Islamist preacher Anjem Choudary has appeared in court charged with three terror offences relating to banned organisation Al-Muhajiroun, which he is accused of leading.

The 56-year-old, from Ilford in East London, is accused of directing a terrorist organisation, being a member of a proscribed organisation and addressing meetings to encourage support for a proscribed organisation.

Appearing in the dock of Westminster Magistrates Court on Monday wearing a black jacket and glasses, he spoke only to confirm his name, date of birth and address.

He was not asked to enter any pleas to the alleged offending during the hearing, which lasted around 30 minutes.

Khaled Hussein, 28, from Edmonton in Alberta, Canada, appeared separately at the same court charged with one count of being a member of a proscribed organisation.

His lawyer said he would not be entering any pleas.

The court heard that the case relates to “an extreme form of Islam”.

Choudary is alleged to have provided lectures to the Islamic Thinkers Society, which is Al-Muhajiroun “for all intents and purposes”, the court heard.

Al-Muhajiroun has been banned in the UK since 2010 but has continued under “many names and guises”, the court heard.

Bespectacled Hussein spoke only to confirm his name, date of birth and address in a Canadian accent during a 10-minute separate hearing.

He is alleged to have been in “close contact” with Choudary online to provide “a platform” for the group’s views for around two years.

Chief magistrate Paul Goldspring remanded them into custody until they appear at the Old Bailey on August 4.

Choudary was arrested in east London on July 17, while Hussein was detained at Heathrow after arriving on a flight the same day.

Nick Price, from the Crown Prosecution Service Counter Terrorism Division, said: “The CPS has authorised charges in relation to Anjem Choudary and Khaled Hussein under the Terrorism Act.

“The charges relate to the proscribed organisation Al-Muhajiroun, also known as the Islamic Thinkers Society.

“Criminal proceedings against Mr Choudary and Mr Hussein are now active and they each have the right to a fair trial.”

Read more: Radical Islamist preacher Choudary guilty of inviting support for IS

A primary school teacher has been banned from teaching after sending thousands of pounds to individuals and groups linked to terrorism.

Miriam Sebbagh, 52, who worked at Hunwick primary school in Crook, County Durham, has been prohibited “indefinitely” from any classroom by the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA).

It came after she was found to have made five payments worth £2,500 to a person linked to banned terrorist organisation Al-Muhajiroun (ALM), as well as sending extremist videos promoting violent jihad.

In July 2017, Ms Sebbagh was arrested by Counter Terrorism Policing North East (CTPNE) but the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decided there was “insufficient evidence” to charge her.

CTPNE “maintained a high level of concern” regarding Ms Sebbagh’s state of mind, her opinions and her actions as a teacher, and submitted that her conduct should be considered by the TRA.

A witness statement provided to the panel said: “Ms Sebbagh initially came to the attention of CTPNE following receipt of financial intelligence, which indicated that she had made several payments to an individual linked to Al- Muhajiroun, which is a proscribed terrorist organisation.

“The investigation identified that Ms Sebbagh sent five payments [of ] £2,500 from her account to the individual.”

A further seven payments totalling £1,310 were made between January 27 and July 5 2016 to an individual who is suspected to have left the UK and join the terrorist group calling itself Islamic State.

In 2017, a payment of £100 was made to an individual believed to have married a suspected ALM member and there was an unsuccessful payment in 2015 to an individual arrested over terrorism offences, the panel was told.

Police discovered £4,670 in a safe at her address in 2018 which was intended to fund terror attacks.

The money was forfeited under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 and Ms Sebbagh was also ordered to pay costs of £12,654.

During a police interview on May 8 2018, Ms Sebbagh said she regularly donated to good causes including Muslim charities as part of her faith and denied making payments to those linked to terrorism.

A witness statement to the panel said: “Despite Ms Sebbagh’s assertion that the payments she had made were charitable in nature, the only ‘charitable’ aspects of those payments were to support fellow extremists whilst under criminal investigation for terrorist-related offences and/or to fund travel to join Isis or others who espouse hate.”

