How a Leaked Phone Call Proved the Greatness of Ahmadiyya Khilafat

Hazrat Khalifatul Masih V, may Allah be his Helper

Contents

• Background
• Introduction
• Miss N’s “Evidence” Examined
• Accusations Against the Khalifa Reviewed
• Are Four Witnesses Required to Establish Rape in Islam?
• Is the Khalifa Infallible?

Background

While the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community leadership continue to instruct all members to remain silent regarding the ongoing allegations made by Miss N against members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, out of respect and to protect the integrity of the ongoing Police investigations, Miss N herself and her supporters have taken no such prudent and appropriate measures.

Anonymity of individuals who claim to be victims of sexual offences is a legal protection in the UK, except in such cases that the individual themselves, over the age of 16, have given their consent to be identified, in writing. Unfortunately, instead of benefiting from this provision by speaking only to the police, Miss N, 38, has openly publicised her accusations and gone so far as to provide her contact details for media communications, thus providing such consent for identification.

As if to jeopardise her own chance at “justice”, she has openly discussed her allegations in public, in writing, and fanned the flames by working with a journalist of the lowest professional repute. This journalist, Rana Tanveer, with her permission, has promoted her allegations across social media, while exaggerating and concocting additional allegations to an extraordinary extent, promoting them through YouTube and television. One of Miss N’s most serious acts however, has been to privately record aphone conversation between herself and the one she claims is her spiritual preceptor: the Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad (atba), without his permission, and give her permission for it to be leaked. This is an act that has harmed her own case, both legally, and in the court of public opinion. Why?

Because the audio call is full to the brim with evidence against her case, damaging her credibility. So as to reply to the many allegations made against the Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community on social media, as a result of this leak, we’re going to go through this evidence, that is already in the public domain, carefully.

I am not an employee of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community nor do I represent them. This article is not written under their auspices or on their behalf. Rather, I am writing this in my individual capacity after reading the many absurdities circulating on all forms of online media. I must set the record straight.

Introduction

The allegations of Miss N emerged privately in the Spring of 2021. As narrated in this in-depth assessment of Miss N’s character by an anonymous individual who knows her well, the Khalifa initially supported her greatly and showed great compassion. From the allegations of childhood sexual abuse, he ensured that a police investigation was initiated by British police forces. He also himself oversaw an investigation into the allegations, which, on review of the “evidence” she provided, did not substantiate her allegations of rape. The outcome she wanted — removal of the individuals accused from their positions as office-bearers in the Ahmadiyya Muslim community — did not come to pass.

Outraged by the result of the investigation, she called him to confront him, while secretly recording the conversation. She then gave it over to someone to be leaked, with her permission and approval. Why? As we shall see, she herself admitted that it was an attempt to force and bend the hand of the one chosen by God to her will, so that he would be forced by public pressure to find the investigation in her favour, and to remove the accused individuals from their roles. In reality, the pre-planned nature of the leak, and the subsequent coordination with journalists, unveils an underlying attempt to bring humiliation and disgrace to Khilafat e Ahmadiyya.

But in doing so, all she achieved was to reveal the greatness of Khilafat, and our beloved Huzur in particular, his strict adherence to and deep understanding of the Islamic sharia, as well as to illuminate the perfection of the sharia itself. For despite approximately forty five minutes of abusing him directly, quite literally screaming and shouting at him, all she ever received in return were prayers from him and kind words. She called him a “bully”, stated that he was duplicitous, lacking in Islamic understanding, and a coward. She further asserted her disbelief in his Khilafat. Her ranting at him brought no anger from him but only pious advice in a quiet, humble voice. Thus, in leaking a private conversation, what Miss N has unwittingly achieved is to confirm what devoted Ahmadis already knew — our Khalifa is indeed a man chosen by God for the highest spiritual office in the world. It is one thing to put on a pious pretence in public, but to behave with the highest degree of compassion, gentleness and forbearance in private conversations, in the face of abuse and curses, is rare indeed.

Indeed, we have seen the spirit of the Promised Messiah (as) in action, when he said:

“I have such control over my nafs (self) and God has made my nafs such a Muslim that if a person sits in front of me for a whole year and gives the worst possible personal abuse to me, ultimately it will be him who will be embarrassed and will have to confess that he could not disturb me.”

(Life of Hazrat Masih e Maud by Maulana Abdul Karim Sahib Sialkoti. p. 51–52)

This article will cover the key parts of the conversation and demonstrate and address the blatant falsehoods and absurdities currently in circulation. It will demonstrate how the Khalifa behaved not only with kindness, forbearance and compassion, but made his rulings based on a deep and profound understanding of Islam.

We will cover the following aspects:

1. Miss N’s “Evidence”
2. Accusations Against the Khalifa Reviewed
3. Are Four Witnesses Required to Establish Rape in Islam?
4. Is the Khalifa Infallible?

Miss N’s “Evidence” Unravelled

Presumption of Innocence and Burden of Proof

Before running through the allegations made, a vitally important point needs to be made and that is as follows: allegations do not make a victim and they do not make a perpetrator. In other words, Miss N making these allegations does not mean that she is automatically a victim and that these allegations are true, nor does it make the individuals she is accusing, guilty. This is a vitally important statement to make, because many throughout the internet and social media, are treating Miss N as a victim and the accused as perpetrators.

The principle that one is innocent until proven guilty and the necessity for the burden of proof to be on the accuser, are not simply Western principles, but Islamic Sharia principles too. Thus, the Prophet of Islam explained:

The Prophet ﷺ said: If people were given everything that they claimed, men would [unjustly] claim the wealth and lives of other people. The onus of proof is upon the claimant, and the taking of an oath is upon him who denies.

(Hadith 33; 40 Hadith of an-Nawawi)

Allegations Review

In the audio call, there are a number of allegations made by Miss N. Those under consideration in this article are as follows:

1. That individuals in the community in Pakistan, in positions of authority, have physically and sexually abused her on multiple occasions.
2. That appropriate investigation into these allegations were not made by the Khalifa when Miss N first complained of these matters in March.

The first allegation is therefore directed at other members of the community, whereas the second allegation of a failure to investigate matters properly, is directed at the Khalifa himself.

Let’s take a look first at the Khalifa’s position on the allegations she raised.

