LONDON: Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) founder Altaf Hussain has settled nearly £10 million in a London properties case against his former loyalists in the MQM Pakistan (MQM-P) following a legal battle in the UK High Court. Damaged.
IT Minister Syed Aminul Haque represented the party in the UK court.
Insolvency and Companies Judge Clive Jones, who sits as a High Court judge in the High Court of Justice, Business and Property Court of England and Wales, ruled that the MQM was the real MQM. And its members are the real beneficiaries of the trust. which controls London properties currently controlled by Altaf Hussain.
The judge ruled that MQM founder Altaf Hussain had resigned from the party after the August 2016 speech. The verdict means that the UK judge has ruled in favor of MQM led by Khalid Maqbool Siddiqui and against MQM London led by Altaf Hussain.
JEE News has exclusively obtained a copy of the judgment which shows that ICC Judge Jones has ruled that MQMP’s Syed Aminul Haque’s counsel has proved that MQM’s April The 2016 Constitution was adopted and “it has not been established that the 2015 Constitution adopted the Constitution and on a balance of probabilities it did not.
In his judgment, ICC Judge Jones said: “On 23 August 2016, Mr. Altaf Hussain withdrew from any role or involvement in the MQMP. Whether temporarily or permanently, There was no change when he formed a new party before his expulsion from the MQMP. The association is operating from London.”
MQMP and Syed Aminul Haq were represented by Barrister Nazar Muhammad and Hussain and his colleagues were represented by Richard Black QC.
The case against Altaf Hussain
In the High Court of Great Britain, Syed Aminul Haque of MQMP (claimant, representative/member of Muttahida Qaumi Movement Pakistan Non-aligned Association) against party founder Altaf Hussain and other trustees/defendants (Iqbal Hussain, Tariq Mir, The case was initiated by Muhammad Anwar, Iftikhar Hussain, Qasim Ali and Euro Property Development Limited) for control of a trust controlling the following six properties: 12 Abbey View House in Edgware (where Altaf Hussain lives), High View Gardens first house, High View Gardens second house where Iftikhar Hussain lives with his family, first house in Whitchurch Lane used as lodger house, second house in Whitchurch Lane, 53 Brookfield Avenue house (where Salem Shahzad lived with his family) and the MQM’s first-floor Elizabeth House office (once known as the International Secretariat).
Tariq Mir, Muhammad Anwar and Iqbal Hussain did not contest MQM-P’s claim and sided with MQM-P in agreement. Former MQM leader Nadeem Nusrat, who runs his own party under the name Voice of Karachi, Dr. Farooq Sattar, who was also the head of his faction of MQM until recently, and former mayor of Karachi Waseem Akhtar have joined the MQM. Supported the MP’s case and appeared in court against Altaf Hussain, openly confronting his former leader.
All of them said that the MQM had not accepted the 2015 constitution and the 2016 constitution was in force and in existence when Altaf Hussain left the MQM voluntarily and then Dr. Farooq Sattar and others reinstated it. Never admitted.
The UK High Court’s decision relates to the first part of the trial and another trial is due to be heard soon where various issues including the role of trustees and the allocation of funds received in the name of the MQM will be determined. Used as Beneficiaries or not. The MQMP vs MQML case concerns the High Court of England and Wales deciding on the facts of the case whether Altaf Hussain is the beneficiary of the Group Trust or MQMP represented by Syed Amin. They are doing right. Beneficiaries
The case revolves around the facts of the constitutional history of the organization and the court has been asked to decide whether the 2016 constitution on which the MQM relies, which the Central Coordination Committee (CCC) of the MQM The 2015 constitution was adopted by Altaf Hussain Rails and came into effect in August 2016 and September 2016 when Altaf Hussain left the MQM and formed the MQM-L.
Syed Aminul Haque says that since August 22, 2016, Altaf Hussain had no leadership role in MQM and Altaf Hussain had no objection to it. MQMP says that Altaf Hussain’s veto power was overridden by an apology letter dated August 22, 2016 after his controversial speech.
MQMP held that the defendants who are trustees are not acting in accordance with the trust deeds. That they were using all the income and assets for their own personal gain. and that they be removed as trustees and held accountable for the failure of their actions.
Which is the real MQM-P?
The case was divided into two parts – the first issue was who is the real benefactor: is it MQM-P or MQM-L. Simply put, this issue can only be decided by whether MQM is genuine and legal since its inception.
During the trial, the MQM-P provided a trail of documents in the form of a constitution that was registered with the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). The only constitution that was not part of the ECP record was the 2015 constitution relied upon by the defendants including Altaf Hussain.
The verdict shows that ICC Judge Jones accepted the case presented by MQMP and did not believe the case presented by Altaf Hussain’s legal team.
The defendants argued that the 2015 constitution was operative, giving powers to Altaf Hussain under Article 9-b of the 2015 constitution but were unable to establish its origin, according to the judgement. The judge accepted Altaf Hussain’s argument that he had approved the constitution on October 22, 2015, which contained several errors.
The future of Altaf Hussain
The decision in the first part of the case is likely to lead to major legal difficulties for Altaf Hussain. Now that stage one has been won by the real MQM and the real beneficiary – which according to the UK court is the MQMP – stage two will begin where the defendants will have to account for all the money they received from the trust. And if it was used for the benefit of the beneficiaries and if not then they have breached their duty and they have to return all the money.