The panel also heard Ms Sebbagh had “strongly-held views” that violent jihad was the “correct interpretation of Islamic teaching”.

She had liked a number of pages on Facebook including those of individuals linked to IS, extremist views and hate speech, and had been trying to radicalise a friend with her beliefs about “violent jihad”.

Ms Sebbagh also sent four “extreme and concerning” videos to someone, one of which would be classified as a criminal offence to disseminate contrary to the Terrorism Act 2006.

Alan Meyrick, on behalf of the Education Secretary, made the decision to ban Ms Sebbagh due to the “seriousness of the allegations found proved against her”.

Ms Sebbagh did not attend the hearing, which took place on December 21.

A terror suspect who cut off his electronic tag before taking a taxi to London has been jailed for more than three years.

The man, who can only be identified as LF, is a senior leader of the banned extremist group Al-Muhajiroun (ALM).

He was sentenced at the Old Bailey on Monday after pleading guilty last week to six counts of breaching a Tpim (Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures) order.

Tpim notices allow the authorities to monitor suspected terrorists who are not subject to criminal charges.

LF was first made subject to a two-year Tpim in October 2016 and was sentenced to two years imprisonment, suspended for two years, in May 2019 after he was convicted of breaching the conditions.

Home Secretary Priti Patel imposed a second Tpim in November 2019 because he had continued to engage in terrorism-related activity, including acting for the benefit of ALM, possessing Islamist extremist material and encouraging terrorism.

“LF met with other ALM members in London and elsewhere,” said prosecutor Kate Wilkinson. “LF twice hosted ALM meetings in his own home.”

The court heard that LF obtained an unauthorised “burner” mobile phone and £90 in cash to pay for a taxi to London in the early hours of September 15 last year after removing his electronic tag.

When police forced entry to his flat, it smelled strongly of smoke and it appeared that items, including paper, had been burnt.

LF was arrested on the morning of September 16 outside a supermarket in south-east London after calling his solicitors, who told police where to find him.

The court heard that checks at UK ports to make sure he did not flee the country caused nine-hour tailbacks for travellers.

Judge Anthony Leonard QC jailed LF for three years and two months, including concurrent sentences of two years and four months for the Tpim breaches and a 10-month prison term for breaching his suspended sentence.

“The Secretary of State was right to decide you were a senior leader in ALM, having a leading role in communications, including encouraging others to travel to Islamic State-controlled territory, and logistics,” he said.

“You are not suspected of personally carrying out terrorist attacks in this country.”

The judge said LF’s fear of his suspended sentence being activated after a probation officer upgraded his risk from “serious” to “very serious” had acted as the “catalyst” to him absconding.

“Fortunately, you came to your senses and probably your best mitigation is that you arranged to give yourself up on September 16,” he told LF, who was appearing by video-link from Frankland Prison in Durham.

Catherine Oborne, defending, said an assessment by the Home Secretary found the breach did not pose a risk to national security.

“The intention was not to engage in terrorist activity or criminal activity,” she said.

“He recognises what he did was a mistake and that he intends to have a better attitude to the order going forward.”

A Muslim convert nicknamed “The Eagle” has been jailed for at least 15 years for planning a “spectacular” terror attack on Oxford Street in London.

Lewis Ludlow, 27, swore allegiance to Islamic State as he prepared to drive a van through London’s shopping district or Madame Tussauds.

The former Royal Mail worker, who called himself “The Eagle” and “The Ghost”, bought a phone under a false name and wrote down his attack plans, which were later found ripped up in a bin.

He identified Oxford Street as an “ideal” spot, writing: “It is expected nearly 100 could be killed in the attack.”

Last year, he pleaded guilty at the Old Bailey to plotting an attack in the UK and funding IS abroad.

Judge Nicholas Hilliard QC jailed Ludlow for life with a minimum term of 15 years.

Ludlow was also sentenced to a further seven years in prison to run concurrently for the funding offence.

