Welcome to F.I.E.L.D.- the First Ismaili Electronic Library and Database.

2010-12-07 Summary Judgment Motion Hearing for Copyright Lawsuit Lasted 2-Days

The Hearing for the Plaintiff's and the Defendants' Summary Judgment Motions was Held in Toronto On December 7 & 8.

Here is the entry in the Court Docket:

Toronto 07-DEC-2010
BEFORE The Honourable Mr. Justice Harrington
Language: E
Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 20 on behalf of Defendant (Jiwa)
Result of Hearing: Matter reserved
Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 28 on behalf of Defendant (Tajdin)
Result of Hearing: Matter reserved
Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 36 on behalf of Plaintiff
Result of Hearing: Matter reserved
held in Court Senior Usher: Noel Nation
Duration per day: 07-DEC-2010 from 09:30 to 04:45
Courtroom : Courtroom No. 4-A - Toronto
Court Registrar: Jeff Weir
08-DEC-2010 from 09:15 to 03:05
Courtroom : Courtroom No. 4-A - Toronto
Court Registrar: Jeff Weir
Total Duration: 2d
Appearances: Brian Gray, Allyson Whyte Nowak (416) 216-4000 representing Plaintiff Alnaz Jiwa (905) 640-3831_ representing Defendant Jiwa Nagib Tajdin (514) 212-5789 representing Defendant Tajdin Court Reporter: Calypso Schincariol, ASAP Reporting Services Ltd (416) 861-8720 07-DEC-2010 Calypso Schincariol, ASAP Reporting Services Ltd. (416) 861-8720 08-DEC-2010
Transcript not requested
Comments: Index of Materials filed for Summary Judgment Motions and Plaintiff's and Defendants loose authorities and Plaintiff's Draft Bill of Costs to be received
Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 835 page(s) 51 - 61 Abstract of Hearing placed on file


Comments on the Hearing

The Following are Relevant Extracts of Comments from http://www.ismaili.net/heritage/node/29740#comments

News: The hearing is closed
On December 9th, 2010 Nagib (not verified) says:

The hearing is closed and the judgment will come soon we hope. Lets see what happens. A lot of issues were discussed in front of the judge and normally Motions would pass if the matter is very simple. By complicating Motions, the outcome can be that both motions are dismissed and a mini-trial is possible.

Gray pleaded so many thing in contradiction of what the Imam instructed on 15 October. I could not believe it. For example, Gray completely disregarded Hazar Imam's statement from that day that he remembered the instruction given to us about continuing the publications of Farman, Gray pleaded the opposite.

Gray admitted that what they were seeking was a declaration that we have infringed. It was apparent that this was more a vendetta.


The case will go for trial it seems .
On December 11th, 2010 Alibhai Jiwani USA (not verified) says:

From what I gather from the "Vancouverite's version of court proceedings and judge's remarks , judge may not be sympathetic to the defendants. Summary judgement seems unlikely for either side.Trial seems very likely.

* United States

@Nagib re: above post of Dec. 9th
On December 10th, 2010 Kanize (Canada) (not verified) says:

Thank you for updating us, Nagib.
Indeed, for the past few weeks, it has been utterly clear that the whole matter is nothing but seeking a revenge. "Eeloko nè kètli adèkhay hassè, ya Mowla !" I hope that the judge could see that... Madad, Mowla, madad.
If this period of waiting is so hard for us, the readers and the "carers" (forgive the newly invented word!), how much harder it must be for you, Nagib, Alnaz, and your families...
Thank God we have our tasbihs to give us solace.
Ya Aly madad.

* Canada

Normally how long for the judgement?
On December 9th, 2010 Alibhai Jiwani (not verified) says:

Any idea how long does the judge take normally?

* United States

Judgment, how long...
On December 11th, 2010 Alnaz (not verified) says:

There is no fixed time, I expect the judge to issue it in a few weeks, maybe four, or so.

