rules. Why don’t you accept that.
    FP: Let me tell you something. Arbitration has been frozen. Are you aware of that.
    SH: What does that mean. All that we have agreed upon has gone? Then why are we sitting here?
    Then why are you sitting here?
    FP: We are still committed to it. SH: Yes we are still committed to it. FP: If the Trust is attacked by
    anybody outside the Mosque since you are not unable to defend it. You are unable to defend the Trust.
    I’m sorry.
    SH: The secretary was there. He was there.
    FP: He didn’t say anything. Did he get up and say anything. You are more concerned about family
    than the Trust.
    SH: There is no point in screaming at this time. There is no point in screaming. You have breached
    the agreement. Why can’t you admit that?
    FP: You are more concerned about your own family than the Trust.
    SH: The Trust is not you five people. It is made up of ten people. Why did you release the press
    without consultation?
    LA: Mr Fazal. Why are you so paranoid? Why are you so paranoid?
    TS: You are not answering any questions.
    LA: You are very paranoid, because you are saying that Usama went to the press …..interruptions…
    LA: Can I talk?
    FP: The fire…All the people as they come through the door…
    LA: Can I make my point?
    TS: As the Trust we bring you to account. You are all accountable…
    SH: What is your position. It is because of these people that you are here.
    TS: We have maintained your respect for many years.
    SH: What respect? You are creating Fitna (mischief) now. Your colleagues are not talking like you
    are talking. Why are you talking in this way. Why are you talking in this way.
    TS: I’m a Trustee. Let me finish. I haven’t even started yet. I have many matters….
    SH: In creating fitna (mischief), you are ahead of everyone. I told you at the beginning that to get out
    of this dispute, please find a solution, but you are bent on creating more trouble.
    TS: If you wanted to do that you would have made a clear statement on Friday. You would have said
    that my heretic son and his beliefs, I don’t stand for this. Four weeks ago he stood at the pulpit.
    SH: You have called him a heretic. You are a greater heretic. According to the saying of the prophet
    if a person says to someone he is a kafir, he becomes a kafir. You are the greater heretic because he
    has taken his statement back. He has retracted it. You have no right to say that he is a heretic.
    TS: Let someone else speak. Under oath he defended evolution.
    SH: No he did not.
    TS: He said there was a mufty in Egypt and that the Muslims came up with this…
    LA: He was giving evidence to Nizar Boga in response to specific questions. He was asking for the
    counter opinion from him at that time. You are asking a question and I am answering your question
    but you have no interest in listening to the other person. You are not letting me speak at all.
    LA: I have answered your questions but you are not listening.
    TS: Tell us very clearly. You were there Dr Liaquat. If you are an honest man we are all going to face
    the hereafter. LA: Just remember that you will also be answerable.
    TS: You tell me who organised Anwar Awlaki and authorised and allowed him to come to the
    Mosque. And who were the people who were in charge of the Dawah activities and speakers at the
    Mosque. It was yourself, it was sheikh Suhaib primarily and his son. LA: No. I was not involved in
    Dawah activities. TS: It was the three of you. Of course everyone is going to deny it.
    LA: You weren’t even there at the time.
    NS: Look. I just want to emphasize one thing. You have just asked him a question and he has
    answered it. TS: He hasn’t answered it. NS: He has answered it.
    TS: I want to hear that. Tell us whether you did or you didn’t.
    LA: The funny thing here is that … TS: You are not answering the question. LA: Let me speak.. You
    see this is the thing…
    NS: Why can’t you listen.
    LA: You can speak for ages and you just want a yes and no answer from me! If you ask nicely you
    will get a yes or no answer. If you ask difficult and stupid questions then …
    TS: It’s a stupid question who was responsible…
    LA: You weren’t even a Trustee then. …. It is a stupid question and let me answer it. You have only
    been a Trustee from last year. You have no idea. You have no knowledge how the Trust has operated
    all these years. As a Trustee I have never taken any responsibility for Dawah activities in this Mosque.
    TS: So who has.
    LA: Well it was not me and you should be asking this question to your fellow Trustees who were
    responsible for that and not me.
    FP: You have never organised events in this Mosque.
    LA: Dawah Activities. I have organised events but not dawah activities. There is a difference here.
    TS: So we are asking you. It was yourself, Suhaib Hasan and the Hasan family.
    LA: Well, let the charity commission investigate. You have asked me a question and I have answered
