Rotten Borough
The Guardian reports that the Mayor of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, Lutfur Rahman, has been found guilty of widespread corruption after a 10-week hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice.
The judge described Mr Rahman as an "evasive witness" who was "no doubt behind illegal and corrupt practices" having sought to play the "race and Islamophobia card" throughout his election campaign.
A 'rotten borough' indeed.
Met considers criminal inquiry into Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman
Rahman is told to vacate post immediately after election court judge finds him guilty of widespread corruption in seeking office last May
Lutfur Rahman has been found guilty of corrupt and illegal practices. Photograph: Graeme Robertson
By Rajeev Syal and Ben Quinn - The Guardian
Police are considering whether to launch a criminal inquiry after the mayor of Tower Hamlets was kicked out of office following being found guilty of widespread corruption in last May’s local election campaign.
The mayoral election in the east London borough will be rerun after Lutfur Rahman and his supporters were found to have been involved in vote-rigging, seeking spiritual influence through local imams and wrongly branding his Labour rival a racist.
Rahman, who has been banned from seeking office again, was also found to have allocated local grants to buy votes. He was ordered to pay immediate costs of £250,000 from a bill expected to reach £1m.
Senior Met officers are holding a meeting on Thursday afternoon to discuss whether any further inquiries will arise from the judgment, a Met spokeswoman said. A statement is due to be released later.
The Met reviewed evidence from government auditors last year and found “no credible evidence” for a police inquiry.
Rahman, who is no longer mayor and will be removed from the electoral roll, expressed his surprise at the judgment and said he was considering whether to challenge it. A statement on his website said: “Today’s judgment has come as a shock – the mayor strongly denies any wrongdoing and had full confidence in the justice system, and so this result has been surprising to say the least. We are seeking further legal advice on the matter in relation to a judicial review.”
One supporter of Rahman said there would be an outcry across Tower Hamlets. “It is as if we have received a decision from on high from someone who knows nothing about us and – bang – we lose our elected mayor. The judge is one man, and he has his opinion, we disagree with it,” he said.
Judge Richard Mawrey QC handed down his verdict on Thursday after a 10-week hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice.
A group of four residents had called for last year’s mayoral election, in which Rahman triumphed over Labour rival John Biggs, to be declared void and rerun.
The group of voters was led by Andy Erlam, who stood as a councillor on an anti-corruption ticket. He said: “It is a fantastic result for democracy. There will have to be a new election of mayor. Mr Rahman cannot stand.”
Rahman, Britain’s first directly elected Muslim mayor, won the ballot after a campaign of “intimidation and corruption”, the petitioners alleged.
The judge said Rahman had sought to play the “race and Islamophobia card” throughout the election and would no doubt do so after this judgment. “He was an evasive witness – Rahman was no doubt behind illegal and corrupt practices,” Mawrey said.
The conduct of Rahman’s supporters on polling day has caused “considerable disquiet”, the judge continued. “The evidence laid before this court, limited though it necessarily was to the issues raised in the petition, has disclosed an alarming state of affairs in Tower Hamlets.
“This is not the consequence of the racial and religious mix of the population, nor is it linked to any ascertainable pattern of social or other deprivation. It is the result of the ruthless ambition of one man. The real losers in this case are the citizens of Tower Hamlets.”
Mawrey said the effect of his ruling was that “Mr Rahman’s election as mayor on 22 May 2014 was void – that is to say, it is as if it had never taken place. He has not lawfully been mayor since that date.”
He said a new mayoral election would have to be arranged and added: “It is declared that Mr Rahman shall be incapable of being elected to fill the vacancy.”
Rahman’s election agent, Alibor Choudhary, was also banned as a councillor with immediate effect.
The group of four voters who took legal action against Rahman and forced the hearing were praised by the judge for their courage and told that they had been fully vindicated.
They called for a criminal inquiry into Rahman but questioned whether it could be carried out by local police because of their “connections” to Rahman.
Azmal Hussain, a petitioner who said he would have lost his Brick Lane businesses if they had lost the case, dismissed claims that the judgment would be seen as racist.
“The people who have really suffered are ordinary people of all races who were supposed to accept corruption because it comes from someone claiming to be against racism. It is corruption, pure and simple, and it should be challenged,” he said.
During the hearing, the court heard evidence from a handwriting expert that hundreds of ballot papers carried marks suggesting they could have been filled out by the same person.
Rahman was also accused of making false statements about the personal character of Biggs by branding him a racist and of “undue influence” during the campaign and on polling day. “No rational person could think Mr Biggs was a racist – it was a deliberate and dishonest campaign. Rahman and Choudhary are personally guilty of making false statements about a candidate,” said the judge.
Finding Rahman guilty of undue spiritual influence, the judge said that local Muslims were told “that it was a religious duty to vote for Mr Rahman”.
