Adverts

Please click on our sponsors to show your support

Journalism Diversity Fund
Why we Need to Kick Out Dictators & Get The Mosques Democratic Print E-mail
Sunday, 25 February 2007

570018_mosquePlanning for a shining future
IT is a place for prayer, reflection and worship. But Southampton's Medina Mosque has also been at the centre of a costly long-running court battle, witnessed a mass brawl and bitter divisions within the city's Muslim community. Fifteen years after the plan was first mooted, and ten years after the first brick was put down, the striking mosque with its Eastern-style gleaming silver dome and imposing minaret, is still not finished.

The incomplete building is symbolic of the problems that have beset the place of worship since the original trustees, who helped mastermind the plan for the region's very own purpose-built £2m mosque, fell out with one another. Seven years on, the original trustees have been unable to overcome their differences leading to a lengthy legal dispute, costing thousands of pounds of taxpayers' and their own money, over who should own the freehold to the building.

Southampton City Council originally sold the land for the site in Compton Walk at a knock down price of £56,000, a quarter of its market value, under special legislation for religious buildings. A building agreement was drawn up in 1997 between the city council and the original trustees; Mohammed Abdullah, his son Mohammed Aslam and Aziz Din Brora. The city council said it would hand over the freehold to the trustees when all the building work was completed and all the payments were made in full.

However, the mosque was temporarily opened for prayers to celebrate Eid in 2000. A few months later, it was reopened permanently, contrary to the terms of the original building agreement, as not all the building work had been completed. Later that year, 2001, the council's building control team confirmed that the mosque was structurally safe to use providing, in the eyes of some in the Muslim community, a mandate for its continued use.

Throughout, work on the building has been dogged with delays and the city council was forced to launch a legal battle in the High Court in 2003 because different factions of the Muslim community were laying claim to the building's freehold. The council made a declaration to the High Court outlining the unresolved freehold issue and invited anyone with an interest in the building to come forward - leading to a total of 15 defendants at one point.

A ruling was made for the proceedings to be stayed' - effectively meaning they were put on hold - while the Charity Commission was ordered to resolve the matter.

Since opening in 2000 the Mosque has been run as a place of worship and community centre for Muslims by Southampton Medina Mosque Trust Ltd, with one of the original trustees Aziz Din Brora a founding member.

But a separate charity, the Medina Mosque Trust, led by Mohammed Aslam has also claimed ownership of the site. Mr Aslam claims that his charity was the original organisation responsible for running the mosque.

In what might turn out to be a breakthrough in the long-running saga, solicitors acting for Mr Aslam, one of the original trustees, have today scheduled a High Court hearing to have the case dismissed.

Southampton City Council has said it will not contest the hearing and is likely to pay legal costs in the region of £5,000 to Mr Aslam and his fellow defendants. The fact that both Mr Aslam and Southampton City Council have agreed to throw the case out means that the legal proceedings which were put on hold have now been withdrawn. With the High Court hearing scrapped it is hoped that a renewed emphasis can be placed on finding a solution outside the courtroom.

Southampton City Council, which still owns the freehold, is now waiting for the Charity Commission to declare to whom they should transfer the freehold. A council spokesman said: "The matter of which trustees of the Medina Mosque should be given the freehold of the land is now in the hands of the Charity Commission. "We are supporting the Charity Commission with what they are doing. We hope they will be able to find a resolution and we are happy to let them do that."

A Charity Commission spokesman said: "We have been talking to all parties involved and looking at different options and solutions.

"Our role is to make sure charities sort out things effectively. Because it's a dispute we hope, and we believe, there are other ways of sorting this out, without going to the courts.

"We are still trying to work things out and speak to all parties. If no progress is being made then we will have to make a judgement call whether it is worth continuing to try and find a resolution.

"It we cannot, it will then be up to the courts, as a last resort, to decide the outcome."

The spokesman would not divulge the action it has taken so far to try to resolve the matter for fear of jeopardising the outcome.

Under current guidelines, the Charity Commission can only make recommendations, which are not legally enforceable, such as proposing all parties go through a process of mediation.

However if the commission begins a formal inquiry they can legally remove and appoint trustees and appoint interim boards.

While the commission is investigating the matter, none of the interested parties can take their case to court. However, if after the commission has explored all avenues and no resolution can be found, it can consent to court action.

Chairman of the Medina Mosque Trust charity, and one of the original trustees, Mr Aslam said: "We are hoping to bring the situation to a peaceful end so it can unite Muslims in the city and in the community.

"I am happy to work with the Charity Commission. I am happy to work with anyone who has a vested interest in the peaceful management and stability of the mosque."

The long-running saga into who owns the freehold to the building is a far cry from the hopes that underpinned the project from the outset.

Today, some work on the building including the dome and upstairs hall, still needs to be completed due to this debate over ownership and previous problems including a fire in the prayer room, and a mass brawl.

Recalling the years when building work started, and the trustees were responsible for paying an annual £20,000 instalment to the council until the freehold was handed over Mr Aslam said: "It was a difficult and very testing time. It was a time for the community to rally together."

Bushir Ahmed, chairman of the Southampton Medina Mosque Trust Ltd, which currently runs the mosque that is today used by hundreds of worshippers, said he hoped that a resolution could be found.

"We hold an election every year at the mosque, and every year we have sent an invitation to Mr Aslam by recorded delivery to take part.

"We want the community to be involved in the running of the mosque and that is why we hold our elections every year.

"The Charity Commission has told us it wants to dissolve the committee and hold new elections but no date has been set.

"We are happy to work with the commission. We want every Muslim in Southampton to come forward and become part of the mosque."

There are currently 15 elected members serving on the Southampton Medina Mosque Trust Ltd committee.

There are many who hope that Medina Mosque's future will be less turbulent than its beginnings.

http://www.thisishampshire.net




Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Live!Facebook!Technorati!Spurl!Furl!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

One person has commented on this article.
PresidentWPM: Quote

There's no problem. The article states that

"the trustees were responsible for paying an annual £20,000 instalment to the council until the freehold was handed over".

Clearly the Trust that paid these instalments is the legal owner of the freehold. Surely the Council has a legally binding agreement with a particular and named Trust with which it's dealing over the Mosque affair especially in relation to the freehold.

Now, Mr. Aslam and Mr. Brora were both on the Board of the "original" Trust. It seems that one of them left the Trust and formed a new Trust and the other remained on the "Original" Trust and continued to run the incomplete Mosque. Clearly this Trust is the original one and the owner of the freehold as they, presumably, continued to make the "annual instalment".

Don't tell that both Trusts paid the annual payments i.e. £40,000 a year?

The Trust that paid, and continues to pay, the instalments is the legal owner of the freehold. Now that the Charities Commission is investigating the matter, it makes resolution more difficult from within the community - we have to await their findings and perhaps depend on a court ruling.

If we assume that Mr Brora left the original Trust and set one up independently and that Trust took over the running of the Mosque, then someone agreed to this making the new Trust the legal owner of the freehold.

If Mr. Aslam abdicated responsibility for the running of the Mosque, then his Trust has forfeited the ownership of the freehold. To make a claim now is sour grapes. What happened to the continuity? I am assuming Mr Brora's Trust continued the running of the Mosque and paying the annual instalments.
(1) 2007-02-25 20:09:27
The author or administrator has closed this item for comments.