    that question.
    TS: So you are in denial. LA: No.
    SH: You have already written that it was the Hasan family who was responsible without even
    consulting us.
    ….Shouting and interruptions….
    LA: You have pre-conceived ideas. You have been brainwashed and are coming up with allegations
    of which you have no knowledge what so ever. Talk about what you do know.
    SH: Don’t you have any respect for some one who is senior than you and is also the chair. Don’t you
    have any shame to talk to that person with politeness some respect. Can’t you listen.
    TS: Don’t get angry.
    SH: So why don’t you listen then. He has no manners of speaking so how can he….
    SH: Why don’t you ask about Abu Qatada. The reason is because you all know that I was the one
    who evicted him from the Mosque. I spoke to Sheikh bin Baz and asked him should I call the police
    or not. I will also tell the charity commission, this is how he was evicted. We had security here for
    two years so that Abu Qatada’s supporters could not take a stand here. This is how we protected the
    Mosque. As far as Anwar Awlaki is concerned I am not disputing that he did not come here. What I
    can recall is that he was invited by another organisation where he was speaking about family matters
    and where I also spoke. Following that he did come here and possibly led the Friday prayer also. At
    that time Usama was working and teaching abroad. He was not even here. Our reply to his coming
    here is this that Anwar Awlaki was not known for his views at the time. No one knew that he was
    Usama Bin Laden’s person. In fact to my knowledge he was against him at the time. He was not well
    known at the time. It was after that when he became famous for his views and not before. For this
    reason the charity commission has no right to ask us about Anwar Awlaki. I take the full
    responsibility as the chair.
    IS: The problem is this. The 9 page blog that Usama released, he wrote in it, that Abu Qatada and
    Anwar Awlaki came here. Then he withdrew it. Then he carried on with it and showed that terrorists
    and extremists come to this country. You and I know that I had no links with that. You and Usama
    have been inviting people all these years. I have not invited anyone up until now. Never ever. So
    whatever Usama put on his Blog and wrote to the charity commission that terrorists and extremists
    have been invited to this Mosque. But it was not us who invited them. I have a minuted account of
    what happened with Abu Qatada. What you have stated is correct. It is Usama who has spread
    confusion not us.
    SH: The fact of the matter is that we did evict Abu Qatada and Anwar Awlaki at the time was an
    unknown entity. There is no basis for the charity commission to look into matters that are over ten
    years old.
    Recently Abdul Muhsin Zikri gave an address and this was on moderation in islam. This also shows
    that we are preaching moderation in Islam.
    We can therefore resolve this issue with this united approach. As far as Usama is concerned he
    withdrew his complaint as soon as Mr Nizar Boga asked him to. Usama also does not want any harm
    to come to the Mosque.
    FP: So why did he go to the BBC then.
    LA: Let me tell you about that. I saw an email from Usama to Mr Nizar Boga on the day or the day
    before informing him that the BBC have got hold of the charity commission investigation story and he
    will speak to the media to limit any negative publicity. You may not know that but I do because a
    copy of that email was sent to me.
    TS: That means nothing.
    LA: You are stating that he went to the media. I am making clear the information that I know. You
    can interpret it any way you like. You are saying that he went to the media and I know otherwise.
    UH: So you are supporting Usama Hasan then.
    LA: Did I say that?
    TS: What is your position with regard to Usama Hasan.
    LA: He has nothing to do with this Trust at the moment.
    IS: He can say what he likes about the Mosque. If he targets any other Mosque you can see how
    people will treat him.
    TS: Do you know much about the kind of reporters that were putting out the stories and their political
    persuation and their agenda. This is well known if you go to their blogs. People are well known to
    pick up shallow stories. Usama Hasan seems to bump into these people.
    This is not a Masjid Tawhid issue now. This is the first time a Mosque is being investigated by the
    charity commission using its statutory powers.
    SH: Talat we are trying to resolve this issue and you are trying to make it worse. You think that by
    smearing my family you all will be in the clear. That is not so. The charity commission will speak to
    every individual.
    TS: This abuse of power/nepotism cannot continue. You just want people to shut up and be yes men.
    We will respect you as an amir, as a scholar, if you act accordingly according to Islam.
