Welcome to F.I.E.L.D.- the First Ismaili Electronic Library and Database. Guests are not required to login during this beta-testing phase

Copyright Lawsuit: Defenses Glorifying the Aga Khan filed in federal Court - 2010-04-29

Date: 
Thursday, 2010, April 29
Location: 
Source: 
Heritage News
20100429-court-filings.jpg

In a surprisingly rapid twist of events, both Mr Tajdin and Mr Jiwa have filed their respective statements of Defense this 29th of April 2010. They affirm to being devoted followers who will unconditionally abide by the wishes of the Aga Khan, whom they glorify in their defense.

Mr Tajdin declares that:

He has not been served yet but the ethics imposed upon him by his faith demands that he should not keep in ignorance the public by being silent on the issue and should clarify all of the facts, pertaining to this lawsuit, of which he is aware.

He reaffirms his allegiance to the Aga Khan, is willing to submit to any of his wishes, and is ready to surrender himself and all his possessions to the Imam.

He has been printing Farman books since 1992 with approval and instructions from the Imam received on August 15, 1992 in Montreal.

He has not received any communication from the Imam from 1992 to 2009 instructing him to stop publication.

He cannot stop publication without instruction from the Imam as this would be a breach of his oath of allegiance to the Imam.

All Farman publications were financial deficit projects done as a volunteer service and large numbers of books were distributed free of charge.

Farman sharing is a historic Ismaili tradition which still continues today.

The current Ismaili Constitution does not restrict the right to publish Farmans

Mr Tajdin concludes that:

He has no choice but to await further direct instructions from the Imam.

He reaffirms his allegiance to the Aga Khan, is willing to submit to any of His wishes, and is ready to surrender himself and all his possessions to the Imam.

Mr Jiwa states that:

"This action does not appear to have been authorized personally by the Aga Khan .."

"In distributing Farman books obtained from Tajdin to other Ismailis, he has not violated either the Ismaili Constitution or any Farmans"

He has not violated the copyright act as "Tajdin was given express authority by the Imam" and regardless of the fact that "the limitations period provided for by the Copyright Act also bars this action as the books containing the Farmans were commenced publication in the year 1992", he will still do whatever the Imam tells him to do.

Mr Jiwa clarifies finances:

He "obtains these books for C$50.00 and sells them for C$50.00 or gives them free, without any profit.

"All monies received by him from the sale of (other) books after 2005 were delivered to the Jamatkhanas"

Mr Jiwa further states that:

"If the Imam edited the Farman before releasing to the Jamats, in effect he is superceding the Farman he made orally previously."

He "unconditionally reconfirms his oath of allegiance to his Imam" and "if the Imam does not desire his Farman books to be distributed to the Jamats (...) this defendant will submit to the instructions of His Imam without reservation whatsoever"

Replies From the Plaintiff are due within 10 days, and Affidavits of Documents are due 30 days later.

[Update from May 6: Ogilvy Renault, the law firm which launched the case has asked for an extension of 15 days to reply to the Defense. They claim delays due to breakdown of email servers, blackberry communication, travel of senior lawyer, time difference with Paris etc...The more delays in this file, the more damage it creates to the reputation of the Ismaili community, the Imam and the defendants. It is to the advantage of all parties that this case be withdrawn from the courts.]

[Update from June 22: Defendants have filed a Motion for summary Judgement to have the case dismissed.]

[Update from September 5:
Online Book that gathers court materials as well as articles that are currently available for the ongoing 2010 Lawsuit:

Copyright Lawsuit 2010: Online Book of All available Materials
News on cross-examinations:
Copyright Lawsuit: CROSS_EXAMINATIONS Table of Contents - 2010-09-04
Latest Development
Copyright Lawsuit: Imam Appears for Discovery and Ends the Case - 2010-10-15
As users are asking to read the letters from Nagib and Alnaz on the court docket, the latest have been attached on the following link:
A. Various Court Filings

Revised Factums have been posted Here:
2010-11-29 Summary Judgment : Plaintiffs Revised Combined Factums of Reply and of Motion
2010-11-29 Summary Judgment: Defendants' Revised Factums of Motion and of Reply

There has been proven fraud in the recent past in the Aga Khan's domain by the Aga Khan's agents:
Aga Khan Lawsuit: Fraud at Aga Khan Studs - 2000-02-22

2011-05-25: A Jamati Member who has never met the Defendants volunteered as his brotherly duty to pay the $30,000 that was demanded in the Plaintiff''s submissions and that was accordingly ordered by the judge.
Read the full details of the $30,000 payment directly to H.H. The Aga Khan.