* Canada

News from the case: Massive fraud?
On December 9th, 2010 heritage says:

As Gray had been trying to tell the judge that it is not conceivable that there was massive fraud against the Aga Khan by those who started the lawsuit, Alnaz, at the end of his pleadings, presented a case from 2000 where it has happened before: that there had indeed been fraud in the Aga Khan's domain by the Aga Khan's agents. See link below:

Aga Khan Lawsuit: Fraud at Aga Khan Studs - 2000-02-22

Enjoy Surfing Your Heritage!

FRAUD in 1998 at Aga Khan Studs: Extracts
On December 10th, 2010 heritage says:

Summary and extracts showing:

- How a document forgery was perpetrated by a high ranking agent of the Aga Khan to cover up that agent's own possible involvement in a large fraud.

- How this forgery was done on behalf of the Aga Khan and His Societe Civile

- How this agent attempted to mislead the Irish High Court in order to prejudice it and divert blame to a secretary

- How this nevertheless became a very long court battle that was made to look like a former secretary was conducting a lawsuit against the Aga Khan.

Fraud in Aga Khan lawsuit at Irish Studs in 1998: Explanations and Extracts - 2010-12-10

Enjoy Surfing Your Heritage!

Thank you and Nagib. The
On December 9th, 2010 Momin (not verified) says:

Thank you and Nagib. The relevant sentence in that lawsuit is "In his affidavit, the Aga denied having given any instructions for the termination of Charlton's employment "

It seems highly improbable that the only one issue remianing of whether there was Infringement will be settled by agreement as directed by Hazar Imam.

So the lawsuit is likely to go on

On December 10th, 2010 ABDUL (not verified) says:

Just finished reading the interesting Feb 2000 judgement of Mr. Justice Declan Budd.

What stands out starkly are very strong language used by the Hon. Judge about the conduct of Defendant (the Imam's horse farm). He called the Defendant's conduct “misleading and a snare and a deception to the Court” and spoke of “the illegal, deceptive and misleading deletion of portions of the memo”

The Judge went on::

“I take the view that the Court should mark strong disapproval of the conduct of the Defendant Société in

(a) Fighting the motion before Laffoy J. when documents in the possession of the Société, including the Coulton memo, and knowledge of the role of Mr. Faughnan as head of security and as a person with a perceived vested interest in the mode and outcome of the inquiry made him an obviously inappropriate person to conduct the inquiry.

(b) Prevarication, obfuscation and obstruction in the conduct of the motions before this Court in -

(1) failure to nominate persons to make affidavits of discovery,

(2) by failure to nominate Solicitors to accept service on behalf of agents of the Société outside the jurisdiction and causing delays and difficulty by contending that agents of the Société did not have authority to hire and fire employees when averments in the affidavits and signed documents manifest the contrary in practice.

(c) Persistent prolongation of these proceedings by maintenance of what transpired to be quite untenable stances on issue after issue, for example, by firstly the contention that Mr. Faughnan was an appropriate person to conduct the inquiry and, secondly, the contention that Mr. Downes was an
appropriate person to conduct the inquiry. Notification had already been given by the Plaintiff’s Solicitor that Mr. Downes was likely to be a prospective witness and that he had involvement in the subject-matter of the inquiry, having been Mr. Drion’s assistant manager. Thirdly, by simply ignoring the suggestion made that in a prestigious and world-wide
organisation such as the Defendant, there must be other employees or agents not previously intimately involved, or at least the Defendant could have engaged a person (as with Mr. Magee in the Drion inquiry) who would have been an appropriate person to carry out an impartial inquiry or investigation in respect of the Plaintiff.

(d) Persistently breaching Court Orders.

(e) Deceiving the Court by non-disclosure of relevant documents such as the Coulton memo of 18th June, 1998. Trust was further eroded by the delay by the Defendant in the production of the Coulton letter hiring Diane Kavanagh and especially the failure to produce the third page thereof
which, when eventually produced, revealed that Mr. Coulton had signed the hiring letter on behalf of the Defendant. It is not for the Defendant to choose which documents will be discovered or which documents will have expurgations particularly when such documents embarrass the Defendant’s

(f) Compounding and aggravating this deception of the Court by deleting relevant passages from the Coulton memo which included excisions which altered the meaning and excluded obviously significant and relevant
passages from the memo.“

The Judge even considered a prison sentence on the Defendant but then gave them a last minute reprieve because they had cooperated just before the hearing in his court. In any event, he was so disgusted with them that he ordered full costs on a solicitor and client basis (i.e actual costs not standards fees) against the Imam and his organisation.