    SH: So what kind of act have you done, without consulting anyone. What position were you holding
    that you stood up. The spokesman is either the chairman or the secretary. This is not a fish market that
    you can stand and slander my family. By waiting a week, the sky would not have fallen down!
    NS: You are allowing one person to ignite the situation instead of trying to sort this out. Just one
    complaint. You think the charity commission has opened an investigation on just one complaint.
    TS: You work for auntie Shakila.
    NS: How dare you. Where’s your proof. I have been in this Mosque for the last 15 years. How dare
    you say that I am working for someone else.
    TS: You have been making collections at the Mosque.
    NS: I have been making collections since the Arbitration. That’s because I have been asked to by the
    TS: I raised the question that there should be padlocked metal boxes. You wouldn’t allow this to
    NS: When did we not allow this to happen?
    FP: Let me correct you. Even before the dispute she has been collecting for the Mosque and no
    account has been given to us.
    NS: Since the Trust has been divided there has been accountability for everything. And the same
    applies to you. The same applies to you. How can you throw that allegation and not have to counteract
    FP: Can I correct you. Even before the dispute She was collecting the money and no account was
    given to us. So this is not a new problem.
    NS: So if that was so much of a problem. How long have you been in the Trust.
    FP:11 years.
    NS: So before this before the split why was this not an issue.
    IS: I don’t understand how Dr Hasan can say that Usama is protecting the Mosque.
    SH: Ask Hanif did I use these words. Did I use the word ‘protect’.
    HP: No You said Usama used ‘good words’ for the Mosque. He did not use the word ‘protect’.
    SH: So why do you twist words and say things that I did not say.
    IS: So please tell me. You and Usama have been chair and vice-chair for so many years. So why
    suddenly all this has come to light now.
    SH: Answer this one question. Whatever Usama is, a Hafiz of Quran or whatever. He can on the basis
    of his knowledge or his ability and you suggested him for being a vice-chairman. He stayed in the
    Trust for so many years. He said one thing about evolution. Following this I asked him to retract his
    statement which he did so. I gave three lectures on Prophet Adam and Hawa after reading Darwin’s
    Theory. All these are recorded and available. So if he has retracted his views of his own accord, not
    just on my say so, but one day he came to me in March and said that I am retracting and it was put up
    in the Mosque. I only wanted for him, as my son, only that which would be any ones wish for his
    child and that is for him to be on the right path. He gave this retraction, but your hearts were so hard
    that you did not accept it. Instead you started the Save Masjid Tawhid website……
    TS: Do you know what is in our hearts?
    SH: Be quiet and speak with manners. You are nothing but a troublemaker. You are not willing to
    listen to anyone and are just here to cause fitna and trouble. Because of your wife, your wife is
    speaking out from within you. Because of the quarrel between Shakila and your wife. That’s why
    your eyes are becoming red. You have no fear of God. I cannot understand why you are working for
    Islam Channel. You are the one who is the most insulting. So you think just because you have become
    a Trustee that your wings have come out….. interruptions….
    Don’t tell me to calm down. When I am talking, why do you keep cutting me off then? Why do you
    keep interrupting when I am speaking? If you don’t want to listen to what I have to say then just
    Why won’t you shut up?
    LA: Fazal, can you please control him. His language is very provocative. Please control him.
    SH: You did not accept his retraction. I informed you that he has retracted his views and with
    kindness you could easily resolve this. But you lot were so arrogant that you insisted that he has to go
    no matter what. Eventually he had to resign and now he has gone. So tell me what control do I have
    upon him now? A father will be questioned about his child only on the day of judgement. Whatever
    he does, only he is accountable for it. I can still bring him to the position of mounting a credible
    defence in the face of charity commission investigation. The whole reason for this meeting is to
    resolve the situation amicably.
    FP: The Mosque is now world famous due to negative publicity.
    SH: You say that you have played no role in getting the Mosque to this state. Even up to the point of
    arbitration you had slandering remarks on your website about me, my wife and my family.
    FP: What about your website.
    SH: Bring any sane person and ask him to compare the two. Whose wife have I made slandering
    remarks to? Whose daughter have I made slandering remarks to?
    FP: We have not slandered anyone.
