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

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

Thursday, 2010, April 29
Heritage News

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

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



A new complaint is filed with ICAB and NCAB. Email as received

"Disciplinary Action No. 2 of 2012 - Salim E-A Ebrahim vs Shafik Sachedina

Appeal Against ICAB Order dated 15 September 2012

The ICAB order of 15 September 2012 faults on the following issues:

1.1. Mawlana Hazar Imam (henceforth MHI) is not the subject of the inquiry, and
1.2. How MHI supervises his personnel is not the matter to be pursued in the inquiry.

2.1. Although Dr Shafik Sachedina reports directly to and only to MHI however he is accountable to the entire Jamaat worldwide. I refer to the following excerpt from MHI’s firman to the Leaders of the Jamaat dated Gilgit, 21 November 1987: “Basically, the new Constitution provides that every Murid has the same relationship to the Imam-of-the-Time in the administration of Jamaati matters and that is . . . a very important step."

2.2 Within the aforesaid Gilgit firman MHI further states: “I am proud of two things. The first is the creation in a variety of countries of institutions of the community which possess real autonomy, which do not depend on the intervention, nor the thinking, nor the support of the Imam.” Clearly therefore, MHI is justifiably proud of ICAB and CABs which form an institutional network which is meant to act independently of the Imamat to prevent the type of corrupt governance as reported in the attached article on the corruptness that bedevils Imam Khamenei’s Government in Iran. This is the status quo in Iran because unlike the autonomous Ismaili Institutions set up and nurtured by MHI, the Iranian institutions of justice and are directly under the Iranian Supreme Spiritual Leader Imam Khamenei and subject to interference by him.

3. In order to protect the reputation of the Imamat and the Ismaili community, MHI has had to swallow treachery and personal insults from the Respondent. The Respondent has caused MHI to suffer the debilitating public embarrassment of having to bear the blame and/or derision of having sued his own followers when it was the Respondent who hired the litigating attorney Brian Gray instructing him to litigate by falsely using MHI’s name as the initiator of the law suit. Highly indicative of something truly suspect with the said litigation was the fact that the Respondent’s lawyer Brian Gray was opposed to MHI’s discovery (!) because he feared the real litigant's identity (i.e. the Respondent) would be revealed publicly in the Aga Khan Discovery thus dissolving the lawsuit and also exposing him as a fraudulent lawyer dealing with the Respondent as the fraudulent client to subvert the process of the Canadian justice system.
4. The Respondent has caused the entire Ismaili community worldwide to suffer embarrassment and loss of prestige.
5. The Respondent has not only abused MHI's trust but actually taken over MHI’s power to the extent of stealing MHI’s signature.
6. The ICAB must act vigorously against the possibility of the Respondent manipulating MHI’s will in the future with a forged signature and the precedent set by the Canadian Federal Court in accepting that forged signature for all practical purposes.
I request that ICAB look at the matter carefully in light of the reasons and reasoning I have given above to show that it is not in the line of truth and duty for ICAB to search for excuses in the Ismaili Constitution so as to withdraw itself from this difficult and dirty business of the Respondent Shafik Sachedina’s fraud, treachery and reckless behavior as the highest representative of a world respected leader known to the world as His Highness the Aga Khan on the flimsy pretext that it is not ICAB’s jurisdiction to enter into this matter.
The US Supreme Court also feared to take on the US Government over its blatant abuse of the principles of justice by letting it run amok in a murderous frenzy of revenge in Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan to the severe detriment of justice, American prestige, financial ruin, and finally America’s shameful desperation to get out of the wars of its own creation - all this happened because the highest court of the land was itself corrupt and used the easiest of excuses in jurisprudence when judges want a way out: no jurisdiction.
There is always jurisdiction when there is the will to challenge gross evil especially when it is taking place within Aiglemont holding MHI prisoner to his own goodness to remain silent in the face of public humiliation to the Imamat and the Worldwide Jamaat.
Salim E-A Ebrahim

Back to top