The Khalifa’s Position

The summary, from the audio recording of the Khalifa’s position on the allegation of rape and sexual abuse she claims to have suffered as an adult at the hands of officials in the Ahmadiyya Muslim community in Pakistan, can be given in a single, short quote from the recording. He states:

26.30: Huzur (Urdu): Bat ye nahi hai. Tumhare jo moamlat hain na unko dekho…(inaudible)…Jo sawaalat samne aye maine kaha hai ba’az possibilities dekhe jati hain. Ye bhi ho sakta hai, ye bhi hota hai imkanaat
Huzur (English): This is not the case. Your issue that has been raised, you see, focus on them…(inaudible)…those scenarios that have come before me, as I have already said, can be looked at in various possible ways. This could be a possibility or that could also be a possibility.

From this statement of the Khalifa, including the evidence presented before him, which others have not been privy to, the Khalifa has made the judgement that there is no clear evidence of her having suffered sexual assault or rape as an adult; to him, the evidence that has been presented could also be interpreted as showing that Miss N was a willing participant of inappropriate speech and relations, rather than a victim.

Consequently, he gave her the advice that she should not make these allegations public because there was nothing in them that proved rape. Making the allegations public would only reflect poorly on her, with many taking the position that she herself participated in Islamically impermissible acts.

The basis of his advice was therefore on the basis of the evidence to which he was privy, and to which we are not. Individuals listening to the phone conversation should not consider that they are in possession of the full facts. This is a fly on the wall invasion of an individual’s privacy, not a full disclosure of evidence.

Reasons for Khalifa’s Position

We are not privy to the full reasons as to why the Khalifa made his decision. He is not accountable to us, and so we should be careful. Those who have given their bai’at in his hand have no right to stand in judgement over him. To do so is to invalidate their bai’at.

What we can do is glean an understanding of the reasoning of the Khalifa, from the points he made, many of which Miss N tacitly agreed with. Those who have listened to the recording will note three aspects of the claims regarding which the Khalifa raises doubts and questions for Miss N. These three reasons can give us insight into the basis as to why the Khalifa did not find grounds to dismiss the individuals accused from their posts.

It should be noted that no pleasure is taken in going through these statements. These are private statements, which have been made public, due to Miss N recording the conversation without the Khalifa’s permission. These messages having been made public, with accusations levelled on the basis of them, a response however, is therefore required.

1. Miss N Accepts her Evidence Doesn’t Stack Up

The first is Miss N accepting that the evidence she is presenting does not prove her accusation of rape.

In the call, Miss N states that lewd words were used in communication by a senior official in the community’s administration in Pakistan, to her.

The Khalifa points out that out of the emails presented to him, there was only one email of this official that was objectionable, and out of that email, only one objectionable statement. He also points out that his inappropriate statement received from her, a sexual and inappropriate response. The Khalifa states:

10:49 Huzur (Urdu): Siraf ek, ek jo email hai. Us main siraf ek fiqra hai ke ghalat qisam ka
Huzur (English): There was only one, the email (that was objectionable). In it, there is only one inappropriate sentence.

The Khalifa agrees that the statement written by him is inappropriate, but asks her how this proves that he raped her:

11:10 Huzur (Urdu): Sawaal ye hai ke is se ye kahaan sabit hota hai ke usne tumhare sath ghalat kaam kiya?
Huzur (English): The question is, how does it prove that he did a wrong act with you?

Miss N subsequently agrees that it doesn’t prove her allegation of rape against him, but that in her eyes, it proves that he is unfit to hold the position that he does:

11:14 Miss N (Urdu): Nahi magar ye to sabit horaha hai ke ye jo lafanga hai … is seat ke qaabil nahi hai wo admi, wo darinda.
Miss N (English): No, but it does prove that this rascal is not worthy of … this seat, this man, this monster.

That, the Khalifa points out, is not the issue under contention. The issue under contention is an accusation of rape, and as such, this evidence cannot be used to prove it. As shown, Miss N herself agrees to this assessment. She does not mention any other evidence to substantiate an allegation of rape against him.

2. Miss N — Initiating and Responding to Lewd Messages

In a separate part of the conversation, Miss N admits that she in fact initiated such sexual messaging with this individual she is accusing of raping her. The Khalifa asks why she engaged in lewd, sexual messaging with him. In her reply, she states it was because she was scared of this individual’s power and authority over her.

31:59 Miss N (Urdu): Ke mujhe dar leg raha tha. Mujhe main ek, tactfully ek message ker rahi thi apni taraf se.
Miss N (English): (Because) I was scared. I was messaging tactfully after thinking of my own welfare.

This is an odd position to take, since only one minute earlier in the call, she makes clear that the very people she claims she was afraid of, she in fact has no fear of at all. In fact, she explicitly states that she has no fear even if they should attempt to kill her:

30:57 Miss N (Urdu): Wo chahe mujhe maar dain, aap hitman hire ker lain aur qatal ker lain. Mujhe koi gharz nahi hai is se. Main nahi darungi — siraf Allah se dar rahi hu is waqt.
Miss N (English): If they want, they can kill me, you can hire a hitman and kill me. I don’t care about that. I won’t be afraid — I am only in fear of Allah at this point.

The complication to this narrative further arises when we consider that Miss N goes on to admit that she in fact, initiated making lewd comments to him:

32:50 Miss N (Urdu): Aur maine evidence de diya hai wo ap mane na mane. Wo evidence concrete hai ke ye laghviyaat batain wo kerraha hai, chahe maine initiate kiya.
Miss N (English): I’ve given the evidence whether you accept it or not. That evidence is concrete that this person used lewd speech, even if I did initiate it.

The urdu in this is quite revealing. The words “chahe maine initiate kiya” (even if I did initiate it) would not be used by someone who was presenting a hypothetical situation. The words used for a hypothetical situation would be “chahe maine initiate kiya ya nehin” (even if I did initiate it or not). This is a statement of Miss N herself admitting initiating the sending of lewd messages to the individual she accuses of writing her lewd messages.

Her admission casts serious doubt on her earlier answer to the Khalifa as to why she had engaged in responding to sexual messages. She said that she was doing so out of fear of the individual. One wonders, if she was so afraid of him, why did she initiate sending sexual messages to him in the first place?