    SH: No. You have named them all individually. You have even included my daughter’s name.
    Until today I have not mentioned anyone’s name from the pulpit. I have only mentioned Trustees but
    you have named individuals. Why do you not admit your mistake.
    FP: We have been going along with arbitration. What comes next is enquiry. Following the enquiry
    media report coming. I sent Dr Hasan the text message I received from the reporter. I sent him the
    email that I received from the reporter. He did not come back to the Mosque and he sent someone
    else. There are people asking questions. What do we have to say. Oh we have to wait for the chairman
    to come back next Friday.
    LA: No. You simply say to the people that there is nothing to worry about.
    FP: That’s what we said.
    LA: No. You don’t have to go to the pulpit to issue a statement.
    FP: You tell every one individually.
    LA: No. You simply say we will issue a joint statement in due course. As ten Trustees we issue a
    joint statement. Or you can put a notice up saying that we will be releasing a joint statement.
    TS: You are not acting in good faith.
    LA: Based on arbitration and that the ten Trustees are acting as one body, it is you who are not acting
    in good faith. It is clear that you don’t want arbitration to succeed.
    LA: You were itching to release a statement, to make us look bad and you did it immediately just like
    that. It was in your interest and your strategy to issue a statement. You did not have the interests of the
    Mosque at heart at all.
    FP: His son is attacking the Mosque and he is sitting on the fence watching on both sides what’s
    going on. He can’t defend it because he has his son on one side and the Trust on the other side.
    SH: So you can defend the Mosque by lying on Islam Channel that you are the chairman. Usama had
    to correct you that you are the vice chairman. Did you say that you are the vice-chairman?
    SH: So why have all the Trustees names not gone on the charity commission’s website. Three names
    from our side are still missing. Why aren’t you putting the names on. It’s because you don’t want our
    names to go on there.
    FP: I asked for the information that afternoon and he did not give it to me. You sent it to me two days
    after. I then asked him for more information because it wasn’t enough.
    LA: You asked for the information and you got the information.
    FP: You sent me information for two people only which I put on the charity commission’s website.
    The other three I did not have information on.
    LA: This is a copy of my emails sent to you and all the information is there. You definitely have got
    SH: I had to call Nazima in front of you and suddenly you said I have got it now. You have just now
    added that I am Trustee for six months only and Dr Liaquat for six months only. Why? And not after
    your names? Answer me?
    FP: Because we were the established Trustees and you were given a position by Nizar Boga.
    SH: So this is what you call good faith is it? He (Dr Liaquat) was already there. You have deleted his
    name. His is as valid as yours.
    FP: He violated the rules of the Trust.
    LA: What rules?
    LA: Your problem is that you are not acting as a unit of ten Trustees.
    FP: There is a lot of lack of trust there.
    LA: You haven’t got any trust. You have an agenda. You are very paranoid and have your own
    hidden agenda and you are going ahead with whatever you feel like doing, with your own whims and
    RWM: You should not have made that announcement. You should have sought the backing of all ten
    of us.
    FP: I have to make a statement now. Can I be allowed to make a statement now?
    Written Statement read out by FP.
    FP: In the interests of the community we serve, for the safety and the continuation of the Trust, and to
    protect its integrity, and honesty and reputation, the following points are motioned for the Trust to
    See Appendix A for attached statement.
    LA: As the secretary I need a copy of that as you have read it out. Can I have a copy?
    NS: I have one question. How did you come to the figure of £120 missing.
    FP: Two sisters. Their husbands saw the receipt on the notice board which said they collected £25
    sadaqa and £30 lillah. They then spoke to their sister and their wives and they said each of them put
    £60 in different boxes. One said she put it in the lillah box and other said she put in the sadaqa box.
    And they were all twenty pound notes.
    NS: Hanif can I ask you. Last week when you took the boxes. How much collection was there?
    HP: £104
    NS: This was the week when everybody was on half term break and the upstairs was full and you had
    £104. You are saying that on the Friday prior to that when we didn’t even have two rows
    NS: This is a very serious allegation.
    LA: It is something that the Trust has to investigate. Not you Fazal.
    NS: You may have received a complaint but you have not investigated it.