What was clear was his very high regard for Mowla and His family. Whilst he implied that he did not consider the Imam to have been directly responsible for the conduct of his servants, he did remark on the mysterious destruction of a key document by the Imam personally.

It seems Mowla recognises that the power of the courts in these situations and it must be because of this case that why He specifically asked Tajdin to withdraw the allegations of fraud against His secretary, which Tajdin graciously did

What is emerging is a pattern of conduct by senior people around the Imam. What is so baffling is how people in the Imam’s regime are able to get away with all the shenanigans, fraud etc. We all understand that the Imam personally must be quite busy with his vast philanthropic work, his extensive business investments and his complicated family matters. But surely there must be a system in place to act as a check and balance on the vast amount of power and assets that Aiglemont manages?

However, after reading SS sworn testimony (under a very friendly x-examination), it seems frightening that the spiritual and material affairs of millions of Ismailis may be in the hands of such an obviously incompetent person.

Inshallah, with T&K Mowla will soon get leaders who are equally competent as loyal and certainly not outright dishonest as the above case shows.

* Seychelles

The difference between the 2 cases
On December 11th, 2010 Alibhai Jiwani USA (not verified) says:

The comforting part in copyright infringement case is it deals with the "Din" more than "Duniya" and I am anticipating
MHI's spiritual authority to come into play which was not needed in the above mentioned stud case which was purely "Duniyavi" matter.

I have faith very much in the spiritual component. Inshallah these 2 murids will be helped by their Murshid.

* United States

The questions were already given
On December 12th, 2010 librarian-umed says:

The questions were already given to Mr Gray in advance. When we arrived in Gray’s office, he was already in another room with Hazar Imam, later he told us he had prepared Hazar Imam to reply to our questions.

However Gray knew that Imam will say everything in our favour so he cleverly put off record as soon as the Imam started speaking. I was too engrossed in what the Imam was saying and did not notice that Gray had put off-line the whole conversation.

The Imam stayed half hour instead of 15 minutes, he talked about all the questions and even on issues different from Farmans and the lawsuit. He said he remembered very well the Mehmani of 1992 and the instruction he gave us to continue publishing because it was at a time when he was looking for competent people for this work. This week Gray has pleaded in front of the judge that the Imam could not remember what happened 18 years ago and Mohamed Manji was seating in the room also. Both knew Imam’s position was opposite of their position. God have mercy on them, they will need it.


The Court may draw an inference in regards to the presence of the Imam. Gray forcefully pleaded that the presence of the Imam meant that he was the plaintiff. Though, in reality the Imam was only interested in resolving the situation and putting the issue at rest. That was the reason He came.

The other possible inference that the Court may dray is that Gray knew that the Imam will take our favour, and this is why he put everything off-record. If Gray knew Imam was with him, he would have put on record everything the Imam said. In fact the Court Recorder is supposed to note down who is in the room [she did not], what time the proceedings went off-record etc… she did nothing of this. She was supposed to confirm the transcripts with me before releasing, she released to Gray first, I was not even given her email or contact or name by Gray up to the time Gray released the transcript. There was quite a manipulation of the records, so Prothonotary Tabib ruled in a Case Conference that no evidence from Discovery can be entered by either party except by going in a new full Motion.

I could not do that because of logistics. There were few weeks between the Discovery on Oct 15th and the last Motions of December 7th; that was 2 trips for me from Kenya to Canada. Putting a Motion in between and coming for cross-examination was just impossible. 3 trips in 6 weeks and having to prepare would be an expensive Herculean task.


Questioning the Imam
On December 12th, 2010 Alnaz (not verified) says:

A true Ismaili would not insult the imam by asking him questions. Nagib left the floor open to the imam to say whatever he wanted, much better than asking questions because the imam could then say whatever wax in his mind.