3. Miss N’s Confused Narrative of Attempted Rape

Another accusation that she makes in the conversation is that an individual took her to his house forcibly, and there proceeded to attempt to rape her, but found himself, according to her, physically incapable, permitting her to run away home. She states:

14:46 Miss N (Urdu): Maine to nahi pesh kiya. Unhone khud mujhe. Maine kub kaha ke maine Aamir bhai ko pesh kiya hai. Mujhe ek dafa bataen mera ye jumla tha.
Miss N (English): I did not present myself. He himself took me. When did I say that I presented myself to brother Aamir. Give me one instance when I said that (I presented myself).

When asked why she went along with the event, she states that she experienced a “freeze” reaction, in light of her past alleged sexual trauma.

The obvious contradiction in the narrative arises when we consider the circumstances. The individual is taken — apparently with force — to this man’s house. She is unable to scream or call for help because she experiences a “freeze” reaction, in response to what can only be described, from her account, as kidnapping.

However, when she is about to be raped, and the individual is unable to physically perform, she experiences no freeze reaction at all. In this scenario, where she is allegedly directly at the mercy of a man, in a situation that directly corresponds to alleged past sexual abuse, she is able to unfreeze, put her clothes back on, and then run out of his house, physically unharmed. The assailant, a kidnapper and attempting-rapist, allows her to go. One wonders why someone who has a “freeze” reaction to being taken to someone’s house, experiences no “freeze” reaction during the act of rape, and further, is permitted by someone who has just kidnapped her to run out of the house unharmed, after getting fully dressed. There is some potential incongruity to these events.

Thus, we have an individual who does not present sufficient evidence to establish rape, admits that she initiated sending lewd messages and responded with lewd messages, to someone who messaged her in a lewd manner, and finally, has incongruities in a narrative event of an attempted rape. Further, despite alleging many years of serial rape on a weekly basis, the best example she can provide is of an attempted rape which has clear inconsistencies.

Is this the kind of evidence that establishes rape? How can one ascertain the truth of an accusation when the accuser herself admits to initiating conversations of a sexual nature? We of course do not know how many such conversations she attempted to start, and the responses to them.

This is, of course, not a court of law. We are not in a position to judge Miss N for there may be circumstances beyond what is narrated in the call. However, we are merely seeking to understand, from the leaked audio call which Miss N herself consented to making public, the reasons behind the Khalifa’s position that the evidence she was presenting, lacked strength.

Character of Miss N

This is made all the more damning when we consider a recent published testimony by someone who claims to have known her for a long time. We cannot establish the veracity of the claims therein. However, since the entire case is based on Miss N’s testimony, which she admits generally does not establish her claims, there is no reason to exclude evidence on Miss N’s character on account of its anonymity. The testimony is coherent, and has the ring of authenticity, though the reader can decide whether they trust it or not. Let us call the author “X”. Describing Miss N’s character, X writes:

“N lied a lot to a lot of us quite a lot of the time. Mostly about money. But other things too like cheap gossip about everyone. When youve known someone that long you ignore a lot of their things but we all knew about the lies and exaggerations. But that was just N being N. I think she picked it up from her dad. We all of us overlooked a lot. She was from a broken home and N just has a way of patching things up with you again until the next set of lies. There were other weird things too. She is, at least was, randomly abusive to children. She would just hit them or torture them and then laugh about it and give them sweets. I never saw it, but she would sometimes laugh about the things that she would do the kids of her mums servants in Pakistan when she would go spend time with her. I would just try and change the subject. I should have called her out.”

About the allegations themselves, which caused mental trauma to X, and who believed Miss N out of a sense of “obligation of believing the victim”, X writes that slowly, slowly, the allegations themselves began to unravel:

“Something, somewhere along the line changed. The things she started saying became more threadbare. She even started making petty allegations against those supporting her. Stupid things. Then there were inconsistencies. The last time I spoke to her there were outright lies…When I began to question her about the other accusations and the things that didnt make sense or add up she got angry with me and blocked me. We havent spoken since. Quite a few of us are blocked now. But our doubts were and are real. I know that after a while even those of her family who believed her stopped believing and she bagan to say things about them. Her problems with the current caliph started when he began to doubt too.”

As can be seen, while the current Khalifa believed her in the beginning, like her own family members, he too began to recognise the inconsistencies in her claims. These inconsistencies also emerge in the leaked audio call, as we shall see.

A final important point to note, that X makes, is that she has a past behaviour of seeking to disrupt people’s lives:

“I know that there are so many other people she isnt talking about. People she has tried to entrap or marriages she has ruined. A couple of years ago she tried to coerce a very famous vlogger (AR) into marrying her. She cant deny that because I have the messages. He cant deny it either. Let them try. I know that when the vlogger freaked out and tried to back away she said quite a lot of stuff about him too. He is another one who needs to watch his back and so do all the women whose husbands are friends with her. I could take so many names.”

Thus, the evidence we have from the leaked audio call confirms such reports. The existence of sexual messages from Miss N to those she is accusing, would no doubt undermine her credibility as a victim severely. As the Khalifa has advised however, the Islamic position is to conceal indecent behaviour, even while speaking out on wrongs committed, and behave in a manner conducive to public morals.

Accusations Against the Khalifa Reviewed

The accusations against the Khalifa are of two types.

The first is made by Miss N, in the call itself. She accuses him of failing to initiate an investigation into her allegations made against her father of sexual abuse as a child. As noted earlier, since this is an ongoing police investigation, we have not reviewed any material related to these allegations.

The second is the allegation that has emerged since the audio was leaked, that the Khalifa encouraged her to drop the allegations against the community’s office holders in Pakistan, while acknowledging that she was raped.

Both of these accusations are false.

Did the Khalifa Fail to Initiate an Investigation?

Miss N’s accusation against the Khalifa was that she accused him of not conducting an investigation into her allegations against her father. On making this accusation, she received a forceful and clear rebuttal. He stated:

27:33 Huzur (Urdu): Bat ye hai maine us waqt us ko kaha ke tumhare pe ye ilzaamaat hain. Aur usne mujhe paighaam..(inaudible)…zubaani paigham uska agaya tha. Theek hai. Uske bad khat likha, aur khat ka jawab bhi agaya.
Huzur (English): The fact is, at that time I told him that these are the allegations made against you, and he sent me a message…(inaudible)…I received a verbal message from him, understood? Then I wrote to him and the response for that came as well.