    TS: We are passing a motion…
    SH: This motion cannot be placed at all.
    TS: You can leave the room.
    LA: As the secretary I want to make it clear that this motion is illegal according to clause 16 of the
    charity’s governing document. This is a special meeting for which four days notice has to be given of
    the matters to be discussed. The agenda of the meeting has been to discuss the present situation. No
    motion has been mentioned or put on the agenda. So this motion cannot stand on constitutional
    grounds and there will be no voting.
    TS: We can pass a motion.
    LA: You can take me to court if you like. You can ask your solicitor for advice if you like but as the
    secretary I cannot allow the motion to be tabled and there will be no voting.
    LA: Your statement is full of inaccuracies. It is very much biased. You can discuss in general but
    there will be no resolution. I will not allow it.
    TS: We can pass a motion.
    LA: As the secretary I have to decide what items can be discussed and the proceedings. That is the
    secretary’s responsibility. You cannot interfere with that. Challenge me if you like. You go and get
    legal advice. As the secretary I can make that decision.
    LA: I will not allow it.
    TS: This is the only solution.
    LA: No this is not the solution.
    LA: The arbitration decision was legally binding and you have flouted that. You can be taken to court
    for breach of the arbitration agreement. It is a legally binding decision.
    FP: You haven’t fulfilled all your obligations.
    LA: We Have. Have you fulfilled them all?
    FP: No I have not. Do you know why. Because the condition has changed. The climate has changed.
    When these allegations have been made the Trust has been attacked.
    LA: It’s all in your head. You are paranoid. Totally paranoid. You have no interest of the Mosque at
    heart at all.
    SH: You say that this is the solution. By issuing a statement that Dr Hasan has been removed, will
    that resolve the situation?
    LA: So far we have been restraining ourselves a lot. From watching you and looking at your actions
    today we are not going to stop anymore.
    SH: According to arbitration we should not do anything except after consultation. That is why I asked
    for this emergency meeting. The reason I did not make any statement the next day is because I could
    not do it except after consultation. Did not the arbitration agreement say, do not expose yourself to the
    media? When I was in the car this media person contacted me and I told him I am bound by the
    arbitration agreement and cannot talk to the media. I am therefore not in a position to give a statement
    at all. So I was waiting for this meeting and I have all my ideas with me on how to defend the charity.
    This is not the way. The way is that you should be wise enough and sit together and even Usama
    should do his best to rectify whatever he has done. This is the best way.
    SH: So Hanif do you think this is the only way.
    HP: I think we should be helping each other rather than fighting with each other.
    FP: Your role as an imam and scholar has never been challenged.
    LA: So why are you challenging him now?
    FP: As a chairman of the Trust you are unable to make the right judgement.
    LA: You, are not able to make the right judgement.
    LA: The amount of opposition from the Trust that I have had over the years is unbelievable. There are
    so many proposals I have put forward in the past and you kept rejecting them.
    FP: One answer about your question about the lawyer. We had to call him back when the charity
    commission started their investigation.
    LA: The lawyer should be for your personal matter and not for the Trust.
    FP: The Charity commission letter is addressed to us.
    LA: So why not use him for personal matters rather than for the Trust?
    TS: We are the established Trust.
    SH: Is he the Trust lawyer?
    LA: This is sectarianism what you are doing.
    Meeting concluded at 9:00pm with some prayers without any voting taken place or any motion
    Minutes prepared from an audio recording and written notes of the meeting, for full
    transparency, by:
    Dr Liaquat Ali
    Trust Secretary (Appointed by the Arbitrator Mr Nizar Boga JP on 17.5.2012)
    Appendix A: Statement Read by Mr Fazal Patel

