Ismaili.NET - Heritage F.I.E.L.D.Copyright Lawsuit: Defenses Glorifying the Aga Khan filed in federal Court - 2010-04-29
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
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Tajdin Defence Apr 29.10.pdf | 491.02 KB |
| Jiwa AK Defence Apr 29.10.pdf | 543.82 KB |
- Printer-friendly version
- Login to post comments
- 1333216 reads
Comments
“No Ismaili institutions are responsible to state”
It is most disconcerting when some over-zealous people attribute to their Imam, ideas and actions that he personally would utterly disown. When did the His Highness ever state that he wanted his institutions to avoid the law of Canada (or any other place)?
In fact, by accepting Canadian citizenship, he clearly made himself subject to Canadian laws. All Jamat Khana’s and other institutional facilities are subject to local municipal laws. And the Agakhan Foundation itself is a registered charity and subject to regular inspection by the Charities Directorate of Revenue Canada. (It is true that a few years ago, AKF was in some difficulty because AKF funds were used for JKs, which are not charities. The use of the “leases” is a clever but not illegal way of getting around it.)
When Ismailis give to the Imam, they should not misunderstand it is as a charitable donation. Historically, money was given to the Imam as a SARDAR, (or head) of our Khoja community, to do what HE likes to do with it. In fact, in the days when Sultan Moh Shah was underage, the money was split between his family members as hereditary income. Later when he came of age, he went to the Indian Courts to deny a share to his aunt and the court clearly agreed that it was his personal money. Evangelical “churches” (like you see on television) also have the same treatment in law, i.e the pastors of those churches can use the money for charity or to buy themselves large houses or jetplanes. On the other hand, when money is given to heads of the established churches such as the Anglican or Lutheran dioceses, because they are registered as charities, they are answerable to Revenue Canada and apart from reasonable salaries, they cannot do with the money as they please.
So because JK’s are not so registered, when people give part of their gross income as “dasond” or other large sums as “mehmani”, Revenue Canada does not get involved because the “loser”, if you like, is the Jamat which is denied the very generous tax treatment given to charitable donations in Canada. But it is not against the law for the Imam to accept money for his own use.
So you can see that the statement that “No Ismaili institutions are responsible to state” is not only untrue but if it was, it would be considered hypocritical of the Imamat institutions to seek a special place for themselves in Canada.
The clarion call of His Highness has always being the growth of civil society globally. And one of the pillars of a civil society is the rule of law. Any arrangement with the politicians that places a religious organization above the state would be contrary to tenets of civil society. In fact, it is such arrangements in fundamentalists’ societies such as Saudi Arabia or Iran that the Agakhan routinely addresses in his speeches.
On the contrary, by the lawsuit being instituted here, His Highness is subject to the laws of this country. And I am sure that he is well aware that if the “forged” letters were indeed signed by his personal secretary, then she (and him. If he was aware) could be liable under Canada law.
So I would say that the Imam and his institutions are not only responsible to the state but would prefer it to be so.