As if interrogating the Khalifa, she pressed the matter:

27:47 Miss N (Urdu): Kub apne khat likha tha pahli dafa?
Miss N (English): When did you first write a letter (of investigation)?

The Khalifa’s reply was clear:

27:50 Huzur (Urdu): Pahli dafa tumne usi waqt hi jub tumne, jub mere ilm main aya tha to us waqt maine keh diyaa ke tumhare pe bare ghanaone ilzaam hain unki islaah karo.
Huzur (English): The first time was when you raised this. When it came to my knowledge at that time I said that there are horrific allegations against you, reform yourself.

She asserted that this did not constitute an investigation. He replied as follows:

28:03 Huzur (Urdu): Achha. Tumhari investigation tumhare mutabiq karni hai ya apne mutabiq kerna hai.
Huzur (English): I see, am I to conduct an investigation according to your ways or how I deem fit?

It seemed that Miss Nwas unwilling to accept that the Khalifa opened an investigation and alerted the accused of the accusations the very first time her accusations came before him.

Did the Khalifa Discourage Miss N from Pursuing the Allegations?

As regards the second accusation against the Khalifa, relating to her allegations made against office-holders of the community in Pakistan, the Khalifa, during the course of the call, both explained the general principles of how an investigation should be carried out, and also why she should not pursue the allegations, in his view, while providing her with the option to go against his advice. We will cover both, below.

The Principle

The first is the principle he outlines. Early in the conversation, he makes clear to her that she should seek justice for whatever crimes she believes were committed against her, only that she should do so in the correct and appropriate forum, not in the court of public opinion, where she would certainly suffer more than she would gain. He stated:

00:51 Huzur (Urdu): Bat ye hai ke Fahhaashi ko chupao. Iske ilawa bhi jo zulm huwe hain wo tum zulam zaahir ker sakti ho. Lekin baqaaida forum pe ja ker zaahir hona hota hai zulm. Hain? Jiske liye darkhuwast deni parti hai ke ye ye zulm mujh per huwa. Uska madawa kiya jae. Baqi ye Quran Hadeeth aur Anhazrat SAW ka jo amal tha…
Huzur (English): This is what it’s about: Conceal indecent conduct. Apart from that, whatever injustices have been committed, you can expose those. However, injustice is to be exposed on a proper forum. You have to make an application for that, stating that this or that wrong has been perpetrated against me. So it can be redressed. The rest, according to the Qur’an, Hadith and the Prophet‘s (sa) actions is that….”

As can be clearly seen, he advises her to seek justice, but through appropriate channels.

Khalifa Advises to Drop Allegations?

As regards her specific case however, he explains to her that she has not brought sufficient evidence to make her case convincing. Indeed, as we have seen, he argued that on the basis of her initiating sexual messages, her confused statement about being forced to someone’s house, and the lack of evidence she has presented for actual rape, he would be unable to conclude that sexual assault or rape had happened. On that basis, he advises her that she should be careful of making such accusations public, for rape could not be proven on the basis of the evidence she has presented, and the only outcome would therefore be that some people may consider her to have been a willing participant in Islamically impermissible acts, in addition to being open to being sued for libel. This would damage her own reputation and finances, and would not achieve the justice she sought.

To be clear, the Khalifa at no point stated that he did not believe her version of the accounts. He simply made the point that the evidence, from what she had presented, was lacking, and as such, he could not simply take action against people without reasonable evidence being presented. Whether the alleged events occurred or not, and whether they could be proven to the necessary standard for actions to be taken against them, are two separate things.

This is precisely the point he makes in a section of the call that has caused widespread controversy, having been mistranslated and misrepresented by forces hostile to the Khalifa. He stated:

07:42 Huzur (Urdu): Lekin meri nasihat tumhe yehi hai. Main bahaisiyat nigran tumhe nasihat ker sakta hu. Aur meri nasihat tumhe yehi hai ke tumhari izzat bhi isi main hai ke ub isko choro moamle ko. Aur ainda se ager koi huwa bhi kuch tha. Mujhe nahi pata ke huwa bhi ke nahi. Ager huwa bhi tha to wo log ub itne muhtaat hogae hain ke toba taaib ker li hogi.
Huzur (English): But this is my advice to you. I can advise you as your supervisor. My advice to you — and this is what will safeguard your dignity as well — is that you should now leave this matter. And in the future, even if something did happen — and I’m not aware if anything did in fact happen, but even if something did happen, those people have become so cautious now that they will have to have repented.

It should be noted here what he did not say. He did not say, as utterly mistranslated by his detractors, both on Reddit and on other forums of non-Ahmadi Muslims, such as on the 5PillarsUK website, run by extremist, Dilly Hussain, that “My advice to you will be that you drop this case, even if the rape happened, and I don’t know if it happened or not. Even if it has, I am sure those involved would have asked for forgiveness from Allah already.” This is an incorrect and slanderous translation. The correct translation, with the original Urdu, is provided above. The mistranslations involve:

1. Insertion of the word “rape” and;
2. Removal the words “Aur ainda se” — “And in the future”. This is an egregious act, in order to slander the Khalifa.

The Khalifa here was not saying that the case should be dropped because the accused would have sought forgiveness from God, as if, by God forgiving them, she was no longer due justice. He was simply stating that in the future, it would be unlikely the accused individuals would act in a similar way (if indeed they are guilty, of which the Khalifa expresses his scepticism) since they have become so fearful and cautious from these accusations (mohtaat hogae) that they will have repented of their past behaviour. In other words, they will be afraid of acting in that way with her ever again. In other words, their behaviour would have to have changed, and she would be safe from future crimes.

The mistranslated passages give the impression that he felt that their asking forgiveness from God was sufficient expiation of crimes of rape of the past. This is absolutely not the point being made. The point being made is that she should no longer be afraid of them, because it is likely they will have had to change their behaviour and so in the future, she can be assured of her safety. His concern is not for potential rapists, but his concern is for her.