2011-06-16: The Appeal Memorandum of Fact and Law against the Summary Judgment has been filed in court by the defendants on June 16th, 2011.
Read the Full Appeal Memorandum of Fact and Law

Link to Court Docket Case T-514-10
Link to Court Docket Appeal A-60-11
Link to Court Docket Appeal A-59-11
Link to Court Docket Appeal A-156-13

Latest News Comments

AttachmentSize
Tajdin Defence Apr 29.10.pdf491.02 KB
Jiwa AK Defence Apr 29.10.pdf543.82 KB

Comments

Public interest ?

An email as received
Honourable folks, I have heard people saying that the "Appeal" of Tajdin /Jiwa was dismissed by the court ...firstly as far as I know, the appeal was never even heard....

The request made by them, was denied on the grounds that the matter wasn't of any "National Interest" for Canada. .

And yet the matter is of public Interest ( if not to a predominantly Christian country) ...to the community and the muslim umma...

Now please answer these questions with honesty?

a) The Judge who made this said ruling and denied the defendants a right to appeal..has she worked with the Vazier's lawyer in the same department and Law office.. as a Senior partner, before she was appointed a Judge,? Yes or No ?

b) Assuming this is true, then is this not  "conflict of interest"?and should she have made a ruling? Yes or No ?

c) Did the Imam ever sign an Affidavit?  Yes or No ? If and assuming the Imam was the Plaintiff, should he not have done so? Please show me his affidavit then !

d) Isn't it true that the Imam did remember the Mehmani incident of 1992? Yes or No?

Assuming he did remember and also why he recollected this incident... then have the vaziers, in all fairness, told the court and the community, about it? Yes or No?

e) At the discovery in October, 2010, did the Imam not say that all those who have the Firman books can keep them  ? Yes or No ?

f) Assuming that is what he said, isn't it true that the Vazier disagreed with the Imam and insisted that all should ismailis bring back the books but the Imam did not agree with the Vazier? is this true or not?

Isn't it true that the Vazier raised his voice against the Imam and the Imam was visibly upset? Yes or No ?

g) Then the second Vazier insisted that the defendant should close down his ismaili-Net website also in a loud and offensive manner and the Imam refused? is this true or false ? and the Vazier in question, then "pointing a finger" told the Imam in an aggressive manner that the website should be closed as it was 'confusing" everyone? is this true or false?

h) And to add insult to an injury, the Vazier's lawyer snatched the "ariza" the defendants had given to their Imam, whilst the Imam was trying to wear his reading glasses? is this true or false?

i) Has AJ ever communicated with the Vazier's lawyer on the subject matter? and has the lawyer responded also? Yes or No ?

Assuming the answer is Yes! what then is the basis for this to "relationship"?

What is the relationship of AJ with the Vazier's lawyer? and what is his involvement to seek and/or warrant such an "exchange" over a matter that perhaps was or is subject to the privacy laws? Kindly explain to the public this phenomena which is seemingly out of character ! Would AJ communicate with the Imam's Lawyer? OR did the Imam give him special permission?

j) Has the lawyer ever taken instructions from anyone other than the Imam himself? Yes or No ? if so then explain the basis and the justification thereof....

k) Has the lawyer shown to the court evidence of any retainer paid by the Imam himself? Yes or No ? if not then why not?

l) When the Vaziers filed their affidavits, did they seek authorization from the Imam? Yes or No ? is it true that atleast two Vaziers under oath admitted in court that they had NOT sought such permission, from the Imam?

m) Is it true that when the Imam instructed the Lawyer at the "discovery" to put the matter to rest, the lawyer argued with the Imam and the Imam said to him that "that this was the Honourable thing to do"...Yes or No?

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <b> <i> <pre> <hr> <p> <!>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <bib>...</bib> to insert automatically numbered references.
  • You may use [acidfree:xx] tags to display acidfree videos or images inline.

More information about formatting options

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.


Back to top