The judge said Ludlow had been engaged in preparations for a “spectacular” multi-casualty attack “with the intention of causing death or terror”.

He told the defendant: “Your commitment at the time we are concerned with to violent extremism ran very deep and for some time.

“There could be no other explanation for your preparing to kill innocent people in a vehicle attack for ideological reasons.”

Judge Hilliard rejected the suggestion Ludlow had been coerced by an Islamic State supporter in the Philippines, saying the defendant was “nobody’s fool”.

He added: “I do not regard you as suggestible or easily taken advantage of. You were well able to resist the Prevent programme.”

The court heard how Ludlow, from Rochester in Kent, first came to the attention of police in 2010 when he attended a demonstration led by radical preacher Anjem Choudary and his banned Al-Muhajiroun (ALM) group.

When he was arrested in 2015, IS material was found on Ludlow’s electronic devices but no further action was taken.

In January 2018, he bought a ticket to fly to the Philippines on February 3 but was stopped at the airport and had his passport seized.

Having set up a PayPal account and a fake Facebook site called Antique Collections, he sent money to an IS supporter, Abu Yaqeen, in the Philippines.

Ludlow also turned his attention to launching an attack in Britain, with encouragement from Yaqeen, the court heard.

He visited an internet cafe in Vauxhall Bridge Road in central London where he searched online for shopping centres, Oxford Street and the Isis flag.

Police later recovered torn-up scraps of paper from Ludlow’s bin detailing potential attack sites, including Madame Tussauds, Oxford Street, St Paul’s Cathedral and a “Shia temple in Romford”.

He detailed a potential attack on Oxford Street using a van mounting the pavement, noting the lack of safety barriers.

He wrote: “Wolf should either use a ram attack or use … on the truck to maximise death … it is a busy street it is ideal for an attack. It is expected nearly 100 could be killed in the attack.”

On April 13 Ludlow’s mobile phone was retrieved from a storm drain and found to have videos of the defendant swearing allegiance to IS and evidence of “hostile reconnaissance”.

When Ludlow was arrested by counter-terrorism police he refused to explain himself in interview.

Following his guilty plea, autistic Ludlow told how he rejected an MI5 advance in March 2017 but agreed to engage with the Prevent programme.

He became “bitter” and “heartbroken” when he was barred from going to the Philippines, he said: “I felt that I was trapped like an animal unable to escape its cage.”

At first, Abu Yaqeen asked for money then talked him into plotting an attack in Britain, saying “you have to kill them”, he claimed.

Ludlow told the court: “I said no at first, I did not want to because I felt this was a bit scary and then he said, ‘You have to do it. You have to kill them, make them pay in blood, you must get revenge. They are not innocent. They deserve to die’.

“He said the best way to do so was using a ram attack. He said in order to achieve such a spectacular attack we should use a truck bomb attack to achieve the necessary effect.

“He said to me, ‘Don’t you want to die a martyr? They deserve it’.”

A former postman who set up YouTube channels of speeches given by an extremist Islamist preacher and who sent a letter to one of the killers of murdered soldier Lee Rigby has been spared jail.

Sajid Idris, from Cardiff, was described as a “devotee” of firebrand cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed, known as OBM, who ran the radical group Al-Muhajiroun and who is banned from the UK.

Idris, a 36-year-old father from Splott in the Welsh capital, had been due to go on trial on Monday, but changed his plea.

He admitted uploading speeches by OBM to four different YouTube channels.

He was sentenced to 21 months, suspended for two years, after pleading guilty to four charges of distributing a terrorist publication, contrary to the Terrorism Act 2006.

The charges were dated between November 1, 2013 and December 4, 2014.

A search of Idris’ address in 2014, at that time in Grangetown, uncovered a special delivery letter sent to Michael Adebolajo, one of the killers of Fusilier Rigby who was murdered near Woolwich Barracks in south-east London in May 2013.

Officers also discovered old business cards for radical preacher Anjem Choudary, and, in the attic, a banner saying “Sharia 4 Europe”.