The overarching point being made is that, even if she is a victim of the crimes she alleges, she does not have the evidence to prove it, and given that the alleged perpetrators will be fearful in light of her accusations, she will be safe from their behaviour from now on. The Khalifa is seeking to comfort her, so as to spare her the indignity of having her character dragged through the mud of public opinion, while knowing that she would ultimately lose her case on the basis of a lack of evidence. Having seen the contradictory and poor evidence she had, he knew that it would only damage her reputation and would not bring her the justice she sought.

Unfortunately, she failed to heed his words, choosing instead to enter the court of public opinion by flagrantly violating the necessity to remain silent so as to avoid jeopardising an ongoing police investigation, and teaming up with a journalist who has flagrantly violated the basics of reporting on an ongoing investigation, even going so far as tweeting the photos of individuals who are not even mentioned in the police investigation.

In doing so, she has accelerated the likely disintegration of her legal case, demonstrating how little, it seems, she was concerned with obtaining “justice” in the first place, and how much more she was interested in obtaining recognition.

Are Four Witnesses Required to Prove Rape in Islam?

Much of the controversy surrounding these alleged claims relate to the Khalifa’s statement that the burden of proof he required from her was that she should produce four witnesses to testify that she had been raped. When Miss N argues on the call that this is the case only for adultery, the Khalifa is insistent that four witnesses are required for rape also.

The Khalifa was, as to be expected, absolutely correct in application of Islamic theology. To understand why, we need to consider the three scenarios in which accusations of sexual abuse can broadly occur.

Evidence of Rape: Three Scenarios

There are three scenarios that emerge in relation to the Shar’i position on evidence required to prosecute an individual for rape.

Scenario 1: Immediate Evidence of Rape or Sexual Assault

The first situation is one in which an individual who has been raped, presents themselves at the time of the attack, and presents their condition and person as evidence of the crime committed against them. The best known example of this is of the Prophet Joseph(as):

In the narrative of the Prophet Yusuf (as) we find that the lady of the house in which he was a servant, seeks to seduce him against his will. He refuses her advances, and seeks to flee from the house. Both he and Zulaikha, the Quran tells us, run to the door, he to escape, and she to bar his way. He reaches there first, and she tears his shirt from behind, as he opens the door. There before him stands her husband. When he questions the servants who had witnessed the entire incident, so as to ascertain whether she was the guilty one in seeking him or he was the guilty one in seeking her, they give the following words of wisdom, preserved in the Quran as guidance for all who are seeking clarification as regards similar accusations:

قَالَ ہِیَ رَاوَدَتۡنِیۡ عَنۡ نَّفۡسِیۡ وَ شَہِدَ شَاہِدٌ مِّنۡ اَہۡلِہَا ۚ اِنۡ کَانَ قَمِیۡصُہٗ قُدَّ مِنۡ قُبُلٍ فَصَدَقَتۡ وَ ہُوَ مِنَ الۡکٰذِبِیۡنَ

وَ اِنۡ کَانَ قَمِیۡصُہٗ قُدَّ مِنۡ دُبُرٍ فَکَذَبَتۡ وَ ہُوَ مِنَ الصّٰدِقِیۡنَ

“Joseph said, ‘She it was who sought to seduce me against my will.’ And a witness of her household bore witness saying, ‘If his shirt is torn from the front, then she has spoken the truth and he is a liar; But if his shirt is rent at the back then she has lied and he speaks truth.”

(Quran 12:27–28)

In this incident, the evidence on his person served as guidance to the authority in that situation, of who was the guilty party in sexual assault.

In a similar vein, when a woman of Medina was raped in the street, and a group of men found her after the event, she went to the Prophet Muhammad(sa) who asked her to identify her attacker. The man she identified was subsequently sentenced to death (Tirmidhi 1454). We know in this case that four witnesses of the rape were not called for, because the person she first identified as the rapist, was actually innocent. Only as he was being prepared for execution did the actual rapist come forward and admit his crime, being unwilling to watch an innocent man die for his crime. This is strong evidence that witnesses were not called, since it would have been highly unlikely that the wrong individual would have been apprehended.

Thus, in cases where the events are immediately presented, with the evidence still present, the Islamic sharia does not require four witnesses to the event of rape, for the fact that it occurred is already established by the condition of the victim.

Scenario 2: Historical Rape Allegations

In the case of historical rape allegations, the evidence that would have served to illuminate the truth of the situation, is lost. If the woman struggled and her clothes were torn during the assault, or she was physically beaten, for example, the marks of her clothes and her skin would have healed by the time the allegations are made.

In such a scenario, all that is left is the allegation itself. If the perpetrator denies the allegation, then it becomes a case of “her word against his”. Since every court of law operates on the basis of the presumption of innocence and the necessity to establish a crime beyond reasonable doubt, meeting the threshold for conviction becomes immensely difficult for historical sexual abuse allegations.

For this reason, the Islamic position in the Shariah has classically been to only recognise historical sexual abuse allegations that are claimed to have occurred in public, rather than private. The boundary between “private” and “public” is whether four individuals were witness to the event. If four cannot be produced, it is deemed to have occurred in private, not public, and if four individuals can be provided, then the event is deemed to have occurred in public.

This understanding, that four witnesses are required when accusations are made on their own, without evidence, is supported by the Quranic verse on the matter directly:

وَ الَّذِیۡنَ یَرۡمُوۡنَ الۡمُحۡصَنٰتِ ثُمَّ لَمۡ یَاۡتُوۡا بِاَرۡبَعَۃِ شُہَدَآءَ فَاجۡلِدُوۡہُمۡ ثَمٰنِیۡنَ جَلۡدَۃً وَّ لَا تَقۡبَلُوۡا لَہُمۡ شَہَادَۃً اَبَدًا ۚ وَ اُولٰٓئِکَ ہُمُ الۡفٰسِقُوۡنَ ۙ

And those who accuse chaste women but bring not four witnesses — flog them with eighty stripes, and do not admit their evidence ever after, for it is they that are the transgressors.

(Quran 24:5)

The Arabic word yarmuna here means “to throw” or in this context, “to accuse”. As in many situations, the Quran gives the basic principle that is required in any given situation, and leaves the details to the body of believers to understand and apply. This situation, whereby one requires four witnesses, is not in relation to a person who brings forward evidence. Rather, it is in relation to someone who only makes an accusation. That is the import and meaning of the verse and the reason why the word yarmuna is used, on its own. This verse establishes the principle that an accusation on its own, without material evidence, requires four witnesses, or in other words, must have occurred in public.