The judgment concluded: “Further hearings will be required to determine whether the resolutions passed on August 31 and/or September 1, 2016, violate the April 2016 Constitution. Further hearings are unnecessary.” MQM’s constitutional issue is not a defence. The claim against the defendants as trustees. Even if it was a defence, the judgments of 31 August and/or 1 September 2016 have been superseded by events. The September 2016 Constitution 3 Adopted by the CCC elected in November 2016. The new committee amended the September 2016 Constitution and adopted the 2017 Constitution by resolution. It remains in force (subject to any subsequent amendments). Even if Article 9(b) may be reinstated and Mr. Hussain’s eviction set aside, which it is not. Give relief to the active defendants or whom they may seek as trustees, a decision to bring the claim. “
MQMP leader Syed Aminul Haque launched a case in the UK High Court on 3 September 2020 regarding MQMP membership, asking the court to: remove or replace existing trustees; for relief to prevent abuse; and for orders for recovery of trust assets including rental income.
MQMP argued in the suit that Hussain and the other defendants failed to keep the books and records required of them as trustees and failed to account for the use of the properties, including the proceeds from their sale and proceeds. Includes net income. , and has misused trust assets for personal use and/or use by third parties.
ICC Judge Jones noted in the judgment: “It is evident from the statement of facts that the claim was rooted in a speech by MQM founder and ideologue, Altaf Hussain, on 22 August 2016. The speech, which From London to MQM membership in Pakistan, mainly in Karachi, riots erupted, with authorities intervening amid scenes of violence. The next day, Altaf Hussain publicly apologized and said that the MQM would desist from any active involvement with the MQM-P and the active defendants as to whether the decision expressed by it was temporary or permanent. Further, whether the decision on August 31 and 1 Allowed or enabled amendments to the MQM Constitution without first seeking their guidance, consent and/or ratification in September 2016 (“September 2016 Constitution”). The amendments within the MQM including eliminating any role of Altaf Hussain. MQM-P or whether, as the active defendants say, MQM-P is a new political party formed by Dr. Sattar and others who (or of whom some) It has made this claim by falsely claiming to be MQM.”
The judge wrote that there is no dispute that the MQMP has been engaged in elections at all levels of government since August 2016.
“It is registered as a political party in Pakistan in accordance with the requirements of the Elections Act, 2017. Its constitution (as amended from time to time) is filed with the Electoral Commission of Pakistan. It is recognized that MQ No longer politically registered M. Party until its name was changed and it is now MQMP.
Altaf Hussain’s arguments
The case of Altaf Hussain and his colleagues was that the MQM was registered as a political party in 1987 but its registration was blocked by the “military establishment” from August 2016 and after a speech in August 2016. MQMP was created in haste. A “military crackdown” on the MQM “to enjoy the patronage and protection of the military authorities while masquerading as an MQM-like organization to the outside world”.
Hussain’s defense argued that the MQMP, for the purpose of its registration as a political party, falsely informed the Election Commission that the MQM had changed its name to MQMP. However, the judge disagreed with any such pressure and concluded that it was not his role to determine whether there was any external pressure.
The MQM-L told the court that the MQM-P wrongly registered the September 2016 constitution in place of the MQM constitution passed in October 2015, which changed/amended the constitution. The MQM adopted through an amendment in 2012 [the “2012 Constitution”] and that Altaf Hussain could not be removed as the founder and leader of the MQM as was done in the September 2016 Constitution.
Hussain had disputed that he had previously handed over power or otherwise stepped down from his role after his speech on 22 August 2016. Hussain could not be removed by the 31st August and 1st September 2016 meetings and the MQM continued to exist. At his lead, his lawyer argued.
Hussain had asserted that MQMP had no interest in the properties and no right to bring these proceedings or assert any claim against the defendants.
Regarding Altaf Hussain’s pardon after his August 22, 2016 speech, Slack KC said it was clearly a temporary solution to a difficult political scenario that had developed.
“It cannot justify the changes in the 2015 constitution or the April 2016 constitution if in fact it had been implemented which permanently deprived MQM’s father Altaf Hussain of his role.”
The trial
The trial, which lasted for about two weeks in November last year, saw heated exchanges and clashes between the two sides.
Nadeem appeared in person to stand against Nusrat Hussain and told the court that his life was in danger and therefore he should be given security. Altaf Hussain called his former loyalists “traitors” who abandoned their father and ideology.
The trial described how the MQML destroyed the popular BT recording system, among other devices, for the 2016 speech events and the timing of changes to the constitution.
The court heard how the MQM lost control of its email which was used to exchange the draft 2015 constitution with the MQM’s international secretariat.
The court was told that Hussain had previously resigned from the leadership but his followers requested his return, but on this occasion the followers did not consider it necessary to bring him back as leader.
The MQMP’s claim relies on material evidence from earlier court cases in which Hussain said the properties were held in trust for the MQM. For example, during the divorce settlement with his ex-wife, which included a lump-sum payment of £1.5 million and a monthly payment of £15,000 to his wife, Hussain discussed the properties that specifically belonged to M. There were trust properties held for QM. P. and he had no personal interest in them.
Before the MQMP case began, former senior MQM leaders Muhammad Anwar and Tariq Mir had told Hussain that they would not give up control of the two properties in Whitchurch Lane.
MQM London said Hussain would soon issue his response to the verdict and announce next steps. It is understood he will appeal.