The YouTube videos, which were mainly audio-only recordings, discussed things such as the establishment of an Islamic caliphate, and told listeners they should oppose democracy, freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

His Honour Judge Paul Dodgson said: “There is no doubt when one looks at the contents of these four channels, represented by the four counts, that you and those like you were at that time inciting others within our country to perform acts of violence for terrorist purposes.

“You lived in our society and yet it was a society which you were encouraging others to fight and obliterate.”

A bearded and shaven-headed Idris appeared to quietly mutter to himself as the sentence was passed at Kingston Crown Court.

But the judge said the fact the YouTube videos did not have accompanying graphic images, and that they were set in the context of the publication of religious beliefs, meant the offending was “at the lower end” of the range.

He said: “These were not videos designed solely to recruit terrorists, but rather were speeches encouraging the listener to follow a religion, a consequence of that being perhaps the need to fight and engage in violence.”

He added that a series of factors, including Idris’ lack of previous convictions, his guilty plea, and that his bail was cancelled in 2015 after his initial arrest all went some way to reducing his sentence.

He said: “I cannot be satisfied that you pose a present danger to the public.”

He added that in this case there is “a realistic prospect of rehabilitation” and acknowledged the negative effect a jail term could have on Idris’ young daughter and the tragedy the family had experienced following the death of their 11-month-old son.

A charge against Idris’ wife Sadia Malik, 38, of distributing a terrorist publication was dropped.

Detective Superintendent Jim Hall, from Wales Extremism and Counter Terrorism Unit, which, alongside Counter Terrorism Police North East, arrested Idris in 2017, appealed to people to continue to be vigilant and report anything they were concerned about when it came to suspected terrorism.

He said: “Nobody is better placed to detect something that is out of place in their communities than the people living in them. To effectively combat the terrorism threat, the police, businesses, Government and the general public need to work together.”

Detective Chief Superintendent Martin Snowden, head of Counter Terrorism Policing North East, said: “Those operating online should know that they are not anonymous and can expect to be prosecuted if they are involved in this type of activity.

“Tackling extremist material is an essential part of protecting the public and preventing offences that may incite or encourage acts of terrorism.”

Anjem Choudary, Britain’s best-known Islamist preacher whose followers have been linked to numerous plots around the world, was sentenced to five years and six months in prison on Tuesday for inviting support for Islamic State, Sky News reported.

Choudary had been convicted previously by a jury at London’s Old Bailey court of using online lectures and messages to encourage support for the banned group which controls large areas of Syria and Iraq.

Notorious in Britain where the tabloids denounce him as a hate preacher, he is also well-known abroad, making regular TV appearances in the wake of attacks by Islamist militants to blame Western foreign policy for targeting Muslims.

Prosecutors said that in postings on social media, Choudary had pledged allegiance to the “caliphate” declared by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and said Muslims had a duty to obey or provide support to him.

Choudary had denied the terrorism charges and claimed the case was politically motivated. He was found guilty after trial in July.

The former head of the now banned organization al-Muhajiroun, Choudary became infamous for praising the men responsible for the 9/11 attacks on the United States and saying he wanted to convert Buckingham Palace into a mosque.

Despite his often controversial comments and refusal to condemn attacks by Islamists such as the 2005 bombings on the London transport system, Choudary has always denied any involvement in militant activity and had never been previously charged with any terrorism offence.

Anjem Choudary, Britain’s most high-profile Islamist preacher whose followers have been linked to numerous militant plots across the world, has been found guilty of inviting support for Islamic State.

Choudary, 49, was convicted at London’s Old Bailey court of using online lectures and messages to encourage support for the banned group which controls large parts of Syria and Iraq.

Notorious in Britain where the tabloids denounce him as a hate preacher, he is also well-known abroad, making regular TV appearances in the wake of attacks by Islamist militants to blame Western foreign policy for targeting Muslims.