Did the imam not remember his letter no. 1, or letter no. 2, or his brother's email, or his affirmation, or the allegations he made in the claim, or the announcements he authorized to be read in jks. It seems not because when the imam was given the floor, he did NOT refer to or mention anything from these things that we have been rejecting.

Mr. Gray and MHI were given the floor freely to place on the record officially to once and for all destroy our credibility and arguments.

And, wow, the record is clean, nothing said against us.

Nagib says, if Gray knew that MHI would have supported him and their position why then he went off the record. Read the transcript, as soon as MHI says, may I make a suggestion, Gray says go off the record.

What was he scared of?

* Canada

Finding the 'Studs' case seems to be a fortunate coincidance
On December 11th, 2010 heritage says:

We are not sure that Alnaz "saved" this case for the last minute. On the First day of the case, Mr Gray introduced Mr "Henry Carnegie" as The Aga Khan's Lawyer that would be sitting in on this case to advise Mr Gray.

This attempt at intimidation seems to have backfired on them as, from what we understand, Alnaz fortunately found this case that actually involves discovery of this same Mr Carnegie. Alnaz made copies of this case that very evening and brought it in on the second day of the motion.

Aga Khan Lawsuit: Fraud at Aga Khan Studs - 2000-02-22

Enjoy Surfing Your Heritage!

What happened now?
On December 19th, 2010 Alibhai Jiwani USA (not verified) says:

I thought Mr Gray rushed in for summary judgement thinking favorable "instant judgement" was in his pocket, a piece of cake?

For sure the Judge did not hand him the victory so easily so far.
The longer it is taking I think the judge is reviewing everything more carefully?Especially with introduction of the"stud case"?
Or is it just normal it takes a long before any decision?

I heard a rumor from London from a prestigious Ismaili that the Plaintiff already got the Summary judgement in their favor .I told him my guess is the case is going to continue.
Can librarian Umed give some update?

I do not think there will be
On December 19th, 2010 Nagib (not verified) says:

I do not think there will be any hasty decision on this matter. The easy matter would have been just to give a judgment in the matter of Copyright without considering the far reaching changes it will bring to the Ismaili Faith as practiced for Centuries by our Jamat. But the judge was very much aware of what this would meant to our Faith.

The first day of the hearing on 7 December, the Judge was very annoyed, he asked "Why can't you all resolve the issue by mediation?" It looked like he was not comfortable giving a decision in a so complicated matter which was way beyond the issue of copyright and in which he understood that the defendant were eager to comply with whatever the Imam will tell them to do. He could not understand that the Imam came for Discovery and went and the case was still continuing. I guess it is difficult for any person, including me to understand that when the Imam came to find an honourable solution to this lawsuit which was launched without consulting Him why was it still continuing?.

Why are these people SS, MM and Gray still continuing it against the wishes expressed clearly by the Imam? And when the Imam Himself confirmed to them that He vividly remembered the Mehmani of 1992 and the presentation of the book and the instructions He Himself gave to Karim Alibhay, how are these 3 people going to justify what they have done behind the Imam's back by continuing in His name a baseless lawsuit.

And my question to them is simple: The Imam said he will meet us again and we will work together and He will give us all the Farmans with His anotations. Where will these people hide when it happens?


According to Dr SS in his
On December 19th, 2010 Murad (not verified) says:

According to Dr SS in his cross examination, he said Imam first considered legal action at the end of March 2010.

Therefore If the above directives were followed, then the lawsuit would not have been filed within 5 days, by 6th April.

This is because an objective, incisive and succinct analysis research and assessment of facts and a report with a legal opinion and an impact analysis could never been possible in less than 5 working days. Such an internal institutional report would have taken many months. Imam says above " Good information and incisive analysis is critical to making good and objective decision"

* United Arab Emirates

The Stud case ( of 2000) and Copyright case of 2010
On December 11th, 2010 Alibhai Jiwani USA (not verified) says:

It is incredible that Alnaz saved this “Stud case” of 2000, till the end! Excellent!