The verse implies an accusation of adultery or fornication, and speaks of accusations against women only, specifically, so why is this verse also applied to accusations of rape and against men also? To answer the first point, this verse doesn’t specify the nature of the crime. It only refers to an accusation made on its own. Under the jurisprudential process of qiyasor analogy, this verse is applied to other crimes of a sexual nature. As for the second point, the verse is also applied to men as the victims of accusations too, for the same reason that injunctions in the Quran addressing men also apply to women. The Quran, when giving injunctions, addresses that gender that is most likely to be in that situation, but the principle itself applies to both genders, unless explicitly denied for one gender or the other. Since women are more likely to be in situations where they are accused of improper sexual behaviour, often by men, the Quran frames its injunction in this verse with women named as the primary victims of unsubstantiated allegaitons.

Of note, the application of qiyas or analogy to apply this verse to unsubstantiated accusations in respect of rape, as well as adultery or fornication, is common to the Hanafi, Maliki and Shafi’i schools of Islamic jurisprudence, at least. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Fiqh is based on the Hanafi understanding. As such, the Khalifa was on absolutely correct theological grounds.

The Quranic requirement for “four witnesses” is not a statement that historical rape allegations that relate to crimes committed in private aren’t true. It is simply a statement that the judges are unable to meet the burden of evidence required for conviction when all that remains are allegations, and nothing else. Thus, the courts are unable to decide upon the matter since there is not enough evidence either way. In such situations, the presumption of innocence and burden of proof being to establish beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused, necessitates that without sufficient evidence, the individual not be convicted. Recall that the punishment for rape classically given by Islamic societies and by the Holy Prophet(sa) of Islam is the death penalty. Subjecting an individual to the death penalty on little besides a subjective comparison of the statements of the accused and the accuser, would be unfair, and lead to a large number of individuals wrongly convicted and punished.

Again, to emphasise, this does not mean that such allegations relating to sexual abuse occurring in private are all false. What is true or false and what is provable in court or not, are two entirely separate matters. Without evidence, prosecutions cannot be made. Indeed, this reality has universal application. It is precisely because of the lack of evidence in cases that in British courts that only 1.6% of rape accusations ever even lead to an individual being charged with a crime. Even fewer are subsequently prosecuted. According to the Guardian in 2019–20, of 55,130 accusations of rape, only 2,102 were charged (3.8%) and only 1,439 cases reached prosecution (2.6%). These include all cases, including those where evidence was preserved, and not simply historical allegations. The reason for these low numbers is because of a failure to provide sufficient evidence so as to establish beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused.

This is precisely the point made by well known Canadian lawyer Marie Henein. In an interview with CBC’s Peter Mansbridge, she argues a similar point regarding the presumption of innocence and the necessity to prove crimes beyond reasonable doubt in relation to allegations of sexual crimes. She states:

Hashtag “I believe” is not a legal principle; nor should it ever be. Because you can’t believe based on who they are (or) the nature of the crime. And we would never want that. And historically when that has happened, it has never been to the benefit of the most disadvantaged or the most marginalised.

Scenario 3: Multiple Historical Rape Allegations

One application in which the issue of “four witnesses” could be fulfilled, would be in a case where multiple accusers accuse the same individual of the same crime, committed against each of them in private, individually. The basis of this is that the verse of the Quran does not specify that the witnesses must have witnessed the same event. This was however, the ruling by the fuqahaa of the past.

In such a case, from an Islamic position, there would be the possibility of such accusations then being assessed in trial for consistency and to ensure that collusion between the accusers has not occurred. Indeed, even when multiple accusations are made against an individual, when it comes to historical allegations, the burden of proof can still be difficult to meet. This was, for example, the case with Alex Salmond, former first minister of the Scottish parliament, who was acquitted of 12 charges relating to sexual crimes, made by nine female accusers.

While this is a relatively rare occurrence, a more common occurrence when such investigations are opened as a result of multiple accusations from multiple individuals, is prosecution. This was seen in the case of Larry Nassar, the infamous paedophile gymnast coach, against whom hundreds of individual women came forward to claim he had sexually molested them as young girls. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Four witnesses being required, in such a case, could theoretically be understood as relating to four separate accusations of the same behaviour, from independent, reliable individuals, whose testimonies are credible, consistent and not found to be in collusion with one another. Why? Because the same principle applies as in the case of four witnesses testifying to a single incident; each individual is adding to the picture of an individual’s behaviour or character.

This is not to say that four individuals testifying to four separate events is the same as four individuals witnessing one event. They are two separate things. However, as the Quran does not specify that the witnesses must bear testimony to the same event, leaving the matter open, it is a theoretical possibility that the Quran permits this application of its teaching.

Conclusion

These are the three scenarios in which rape or sexual abuse allegations occur and a summary of the broad principles the Islamic Sharia applies in respect of them.

When we look at the allegations of Miss N, they relate to the second category: historical sexual abuse allegations, in this case, against multiple individuals. Yet material evidence which is present immediately after an attack, is either lacking or simply not present. Consequently, the Khalifa, as per Islamic Shariah, asked for the evidence that these events occurred in view of the public, by asking for four witnesses. As the Islamic Shariah does not consider situations of “he said — she said” accusations of crimes committed in private and without evidence, the question of charging or punishing individuals does not arise.

Is the Khalifa Infallible?

Some Ahmadis who do not have a sufficient understanding of Islam argue that the Khalifa is not infallible and as such, it should not be surprising if he makes mistakes from time to time. They do not see a problem therefore with openly disagreeing with the Khalifa and promoting alternative views on matters that the Khalifa has pronounced. They do not see their bai’at as incompatible with listing the “mistakes” of the Khalifa — as they see them. They argue that since Islam teaches that only God is free from weakness, it is not surprising that the Khalifa may also make mistakes. So what is the problem with highlighting them, they ask?

Can the Khalifa Make a Mistake?