Prosecutors said that in postings on social media, Choudary and his close associate Mizanur Rahman, 33, had sought to validate the “caliphate” declared by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and said Muslims had a duty to obey or provide support to him.

In one hour-long speech, Choudary set out the requirements for a legitimate caliphate under Islam and why he believed the Islamic State met those criteria.

Both men, who had denied the terrorism charges and claimed the case was politically motivated, were found guilty last month but their convictions could not be reported until Tuesday for legal reasons. They are due to be sentenced in September and could face a jail sentence of up to 10 years each.

Choudary, the former head of the now banned organisation al-Muhajiroun, became infamous for praising the men responsible for the 9/11 attacks on the United States.

Despite his often controversial comments and refusal to condemn attacks by Islamists such as the London 2005 bombings, Choudary has always denied any involvement in militant activity and had never been previously charged with any terrorism offence.

Rahman served two years in jail for encouraging followers to kill British and American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq during a protest in 2006.

BREEDING GROUND FOR MILITANTS

Al-Muhajiroun has been regarded as a breeding ground for militants since it was founded in the late 1990s by Syrian-born Islamist cleric Omar Bakri, who was banished from Britain in 2005, and was banned under anti-terrorist laws in 2010.

Michael Adebolajo, one of the men who hacked to death British soldier Lee Rigby on a London street in 2013, had attended protests Choudary had organised.

Last year, the trial of a teenage Muslim convert found guilty of plotting to behead a soldier in London was told he had fallen in with al-Muhajiroun.

The group’s influence is said to extend far beyond Britain. Those connected to it include Abu Hamza al-Masri, jailed for life in the United States last year for terrorism-related offences.

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, the gunman who shot and killed a soldier in Canada’s capital and then stormed parliament in 2014, followed Choudary on Twitter, although the preacher told Reuters at the time he had no links to him.

Both Choudary and Rahman say they abide by a “covenant of security” which forbids Muslims from carrying out attacks in non-Muslim lands where their lives and wellbeing are protected.

“We’re living in a global community and no doubt Muslims around the world who have their eye on what’s happening in Syria and Iraq or want to know about the sharia (law) will come across us at one point or another,” Choudary told Reuters in 2014.

“That does not mean that we’re encouraging people to carry out any acts of terrorism.”

Faith Matters is launching its paper that offers a brief insight into the secular reforms of the Ottoman Empire in order to analyse and debunk claims by extreme groups like Al Qaeda of it being an Islamic Caliphate, strictly governed by Shariah Law. The Ottoman Empire is often presented, by such groups as a model political system upon which to re-build a global Caliphate. Osama bin Laden marked the decline of the Ottoman Empire as the fall of Islam – that the Islamic world “has been tasting this humiliation and this degradation for more than 80 years” and that “the righteous Khilafah will return with the permission of Allah”. Through the implementation of an Islamic legal and political system, extreme groups who mis-use the beauty of Islam call for the rejection of liberal values and the current systems in place which do not fundamentally clash with Islam.

The report authored by Hussain offers a new challenge to these claims, arguing that the Ottoman Empire bares little resemblance to the model proposed by such groups. In focusing on the period known as the Tanzimat (1839-1876), Hussain shows that the Ottomans were in fact attempting to secularise their laws and state institutions rather than implementing religious laws into State laws.

These are some of the key findings in the report which show that:

• Homosexuality was decriminalised
• Ottoman society in general moved away from punishments such as stoning
• The death penalty for Apostasy was not implemented

Extremists often bypass these facts and use a warped interpretation of history in order to weave their own narrative into mainstream debate; using their own projected picture of a perfect Ottoman society living under a deeply rigid mis-interpretation of Shariah Law in order to argue for the building of a modern day Islamic Caliphate. Those who spin this historical account help to prop up a narrative used as an ideological basis for extremism. The attacks of 9/11 were even marked by Bin Laden as “a great step towards the unity of Muslims and establishing the righteous Caliphate”. Until now, their account has been met with little intellectual resistance.