First reading of the case made me apprehensive but second reading of the judgment actually make me feel very encouraged that just because name “Agakhan” is there does not mean that the judges are going to be intimidated and tend to sway more on that side.

It also reinforces my belief that the side that has “Imam in Spirit and essence “ will win not just the "name"

The case really reinforces that abuse of power is happening at the Secretariat by some powerful persons but in the end the "truth prevails."

Hazar Imam is always with the "weaker and true" in the divine form.

The secretary in the stud case was falsely accused and harassed and hence the judgment favored her despite the fact that “Agakhan”' himself was the “named” defendant. And “Agakhan” name did get tarnish because of the “wrong doing of his staff”. But justice was done to the weaker side and all forgeries and manipulations exposed. MHI could have easily gone for a settlement in that case .His name would have been saved. But it was not done because he is just. I am sure he had the best of lawyers even at that time.

In this case it seems to me that Gray and SS did not make a good decision of rushing for the summary judgment.

Consent judgment was very vital for the plaintiff especially SS.

If the forgery indeed has happened there is no way plaintiff will get a judgment in their favor especially the judge after reviewing this stud case is going to be very “cautious”.

If Nagib and Alnaz will get the final judgment in their favor there is a big risk of the defendants suing the forgers and this could mean a big deal. I agree with Abdul that MHI has foreseen this and hence urged defendants to withdraw the allegations of forgery against “his staff” means secretary etc only or also SS and MM? He perhaps meant all of them. That can be ugly and no one desires that.

Why did MHI not go for settlement when he came on 15th Oct 2010? Settlement would be a great injustice to the defendants and reinforcement to the wrong doers. How could he do injustice to his own murids? Who are true momins?
All believers would question their faith in Him. Also it would encourage the wrong doers to continue their practices thinking Imam in the end will come and settle for the sake of his Institutions and name. He who is just and merciful could hardly desire this.
It was a good option only for leaders involved in the fraud if it has indeed happened. There is a very great likelihood that it has indeed happened. Hazar Imam knows very well defendants did not want to make any money in printing Farmans. Their intentions were noble

He is definitely not the true plaintiff. He would never ever sue his devotees with so much love and dedication for spreading God’s words (Farmans), which are made for his devotees anyways! It is a completely an absurd hypothesis from the point of view of true momins and if Ismaili faith is a “true and spiritual Tarika”. I think this stud case is going to be very vital for the defendants and change the verdict in their favor.

If case goes to trial we are in for many revelations, which are needed for setting the system right. Every thing happens for a reason! All the GJ wishes and MHI’s ambitions cannot be realized unless there is a big change from status quo and mindset mentality among the Leaders of the esteemed Institutions. Only He knows the end.

* United States

what is going on
On December 22nd, 2010 imran (not verified) says:

its been a while since we heard what is going on. Can some one update thanks.

* United States

Everyone is waiting for the
On December 22nd, 2010 librarian-umed says:

Everyone is waiting for the judgment to read how the Judge arrived at his conclusions whatever they are and which party fought the case in a more convincing manner. Both parties had about 25 previous cases to support their stand, both books of authorities submitted are voluminous. We forecast however a long judgment [many pages] explaining many issues raised during the Motions. It is only reading the explanations in the judgment that we will know if the Ismaili community's workings and what is the status of the Imam, if these points have been explained properly during the Motions.

Ideally the Imam should have been the one writing the judgment. It was unfortunate that even though the Consent Judgment was signed exactly according to the Imam's s instructions by the defendants, it was not acceptable to SS and MM who are directing this case. And it is even more unacceptable that after the Imam said in details that he remembers the 1992 Mehmani instruction to continue publishing Farmans, Gray is still following SS and MM instructions while pretending to represent the Imam. The fact that the Imam found nothing wrong with the Farman Book and allowed everyone to keep it should have been an eye opener.

SS's attempted stunt of sending the lawyer Carnegie to sit within the audience during the Motion has backfired as thanks to his presence, search was done and his name was found in another case involving fraud in the Aga Khan stud.

We can conclude that at the discovery the Imam took the horse to the water but the horse refused to drink. In due time the Imam will tackle these rogue elements. Meanwhile, patience is the name of the game. It has been a long year for the community. Happy New Year to all!