The religious and racial element of Rahman’s campaign was “the most troubling part of the case”, he said.
It was claimed that a Bengali newspaper, the Weekly Desh, published a letter signed by 101 Islamic leaders, which was “intended to have undue influence on the Muslim population of the borough”, said barrister Francis Hoar. Their pronouncements had been used to cajole and control many within the local 65,000-strong Muslim community, it was claimed.
The court heard that one of the petitioners saw a voter crying outside a polling station after allegedly being told by a supporter of Rahman that it was “un-Islamic” not to vote for him, and that if you did not vote for him you were “not a good Muslim”.
The judge said allegations of intimidation at polling stations fell “just short” of being proved beyond reasonable doubt and so rejected them “with considerable misgiving”.
Yet he found that the behaviour of Rahman’s supporters had been “deplorable, even indefensible”.
In an unusual move, Mawrey said that he was sure that the Law Commission would take a close look at the judgment as it weighed up possible reforms to electoral law.
Professor Robert Watt, who has been advising the petitioners on electoral law, said that the commission would now be pressed to find alternatives to the current system of asking individual voters to launch an expensive legal challenge.
“The petitioners would have lost their homes if they had lost. The idea of a properly and publicly funded system should now be considered,” he said.
Rahman won the poll in the first round of the election, with 43% of the vote, and Biggs was second on 33%. In the runoff round he beat the Labour candidate by 52.7% to 47.7%.
The long-awaited verdict comes after the communities secretary, Eric Pickles, ordered a team of commissioners to ensure the councilwas properly run after a PwC report last year found it flouted spending rules.
Pickles took control of key functions of administration when he appointed three commissioners to oversee grant-giving, appointments, property deals and the administration of future elections in the borough.
Other functions such as education, social care provision, street cleaning, housing and homelessness services were unaffected by this move.
Outside the Royal Courts of Justice in central London, Biggs branded the Tower Hamlets ruling “a victory for honest politics”.
He said: “For too long the borough has been dragged down by the unseemly conduct of Lutfur Rahman’s administration and has become a byword for all the wrong things. Enough is enough.”
The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said: “I’m very glad that justice has taken its course and that a cloud has been lifted from Tower Hamlets. It is vital now that we move on with new elections, and ensure that something like this can never happen again.”
A handful of police officers stood guard outside of Tower Hamlets town hall on Thursday afternoon “as a preventative measure” as news filtered through of Rahman’s unseating.
In an area where tensions have been high the past, particularly during Rahman’s disputed election, there was no sign of trouble.
The council was preparing to issue a statement laying out the process for what happens next, including the requirement to hold a new election.
By Rajeev Syal and Ben Quinn - The Guardian
Police are considering whether to launch a criminal inquiry after the mayor of Tower Hamlets was kicked out of office following being found guilty of widespread corruption in last May’s local election campaign.
The mayoral election in the east London borough will be rerun after Lutfur Rahman and his supporters were found to have been involved in vote-rigging, seeking spiritual influence through local imams and wrongly branding his Labour rival a racist.
Rahman, who has been banned from seeking office again, was also found to have allocated local grants to buy votes. He was ordered to pay immediate costs of £250,000 from a bill expected to reach £1m.
Senior Met officers are holding a meeting on Thursday afternoon to discuss whether any further inquiries will arise from the judgment, a Met spokeswoman said. A statement is due to be released later.
The Met reviewed evidence from government auditors last year and found “no credible evidence” for a police inquiry.
Rahman, who is no longer mayor and will be removed from the electoral roll, expressed his surprise at the judgment and said he was considering whether to challenge it. A statement on his website said: “Today’s judgment has come as a shock – the mayor strongly denies any wrongdoing and had full confidence in the justice system, and so this result has been surprising to say the least. We are seeking further legal advice on the matter in relation to a judicial review.”
One supporter of Rahman said there would be an outcry across Tower Hamlets. “It is as if we have received a decision from on high from someone who knows nothing about us and – bang – we lose our elected mayor. The judge is one man, and he has his opinion, we disagree with it,” he said.
Judge Richard Mawrey QC handed down his verdict on Thursday after a 10-week hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice.
A group of four residents had called for last year’s mayoral election, in which Rahman triumphed over Labour rival John Biggs, to be declared void and rerun.
The group of voters was led by Andy Erlam, who stood as a councillor on an anti-corruption ticket. He said: “It is a fantastic result for democracy. There will have to be a new election of mayor. Mr Rahman cannot stand.”
Rahman, Britain’s first directly elected Muslim mayor, won the ballot after a campaign of “intimidation and corruption”, the petitioners alleged.