This important paper is the first of its kind to expose and dismantle such a historical account of the Ottoman Empire. Alongside the Government’s new Prevent Strategy focusing on extremism in schools, online and at universities, Hussain creates a vehicle upon which to tackle extremists who adopt this historical narrative in order to justify their intolerant and right-wing ideology.

By debunking one of the fundamental layers of these narratives, this paper provides an opportunity for debate and discussion within the public sphere. It also supports those civil society organisations and policy makers who defend liberal democratic values that underpin communities in Britain and also provides another tool for Muslims to counter the extremely small yet vocal groups who espouse such a warped interpretation of the Ottoman Empire and the Khilafah. We also hope that it counters those who lump all Muslim communities together and who undermine the history of majority Muslim countries as places where pluralism was alive and thriving. Extremism comes in many shape and forms and affects many communities. We hope that our work can continue to counter it, whether Far Right (including groups like the English Defence League and the British National Party) and others like Al-Muhajiroun.

Faith Matters explored local issues of tensions amongst young male Sikhs and Muslims which threatened to create local and national hotspots of tension.

The project culminated in the Cohesive Communities report which can be used by communities as a resource to develop cohesion and to look at divergent dialogues between Sikh and Muslim communities.

The following text is the introduction from the Cohesive Communities report which can be downloaded through the link:

A Growing Divide and the Need to Acknowledge Triggers that are Dividing Both Sikhs and Muslims

About six months ago, Faith Matters put together the framework of a project to try to address the growing gulf between Sikhs and Muslims in certain localised areas of England. We knew that there had been historical flashpoints and tensions and we were aware of a deep rooted set of dynamics that were corroding relationships. Our own learning journey through this process has been steep and with it a need to understand the key triggers that are dividing both Sikhs and Muslims and the anger that is brewing within a younger male Sikh section of the community. Core to trying to bridge divides is the need for issues raised by the Sikh community to be acknowledged and vice versa, though this seems more so from the Sikhs to Muslims. We also acknowledge that within Corrymeela, that there were different personal aims that individuals wanted to achieve and some of these were different to the aims of this project. Whilst we could not attempt to meet all of these within this project, we believe that because this was the first project of its kind in the UK between Sikhs and Muslims, a lot of issues came out in the process. Some of these opinions were polarized; some were based on a sense of collectivism whilst others were more receptive, thoughtful and inclusive. This report therefore lists some of the findings that came out from facilitated group and person to person interactions. We have also corresponded with participants and have informed them that comments that were seen as inflammatory and which could lead to further barriers to interaction in the future, would be left out. As the name suggests, the Cohesive Communities project was a chance for key issues to be aired and a start to the interaction process between both faiths. It was not meant as a basis to provide legitimisation for either community to use the report or findings against the other and we firmly adhere to this principal.

Today, we can honestly say that the dynamics are becoming polarised as each community starts to mentally map the corresponding faith group as the ‘other.’ The primers and triggers that facilitate  space for this divergent thinking include on Sikh side, the view that resources are going to Muslims be it funding or others and that there are programmes of alleged forced conversations of women. Furthermore, some Sikhs feel that Muslim leaders do not speak out when there are attacks on Sikhs who are considered to be Muslims and there are those voices which suggest that Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and Christians are targeted by Muslims. Conversely, Muslims are starting to voice concerns that a handful of Sikhs are starting to work with the BNP and this is made more relevant when the language used against them sounds like statements from British National Party literature. There are also those within Muslim communities who have no idea of some of the issues outlined and who blindly think that there is a commonality based on race, a minority faith and links to the sub-continent.  There are others who believe that pictorial depictions of Muslims killing Sikh believers within Sikh Gurdwaras do nothing for cohesion and feeds radicalism within the Sikh community from a young age. Then there are those culprits of the night, the shape shifters who feed the fears about Islam and Muslims and who talk about a Muslim take over and the struggle to push back unbelievers. Their texts on Kaffirism and non-believers further exacerbate fears and their names are Al-Muhajiroun and Hizb-ut-Tahrir. On the Sikh side, there are also those small numbers of groups who take a radical polarised view of Muslims and to other faiths and these have come out of a gang culture that was based on the perceived control of local areas. In this concoction, it is not hard to see that both communities are on divergent tracks and that potential problems are being stored up. Indeed, the questions that participants’ from both communities put to each other at the end of this report, show inter-community fissures and why we felt that facilitation was much needed in this project. These questions came out from a flip chart session where each member was told to list their views and thoughts and which led to some wide ranging and deeply troubling thoughts being listed. The questions put to each faith by the corresponding faith group have not been changed, though they thankfully took a more constructive and less inflammatory approach.