Miracle, strange, Leela Providence....
On December 24th, 2010 Bloglaw (not verified) says:

Dr SS, MM and AK are using the very best legal brains and necessary resources money can buy. Before the cross examination of SS & AK, they all knew what questions & issues which will be raised. They will have considered all the issues and the articulation of their responses in detail and comprehensively. They will have had the option of mock questions and answers. with Mr Gray, his team and or Mr Carnegie They have also had in addition our institutional leadership training sessions annually for the last 18 years..

Instead of carefully prepared and articulated responses, both Dr SS and AK demonstrated and confirmed a no care attitude by making at best statements which show a lack of respect and understanding for our Tariquah, and consequently the Jamat and The Imamat.

So who is helping to ensure that the real truth comes out in the open and that too, DIRECTLY from the leaders in question. Anyone can read and decide this for themselves.(Umed please can you add the link on this website).

Call it a Miracle, Leela, providence, strange or a combination of such names and coincidences. The truth would not otherwise have been known.

After the meeting on 15 Oct 2010, Alnaz has confirmed that there have been no meetings or discussions nor reasons explained why an admission of infringement is critical for the purposes of consent and settlement as directed by Hazar Imam.

Dr SS & MM are clearly not following Imam's Farmans or the institutional directives to settle the only difference remaining in this case by arbitration or discussion with the 2 murids..

Imam reminded us of the divine in his speech on 15 October 2010 ".....In acknowledging the immensity of The Divine, we will also come to acknowledge our human limitations, the incomplete nature of human understanding. In that light, the amazing diversity of Creation itself can be seen as a great gift to us – not a cause for anxiety but a source of delight. Even the diversity of our religious interpretations can be greeted as something to share with one another – rather than something to fear..."

In giving feed back I am acknowledging humbly that none of us are perfect. Hazar Imam has confirmed clearly that perfection is Allah’s alone. We must not therefore not seek perfection from our Leaders, we must be generous and supportive. However we must expect performance not perfection, we must also expect competence answerability and capability (1992).

* United Kingdom

Contacts with SS or MM
On December 23rd, 2010 Alnaz (not verified) says:

No, MM or SS has not ever spoken with me or even discussed anything with me. Q why do they insist on infringement.

Remember that SS opposed MHI's confirmation that all distributed books can be kept and not to return. SS sought to make MHI reverse his decision (which he said twice), so they are dying to win the case so they can force the Jamats to return of all books. Their purpose for infringement is in direct contradiction (Gray's revised consent supports our version of what happened on Oct 15.)

They have no desire to follow imam's direction

* Canada

Reasons why ?
On December 23rd, 2010 Bloglaw (not verified) says:

Since 15th October upto date I wonder if Mr Gray or Dr SS and MM, have explained or discussed with Alnaz or Nagib the reasons why an admission of copyright infringement is legally necessary and particularly why it will give more legal protection to MHI against any furture infringements by anyone ?

* United Kingdom

Vancouverite misleading as usual.
On December 25th, 2010 Nagib (not verified) says:

I can see that Vancouverite is having Nightmare about Imam accepting that every lucky person that has the Golden Edition Farmans keeps it :-)

Bloglaw has quoted Vancouverite saying "Alnaz Jiwa failed to confess that Nagib Tajdin has invented some excerpts of Farmans in the Infringement Material."

Well the answer is simple, The Imam having accepted that everyone can keep the book of Farman, who are these people questioning his Wisdom and saying there is invented content in the Farman Book accepted by the Imam Himself?

Can they not understand that by criticizing the Farmans, they have themselves alienated their own right [if they had any] to access the Farmans?


On December 26th, 2010 Alnaz (not verified) says:

Bloglaw has quoted Vancouverite saying "Alnaz Jiwa failed to confess that Nagib Tajdin has invented some excerpts of Farmans in the Infringement Material."