The judge said Rahman had sought to play the “race and Islamophobia card” throughout the election and would no doubt do so after this judgment. “He was an evasive witness – Rahman was no doubt behind illegal and corrupt practices,” Mawrey said.
The conduct of Rahman’s supporters on polling day has caused “considerable disquiet”, the judge continued. “The evidence laid before this court, limited though it necessarily was to the issues raised in the petition, has disclosed an alarming state of affairs in Tower Hamlets.
“This is not the consequence of the racial and religious mix of the population, nor is it linked to any ascertainable pattern of social or other deprivation. It is the result of the ruthless ambition of one man. The real losers in this case are the citizens of Tower Hamlets.”
Mawrey said the effect of his ruling was that “Mr Rahman’s election as mayor on 22 May 2014 was void – that is to say, it is as if it had never taken place. He has not lawfully been mayor since that date.”
He said a new mayoral election would have to be arranged and added: “It is declared that Mr Rahman shall be incapable of being elected to fill the vacancy.”
Rahman’s election agent, Alibor Choudhary, was also banned as a councillor with immediate effect.
The group of four voters who took legal action against Rahman and forced the hearing were praised by the judge for their courage and told that they had been fully vindicated.
They called for a criminal inquiry into Rahman but questioned whether it could be carried out by local police because of their “connections” to Rahman.
Azmal Hussain, a petitioner who said he would have lost his Brick Lane businesses if they had lost the case, dismissed claims that the judgment would be seen as racist.
“The people who have really suffered are ordinary people of all races who were supposed to accept corruption because it comes from someone claiming to be against racism. It is corruption, pure and simple, and it should be challenged,” he said.
During the hearing, the court heard evidence from a handwriting expert that hundreds of ballot papers carried marks suggesting they could have been filled out by the same person.
Rahman was also accused of making false statements about the personal character of Biggs by branding him a racist and of “undue influence” during the campaign and on polling day. “No rational person could think Mr Biggs was a racist – it was a deliberate and dishonest campaign. Rahman and Choudhary are personally guilty of making false statements about a candidate,” said the judge.
Finding Rahman guilty of undue spiritual influence, the judge said that local Muslims were told “that it was a religious duty to vote for Mr Rahman”.
The religious and racial element of Rahman’s campaign was “the most troubling part of the case”, he said.
It was claimed that a Bengali newspaper, the Weekly Desh, published a letter signed by 101 Islamic leaders, which was “intended to have undue influence on the Muslim population of the borough”, said barrister Francis Hoar. Their pronouncements had been used to cajole and control many within the local 65,000-strong Muslim community, it was claimed.
The court heard that one of the petitioners saw a voter crying outside a polling station after allegedly being told by a supporter of Rahman that it was “un-Islamic” not to vote for him, and that if you did not vote for him you were “not a good Muslim”.
The judge said allegations of intimidation at polling stations fell “just short” of being proved beyond reasonable doubt and so rejected them “with considerable misgiving”.
Yet he found that the behaviour of Rahman’s supporters had been “deplorable, even indefensible”.
In an unusual move, Mawrey said that he was sure that the Law Commission would take a close look at the judgment as it weighed up possible reforms to electoral law.
Professor Robert Watt, who has been advising the petitioners on electoral law, said that the commission would now be pressed to find alternatives to the current system of asking individual voters to launch an expensive legal challenge.
“The petitioners would have lost their homes if they had lost. The idea of a properly and publicly funded system should now be considered,” he said.
Rahman won the poll in the first round of the election, with 43% of the vote, and Biggs was second on 33%. In the runoff round he beat the Labour candidate by 52.7% to 47.7%.
The long-awaited verdict comes after the communities secretary, Eric Pickles, ordered a team of commissioners to ensure the councilwas properly run after a PwC report last year found it flouted spending rules.
Pickles took control of key functions of administration when he appointed three commissioners to oversee grant-giving, appointments, property deals and the administration of future elections in the borough.
Other functions such as education, social care provision, street cleaning, housing and homelessness services were unaffected by this move.
Outside the Royal Courts of Justice in central London, Biggs branded the Tower Hamlets ruling “a victory for honest politics”.
He said: “For too long the borough has been dragged down by the unseemly conduct of Lutfur Rahman’s administration and has become a byword for all the wrong things. Enough is enough.”
The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said: “I’m very glad that justice has taken its course and that a cloud has been lifted from Tower Hamlets. It is vital now that we move on with new elections, and ensure that something like this can never happen again.”
A handful of police officers stood guard outside of Tower Hamlets town hall on Thursday afternoon “as a preventative measure” as news filtered through of Rahman’s unseating.
In an area where tensions have been high the past, particularly during Rahman’s disputed election, there was no sign of trouble.
The council was preparing to issue a statement laying out the process for what happens next, including the requirement to hold a new election.