In light of the above, we are of the opinion that more programmes are needed to get Sikhs and Muslims to deal with these and ongoing issues. Whilst the approach taken by Corrymeela was based on their experience of conflict resolution (i.e.) looking at commonalities before moving onto areas of contention, this was something that some Sikh participants queried. Their perceptions were that they had come to try to raise issues of contention and get them resolved. We believe that the approach of Corrymeela was justified since conflict resolution always looks at issues of agreement or similarity before moving onto contentious issues. However, this pilot will be adapted in the future to look at the key issues and relevant methods of overcoming the barriers which has been mentioned by a few participants. We acknowledge this and if a model is to be developed which can be replicated throughout the UK, then it needs to include actual tangible methods of overcoming the areas causing conflict. However, this project has achieved three fundamental and key objectives that will need to be built upon. Firstly, it has flagged up the internalised thought patterns of what may be circulating within each faith community. It has also flagged up and summarised in a set of 10 questions, the contentious dialogues through which each of the two faith communities are taking towards  each other and finally and more importantly, this work has provided us with the basis on which to make some key proposals that are listed here. It is our firm opinion that these will make a substantial difference through national work programmes and public messages that show that the issues affecting both faiths are being taken seriously.

Whilst the issues are currently localised to a few regions across the UK, it is also clear that the use of the Internet and chat rooms are pushing localised issues within the wider national domain. If this continues and the no action is taken through further investment in the proposals made within this report, then it is our opinion that localised tensions may well ‘link up’ and create national tensions that will deeply affect community cohesion and interfaith relations between Sikhs and Muslims in the future. We are also mindful that if this takes place, there will be those groups like the British National Party, as well as other anti-Muslim or anti-Sikh groups who will attempt to manipulate the tensions. This is a real and credible threat given the past history of the British National Party and its recent campaigning against Muslim communities, for example during the local elections of the 5^th of May 2006.

Deep rooted fears need to be respected through sensitive language and acknowledgments. It has been a very tough and difficult process to date though this is part and parcel of dealing with two communities who have complex sets of interactions. We are determined that such issues listed above are acknowledged and then actioned so that further corrosions around community relations do not take place in the future. This is the basic respect that can be given to both communities. It is also why we will be calling for statutory sources and those with resources to set up national Muslim and Sikh commissioners who can work within local areas and act as a bridge between statutory authorities and communities from both faiths. We will also be calling for a national Muslim and Sikh media group which will work together when there are issues of tension or incidents involving Muslims and Sikhs. We will also be pressing for Government sources to get local authorities to set aside local community chests for Muslim and Sikh led community organisations to apply for funding for joint partnership working projects, where there are large populations of Sikhs and Muslims in relevant cities. Finally, we sincerely believe that with the lobbying work that we are undertaking, that an independent report will be commissioned through an academic institution around suggestions of forced conversions that have been raised by Sikhs. Changing religion and converting is the basic right of any one of us if we chose. Forcing vulnerable people to do so is not on and is condemned by all faiths. With that in mind, it is time to find out and deal with this issue once and for all and we are proud to have worked with Sikhs and Muslims over the last 6 months. Easy it has not been, but we have valued every minute of it and hope that we can have the pleasure to work with both communities in the future.

Fiyaz Mughal
Director – Faith Matters