  5. Nasir says:

    Was nice and peacful at the Masjid today as Chief Hasan was not around.

    • Gaz says:

      Well yeah,
      Without him the masjid will become another ‘pray fast & go quick’ place like many other mosques in the UK

  6. Abunuha says:

    If that’s the case then why did his son make these outrageous claims about the mosque and why is he repeating them? What is clear to see is that the Hasans are playing some very dirty games to try and gain control of the mosque

    • Gaz says:

      Its seems you have a problem with yourself understanding the issue.
      The mosque is going to become another ‘family business’ – for sure. U H its a non-issue nowadays.
      The problem is that such unlawful takeover will set a precedent for the future & we will be seeing attempts after attempts to settle ‘old scores’ in the masjid. So, the masjid will loose its purpose – instead it will become the house of shaytans

  7. Maxster says:

    Gaz how can you say UH is a non-issue in the Masjid Tawhid dispute? He is at it’s epicentre. Have you seen his blog? Have you seen his letter to the CC from just three weeks ago? Have you seen his accusations of “extremist takeover” at Masjid Tawhid repeated just a couple of days ago? And his TV interviews about the dispute given to media stations in the East and all the way to CNN in the West? And you still think that he is a non-issue? I think you’re being a little disingenuous there.

    And I’m curious as to what you mean by this takeover being used to settle “old scores”? Can you expand on that a little?

    And from what I can see of the new Trust I do not believe that Masjid Tawhid will become a “pray fast go quick” masjid, or a “house of shaytans” as you put it – that is just fear-mongering.

  8. Gaz says:

    You dont see that the problem has moved from being a U H single issue to something else. Forget about what he really says now – it isnt effecting the masjid as much as you say. A full takeover plan has been in place for many years….and I dont have to elaborate on that as the present evidence clearly shows.

  9. The faction opposed to the Hasan family have posted a response to the published minutes (that were written up by Liaquat Ali – son in law of Suhaib Hasan) of the Trustees meeting of June 14 2012:

  10. abunuha says:

    Nazima Khan (‘trustee’ on the Hasan family side) comments on the ongoing dispute. It seems she’s been tutored by the Hasan family as she also cries extremism and terrorism

    “These people i.e. Idrees Sethi, Mehmood Patel and Talat Sultan have a very dangerous agenda and have used illegal means to obtain possession of the mosque. They are under investigation by the charity commission of their links to extremists who want to penetrate the Masjid and use it as a platform to voice their radical views.”

    • Nasir says:

      Nazima Sheikh is Mrs Hasan best friend and has been sucking up to the hasan family for years and years, and she was finally appointer as a trustee by Dr Suhaib.
      She should be ashamed of some of the comments in her statement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.