This really is an astonishing story, not being discussed at all in the mainstream UK media of course.
Not only is he a Socialist, he’s also been found personally guilty of “corrupt or illegal practices”.
>We have a socialist program to spearhead a fairer society.
No wonder he got kicked out of the Labour party
“Trumped up corruption allegations”
Otherwise known in the election court with a high court judge as
> Lutfur Rahman was found personally guilty by the court of making false statements about a candidate, bribery, and undue spiritual influence. The court also found Rahman guilty by his agents of personation, postal vote offences, provision of false information to a registration officer, voting when not entitled, making false statements about a candidate, payment of canvassers, bribery, and undue spiritual influence. A finding that corrupt and illegal practices for the purpose of securing Rahman’s election, and that such general corruption so extensively prevailed such that it could be reasonably concluded to have affected the result was also returned
Then I’m trying to avoid costs found by a court to be..
> In his ruling, Marsh accused Lutfur Rahman, who was not called as a witness by Ayesha Farid[xlviii] of knowingly providing misleading information when making his mortgage application, and failure to declare rental income received to HM Revenue and Customs.[39]
Went on to be …
> charged by the Solicitors Regulation Authority before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in February 2016 of failure to uphold the rule of law and the proper administration of justice, act with integrity, or behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in him and in the provision of legal services
> On 20 December 2017, all charges against Rahman were found proven and he was struck off the roll of solicitors along with a costs order of £86,400.[51]
Irrespective of all that, the idea that electing this ‘socialist’ in ‘the London’s poorest borough’ demonstrates that the country will elect an obviously socialist Labour Party seems remarkably silly.
He got elected in a borough that votes on ethnic lines. Just look at the makeup of his party and compare it to the ethnicity of the borough. There I said it. Downvote me.
I don’t know if you’re a Socialist but the courts found you’re a crook. Which makes it an even worse outcome for the Labour Party.
[removed]
Congratulations? I’m sure the Tories will be sending you a letter of thanks.
He will still have to work with the Labour MP for Tower Hamlets on issues related to the borough.
>….under trumped up corruption allegations.
He may well consider himself to be “Socialist” , but I’d like to think that very few Socialists would stoop to electoral malpractices so severe that they got him removed from office and lumbered with court costs of £250,000. He got off very lightly , IMO, he should have been gaoled for the electoral fraud..
From the court case.: –
“Mr Mawrey also described Bangladesh-born Mr Rahman as an “evasive and discursive witness whose evidence was untruthful on occasion” and suggested he had played “race” and “religious” cards.”
10 comments
This really is an astonishing story, not being discussed at all in the mainstream UK media of course.
Not only is he a Socialist, he’s also been found personally guilty of “corrupt or illegal practices”.
>We have a socialist program to spearhead a fairer society.
No wonder he got kicked out of the Labour party
“Trumped up corruption allegations”
Otherwise known in the election court with a high court judge as
> Lutfur Rahman was found personally guilty by the court of making false statements about a candidate, bribery, and undue spiritual influence. The court also found Rahman guilty by his agents of personation, postal vote offences, provision of false information to a registration officer, voting when not entitled, making false statements about a candidate, payment of canvassers, bribery, and undue spiritual influence. A finding that corrupt and illegal practices for the purpose of securing Rahman’s election, and that such general corruption so extensively prevailed such that it could be reasonably concluded to have affected the result was also returned
Then I’m trying to avoid costs found by a court to be..
> In his ruling, Marsh accused Lutfur Rahman, who was not called as a witness by Ayesha Farid[xlviii] of knowingly providing misleading information when making his mortgage application, and failure to declare rental income received to HM Revenue and Customs.[39]
Went on to be …
> charged by the Solicitors Regulation Authority before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in February 2016 of failure to uphold the rule of law and the proper administration of justice, act with integrity, or behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in him and in the provision of legal services
> On 20 December 2017, all charges against Rahman were found proven and he was struck off the roll of solicitors along with a costs order of £86,400.[51]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlam_v_Rahman
Irrespective of all that, the idea that electing this ‘socialist’ in ‘the London’s poorest borough’ demonstrates that the country will elect an obviously socialist Labour Party seems remarkably silly.
He got elected in a borough that votes on ethnic lines. Just look at the makeup of his party and compare it to the ethnicity of the borough. There I said it. Downvote me.
I don’t know if you’re a Socialist but the courts found you’re a crook. Which makes it an even worse outcome for the Labour Party.
[removed]
Congratulations? I’m sure the Tories will be sending you a letter of thanks.
He will still have to work with the Labour MP for Tower Hamlets on issues related to the borough.
>….under trumped up corruption allegations.
He may well consider himself to be “Socialist” , but I’d like to think that very few Socialists would stoop to electoral malpractices so severe that they got him removed from office and lumbered with court costs of £250,000. He got off very lightly , IMO, he should have been gaoled for the electoral fraud..
From the court case.: –
“Mr Mawrey also described Bangladesh-born Mr Rahman as an “evasive and discursive witness whose evidence was untruthful on occasion” and suggested he had played “race” and “religious” cards.”
Sounds a charmer.