What does the above quote say or imply? Whoever wrote it needs to explain what is meant by the above quote. AssumIng that he is suggesting that Farmans in the book being distributed are not authentic, all I can say that neither the Statement of Claim, nor the evidence filed nor in the cross examinations conducted is there any suggestion of any Farman wrongfully transcribed or invented, and SS or MM or the Institutions could and would have given evidence that invented Farmans have been published.

In the court the only argument was whether there was consent to publish, not whether any farmans were false or invented farmans. Invented farmans would automatically be considered wrong and damages ordered and injunction issued.

Actually few years back SS
On December 26th, 2010 librarian-umed says:

As received from nagib:

Actually few years back SS told me they had checked all the books [The last one was not yet published], he was referring to the first 3 books of KIZ series and he said they found them to be "accurate to the dot".


"Hurting Our Beloved Hazar Imam"
On January 3rd, 2011 Yasmin (not verified) says:

Ya Ali Madad. Recent "sad" incidents took place because of this lawsuit. I have said this before, "THIS LAWSUIT IS BETWEEN OUR BELOVED HAZAR IMAM, NAGIB AND ALNAZ". It is about "publishing of Farmans. Nagib and Alnaz love their Imam.

On Oct. 15, 2010, Hazar Imam talked to these 2 Murids and discussed what to do next. Now, why should some members of the Jamat interfere with Hazar Imam's decisions? Did Hazar Imam want to punish these Murids? No. Did Hazar Imam attack them verbally? No. Did Hazar Imam want to ex-communicate them from the jamat? No. So, why should some of the jamat from other sites and elsewhere want actions taken against these 2 Murids? Are they better then Our Beloved Hazar Imam? These Ismailis have created "divisions" in our Jamat.

It's none of "our business" to be judges as to what should be done to these Murids. We are in one of the "progressive" countries in the world, and we should change our mentalities and not go back to those "dark ages". Leave these 2 Murids alone, and move on, Mowla is dealing with this issue.

Nagib and Alnaz are no making Hazar Imam unhappy, but it's these group of ismailis who are creating tension in the community, are making Hazar Imam unhappy.

At this time, we all should be united, and pray for these 2 Murids. Every religion teaches "love" for each other. Our Beloved Prophet Jesus Christ(peace be upon him) said: "Love thy neighbours, treat others the way you want to be treated".

It is said that, "when somebody falls down, pick them up, even if it is your enemy". Thank You.

* Canada

On January 4th, 2011 librarian-umed says:

You write: It is about "publishing of Farmans. Nagib and Alnaz love their Imam

It looks like the judge at the 7/8 December Hearing in Toronto understood exactly the case like this as he said to Nagib about the Farmans, according to observers, that "you only wanted to spread the "Good Word" in your community."

In Christianity [The judge said he was Christian and could understand this], this expression is used about spreading the Word of God, the Gospels and the Bible.

From the meeting on 15
On January 6th, 2011 Nagib (not verified) says:

From the meeting on 15 October, I know that Hazar Imam never wrote this letter nor signed the Boston fake. I also believe Mrs Parkes did not do the forgery, she just emailed me the forged letter not knowing that it was forged.

But since the IIS mention comes up, I can also say that Mowlana Hazar Imam never ever mentioned IIS during our meeting.

At some point during a case conference, Protonotary Tabib did an interesting remark, she said the Motions and the trial will not resolve anything. She is right. There is nothing from this case stopping others who are publishing, there is nothing stopping us re-printing all the previous 9 Farman books which we have published in the past and there is nothing stopping the other people who still publish in various languages such as French, Gujrati, English, Urdu, Farsi etc...

During the Motions hearing on December 8th 2010, the judge said that if the Imam wanted his Farmans not to be published or people not to buy the Golden Edition, it would have been easy for him to make a Farman or Talika to this effect. He also said the Imam could have signed an affidavit which he did not do.

And of course any intelligent person will understand that Alnaz who did not even know the Golden Edition was published up to after it was published was falsely accused without any warning, without even a courtesy call from anyone, be it SS, MM or Gray. And unless one believes that Imam would falsely accuse one of His Murid or that the Imam will strip Himself of his infallibility, nothing from the case is credible. It is time that this mockery of our Imam stops immediately.

Back to top