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
- 1333239 reads
Comments
Complainant Proceeds Further ........
Dear All - Ya Ali Madad , ...complainant proceeds further ...( as er received from e mails )
Wed, 26 Dec 2012 at 15:283:28
NCAB UK Order - Complaint againt Shafik Sachedina and Abdullah J Dharamsey
Complaint dated 4th August 2012. Order and response dated 24th December 2012
I am making this preliminary request for further and better particulars, information including clarifications.
Hazar Imam has full and unfettered authority. Hazar Imam has given authority in the constitution and Farmans to NCAB which is the basis of the NCAB order and my complaint. None of us are questioning the authority of Hazar Imam and we are all seeking to do what Hazar Imam has ordained, and authorised in Farmans and the constitution;
1 The order is unsigned and has watermark “Draft”. I have requested confirmation from you and for a signed copy of the order. I intend to make further submissions/apeals.
2 I have asked for a copy of the order regarding my complaint against Azim Lakhani and Mohammed Keshavjee, which has not been provided ( presumably in error)
3 I have requested you to confirm
a. that the Constitution you have referred to is the 1998 constitution. and
b. the rules of UK you have used are those which were ordained by Hazar Imam on 11th July 1987.
c. If not please let me know and have a copies including the related Farmans of the constiuttion and rules you have used.
4 You have provided me with the UK jurisdiction rules of NCAB (You have done so after you have given a response and order. This is unjust, and not in accordance with our constitutions, farmans or under the law of the Land).
These rules are dated 25th May 2010 and signed by you. Can you please clarify and confirm the following
a. If and when were these approved by the National Council and or ICAB and finally by Hazar Imam.
b. Please let me have a copy of theese approvals and signed copies.
c. If not, then please let me have a copies of the Farmans or the rules and authority/ies you have relied upon in considering and making the order
d. Please also let me have a copy of the earlier rules of NCAB (which have not been repealed in the rules you have attached). In any event.
5 Please confirm if NCAB have and used our full constitution including all Farmans regarding any conflict or changes. I have provided you with a copy, which was given to me by the President of UK Council. The UK Prsident has said he does not have related Farmans of the changes, or the requisite copies of the rest of all the constitutional rules and regulations (which by definition are Farmans). Can you please let me have copies.
6 As a judicial body NCAB confirms they use and take account of the law of the land (UK and EU Law).
a. Have NCAB done so in considering this complaint and in making this response and order.
b. I intend (if needed) at a later date, to seek an approprtate decalration by the courts under the law of the land. Hopefully this will not be necessary and resoved internally as Imam wishes.
7 I have requested a copy of the full set of the UK NCAB rules and related Farmans, which are an integral part of our constitution which NCAB have not supplied, so far.
a. I am entitled to them as a murid and especially as a complainant. This is unjust, and has also limited me in my complaint and understading.
b. I request again a full set or access to read and take copies.
8 My complaint against murids is against them as murids
a. Please confirm that the following farman, and others sent before, applies to all Ismailies/murids, including S Sachedina, A Lakhani and M Keshavjee “The new constitution provides that every Murid, is the same in relationship to the Imam of the time, in the administration of the Jamati matters “- Nov 1987 “
b. If not, can you please let me have copies of the signed Farmans, annotations and or and or the rules which say that certain Murids are excluded and or are to be treated differently by NCAB.
c. The constitution does not say that any or all appointees, Leaders or employees who are Ismailies are excluded. I will deal with the issue of answerability and accountability to the Jamat in my submissions.
d. Can you please let me have the Farmans and the rules you have relied on as authorites to conclude that S Sachedina is answerable and accountable to the Imam but not also/and/or to the Jamat or indeed NCAB. I refer to the Farmans I have submitted to you, and whiich you have or ought to have.
9 Regarding Leaders being answerable and accountable to the Jamat. I refer to the farmans I have sent before, and request you to let me have a scopy of the farmans, annotations, and the rules and or authorities you have used to come to the conclusion that Shafik Sachedina is answerable only to the Imam and not also and,
a. to the Jamat and or
b. NCAB and or
c. to the Boards on which he is a member for example LIF, IIS, AKDN, and DJI.
10 I note you have quoted from the preamble to the constitution, presumably 1998.
a. Please confirm that the Preamle is an integral part of the constitution, and
b. you have taken into account all Farmans and the law of the land considering the complaint and in making you order
11 Regarding Bayah. Can you please let me have an Ismaili definition and authorites (Farmans) you have used, in you consideration of the definition and interpretation of Bayah of Dharamsey in this complaint and your order. I refer you to the following;
a. Bayah is accepted by delegated authority given to Mukhi/Kamadias by Hazar Imam.
b. When NCAB considers and makes an order , for example to suspend or excommunicate under the constitution. NCAB has delegated authority.
c. NCAB are authorised to make an order because of a breach in and or breaking of the Bayah or dis obeying the Imam, under our constitution.
d. The constitution is also a farman and so is every clause and rule. Therefore a breach of the constitution or Farmans is also a breach of Bayah,
e. All decisions by NCAB are by delegated authority given to NCAB as a Judicial Body under the constitution, under Farmans and under related rules.
f. There is no question that Hazar Imam has unfettered authority materially and spiritually. Equally Imam has also given delegated authority to Mukhi, NCAB and ITREB relating to Bayah. In making a decision NCAB must investigate if A Dharamsey and others are Ismailies and if they have revoked their Bayah and or readmitted. They cannot simply say someone is an Ismaili because they say they are in the face of evidence submitted to the constrary.
g. NCAB acts as a judicial body for our community and the law of the land is and must be taken into account in every consideration and ruling by NCAB.
I look forward to receiving the above. I note I have 14 days to appeal. Can you please let me know if you and or ICAB can agree to an extension.