It is true that only Allah is perfect, but it should be remembered that if the Khalifa makes a “mistake” either in understanding or the application of Islam, the question is: a “mistake” in whose eyes? Every person who makes a judgement can only do so from their own perspective. No one can see a matter from the perspective of God. If critics of a Khalifa argue that the Khalifa can make mistakes, they should remember that they themselves can make mistakes too, and that given that God has only verified the righteousness of the Khalifa, and not theirs, it is many times more likely that in a matter of a difference of opinion between the Khalifa and one who has taken his bai’at, it is the Khalifa who is in the right and the critic who is in the wrong.

Let us say, however, that a Khalifa has made an error of understanding or application of Islam, and that one who has taken the bai’at has a difference of view, which is correct, in God’s eyes. After writing to the Khalifa with his or her alternative view, with reasoning and in a polite, respectful fashion, the Khalifa still disagrees with the critic. What next? For the critic, there is only one way forward: obedience, and submission of one’s own view to that of the Khalifa’s. Why? The first reason is as given above: the individual must realise that it is much more likely they are themselves in the wrong, rather than God’s chosen one being in the wrong. Secondly, even if they are right, in God’s eyes, it is not the task of those who have taken the bai’at to correct the Khalifa; it is Allah’s task to correct the Khalifa, for surely it is He who has appointed the Khalifa and He is the Guardian over them.

One way in which Allah protects the Khulafa from errors is either through direct revelation, or Allah may ensure that any matters that appear to be errors, ultimately result in a blessing for the Jama’at and are to the good of the Jama’at in the end-analysis. This is referred to by the second Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community as “minor sanctity” in comparison to the protection enjoyed by God’s prophets, known as “major sanctity”, whereby they are corrected on every matter, big and small, explicitly. Thus, he writes:

“It is possible that the Khalifah of the time makes a mistake in personal matters. But in such matters on which depends the physical and spiritual progress, even if he commits an error, Allah the Almighty safeguards His Jama‘at and somehow makes him aware of the error. In the terminology of sages, it is called ‘lesser sanctity’. That means, the Prophets enjoy a ‘greater sanctity’ but the Khulafa’ have ‘lesser sanctity’ and Allah the Almighty does not permit any such major mistakes by them that may cause disaster for the Jama‘at. Their decisions may have partial and minor mistakes, but in the end, the result will be victory for Islam and defeat for its enemies. Thus, because the Khulafa’ enjoy ‘lesser sanctity’, their policy will emanate from Allah’s. While it is true that they will be the one speaking, their tongues will be in motion, their hands will move, their minds will work, yet behind all of this will be the hand of Allah. They can make minor errors in finer details. Sometimes their advisors can give them wrong advice. But crossing these intermediary obstacles, they will be the one who will be victorious. And when all the links are put together, the resulting chain will be good and it will be so strong that no power will be able to break it.”

(Tafsir-e-Kabir, Hadrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad (ra), vol. 6, pp. 376–377)

The Meaning of “Bai’at” and “Ma’ruf” Explained

Bai’at means to self yourself and thereby purchase something in return. What is that something? It is God’s pleasure, also known as Paradise. The one who sells himself fully through obedience is the one who receives God Himself in return, through the blessing of his spiritual preceptor:

اِنَّ اللّٰہَ اشۡتَرٰی مِنَ الۡمُؤۡمِنِیۡنَ اَنۡفُسَہُمۡ وَ اَمۡوَالَہُمۡ بِاَنَّ لَہُمُ الۡجَنَّۃَ ؕ یُقَاتِلُوۡنَ فِیۡ سَبِیۡلِ اللّٰہِ فَیَقۡتُلُوۡنَ وَ یُقۡتَلُوۡنَ ۟ وَعۡدًا عَلَیۡہِ حَقًّا فِی التَّوۡرٰٮۃِ وَ الۡاِنۡجِیۡلِ وَ الۡقُرۡاٰنِ ؕ وَ مَنۡ اَوۡفٰی بِعَہۡدِہٖ مِنَ اللّٰہِ فَاسۡتَبۡشِرُوۡا بِبَیۡعِکُمُ الَّذِیۡ بَایَعۡتُمۡ بِہٖ ؕ وَ ذٰلِکَ ہُوَ الۡفَوۡزُ الۡعَظِیۡمُ

Allah has purchased of the believers their persons and their belongings in return for the promise that they shall have Paradise, for they fight in the cause of Allah and they slay the enemy or are themselves slain. This is a promise that He has made incumbent upon Himself as set out in the Torah, and the Gospel and the Quran; and who is more faithful to his promise than Allah? Rejoice, then, in the bargain that you have made with Him; that indeed is the supreme triumph.

(Quran 9:111)

The one who has sold himself no longer has any right to deny the instruction of the one he follows. If he withdraws his obedience, then it means that he never, in reality, did the bai’at with the true sincerity it required. And indeed, obedience at a time of disagreement is when obedience has meaning and value. To obey a Khalifa when one is in complete agreement with them anyway, cannot be regarded as “obedience” in the complete sense of the term.

What is “Ma’ruf”?

The part of the Ten Conditions of Bai’at referring to obedience in all things “Ma’ruf” springs naturally from the very definition of “Bai’at”. The word “Ma’ruf” or variations of it occur 34 times in the Quran. According to Lane’s Arabic dictionary, the word means “that which is known and accepted as good by all parties”.

When used in the context of a prophet or Khalifa and his followers, it refers to the Prophet or Khalifa taking or drawing his authority from the Islamic sharia, which is the ma’ruf foundation on the basis of which the follower takes the bai’at of the spiritual master. Thus, the meaning of ma’ruf is not that you should be pleased with every decision, or that every decision should agree with your understanding of Islam. Writing about the meaning of “enjoining good”, the Promised Messiah’sas description of the term “ma’ruf” clearly shows that in the context of bai’at to a prophet or khalifa, “ma’ruf” is a description of their decisions, rather than a criterion by which they are to be judged against:

“This Prophet directs you in matters that are not opposed to sane reason. And he prohibits you from things that common sense also prohibits you from. And he makes pure things lawful and impure things unlawful. And he removes the burdens from the nations that they were buried under. And he frees them from shackles that were preventing their necks from being straightened. Therefore, these people who will believe in him and will strengthen him by joining him and will help him and will follow the light that has been brought down with him, they will escape the hardships of this world and the hereafter.”

(Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah, vol. 5, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 21, p. 420)

If you think a Khalifa is giving a decision against the sharia in a clear manner, then there are only two ways to rationalise that belief:

1. The Khalifa is acting knowingly against the sharia
2. The Khalifa is acting unknowingly against the sharia.

To believe the first, you would first have to exit the bai’at of the Khalifa, since a Khalifa does not persist is knowingly going against any element of the Sharia, big or small. If you believe this to be the case, then it automatically invalidates one’s bai’at.

As for the second, even if one holds a difference of opinion, obedience is necessary. One may of course write or speak to the Khalifa humbly and seek clarification, offering one’s alternative perspective, while remaining obedient to his instruction. However obedience is required from the beginning, regardless of whether you have obtained clarification or not. Disobedience at any point necessitates that you have given precedence to your understanding of the sharia over his, despite claiming to be obedient to him, which constitutes a violation of one’s bai’at. Note that matters of subtle interpretation or theological emphasis can differ person to person, however propagation of a view in the Jama’at, as opposed to privately holding such a view, which is known to contradict a clear position of the Khalifa e Waqt, is similarly an act of disobedience.

Thus, complete obedience is the simple hallmark of an Ahmadi. Any other position implicitly or explicitly requires you to disbelieve in Khilafat itself.

Many have objected to the Khalifa’s understanding of the necessary burden of proof in the case of historical rape allegations, according to the Sharia. They have argued that four witnesses are not necessary in rape cases. Miss N herself objects to his requirement that she should bring necessary witnesses forward with such an allegation, having not presented any evidence at the time of the alleged crimes. This is a good example of how to understand the term “ma’ruf”. For the Khalifa’s decision to be “ma’ruf” the question is not whether you think that the Khalifa made the correct Islamic decision. The question is only whether the Khalifa has made his decision known. Whatever decision he has made is “ma’ruf” since the term is a description of his decisions, not a criterion by which he is to be judged by those in the position of spiritual followers.

Conclusion

In summary therefore, the Khalifa is not infallible, but Allah who appoints the Khalifa and who is their Guardian, is infallible. And He it is who guides them, protects them from error, and bestows blessing upon their decisions. Those who follow the Khalifa neither have the responsibility nor the capability to act as a Guardian over the Khalifa or his decisions — that is the position of God Himself. Obedience in all things ma’ruf refers not to the decisions being “ma’ruf” in the eyes of the followers, but refers to a description of the Khalifa’s decisions.

Final Thoughts

Every divine community passes through trials. This, like others, will be to the benefit of the Jama’at. For those in the Jama’at who were of weak faith, it will help illuminate certain issues they may not have understood. This is the purpose of these events. Moreover, through such events, we witness signs of the truth of the Jama’at.

We have witnessed, for example, the clear basis on which the Khalifa did not find the evidence presented by Miss N credible. We have shown how he highlighted that she participated in and initiated sending lewd messages to individuals she had accused of rape, and further, how none of the evidence itself was about rape at all. Moreover, we have seen that the recounted narrative by Miss N of attempted rape has many factors that make it quite implausible.

We have also reviewed whether the Khalifa was correct in understanding and applying Islamic teachings, and requiring Miss N to present witnesses and shown that he was correct. We have also highlighted how he opened an investigation, pursued it, and encouraged her to seek justice through appropriate channels. We have also debunked the slanderous lie that he, accepting she had suffered rape (which he never did, given the lack of evidence) told her to nevertheless drop her accusations. We have shown that the Anti-Ahmadi trolls on forums such as Reddit or 5PillarsUK have deliberately mistranslated the passage, leaving out a whole phrase, and inserting words into his statement.

For myself, there has been a great sign in this event, and I return to it, as I opened this article with it. That is, that through forty five minutes of receiving abuse, the Khalifa bore it with patience, kindness, and gentleness. He kept asking throughout the call, “do you have anything else to say? Do you have anything else?” In response to her ill-intentioned prayers, he even gives his “ameen”:

33:38 Huzur (Urdu): Main tumhe…ek nek mashwara de raha hu.
Huzur (English): I’m giving you well-intentioned advice

Miss N (Urdu): Phir apki naiki pe Allah reham kare ager ye naiki hai. Han.
Miss N (English): If that’s the case then may God have mercy on such “good intentions” if that’s what it really is. Yes.

Huzur (Urdu): Achha. Is per bhi main Ameen kehta hu.
Huzur (English): Okay. For this too I say “ameen”.

In this we saw such greatness as stands head and shoulders above any other leader. For it is easy to make tall claims about a religious leader’s public piety. But how many can say that in a moment of abuse, one remains firm upon the principle of kindness and gentleness?

This incident reminds one of the following incident in the life of the Promised Messiah (as):

“On one occasion, an Indian who took great pride in his own scholarship and portrayed himself as having seen the world and being very well informed and experienced, flung open the door of discussion with His Holiness in a very disrespectful manner. After a brief discussion, he repeated numerous times the comment that you are a liar in your claim and I have seen many charlatans like you; I have experience with many others like you. In short, this was the uncouth manner in which he spoke. However, His Holiness did not so much as show even the slightest facial expression indicating displeasure and listened to the man’s comments very calmly and then spoke in a very tender manner.”

(Life & Character of Hadhrat Masih e Maud,as by Maulvi Abdul Karim (ra)).

This is true greatness. In privately recording the call and permitting it to be leaked, Miss N revealed her own moral bankruptcy, while revealing the moral fortitude and greatness of Hazrat Khalifat’ul Masih V, may Allah be his helper.

We end with the following quote of the blessed words of the Khalifa from his sermon of the 26th November, 2010:

“Hudhur said our so-called supporters should look after themselves rather than provoke us about the level of our steadfastness. The Promised Messiah (on whom be peace) did not say the difficult times will be over soon. Rather, a hundred odd years ago he wrote that three centuries will elapse before people will finally realise that the one who was promised to come has indeed come. With God’s grace, his Community has now reached 198 countries of the world and is gaining strength by the day. It is our progress that has unsettled the enemy and the opposition has increased. The evergreen tree planted by the Promised Messiah (on whom be peace) is being irrigated by steadfastness and prayers and InshaAllah will continue to blossom. Any branch of this tree that does not seek beneficence from it will be a dry branch and will be cut off. In these times of increased hostility each Ahmadi should seek patience and help from God more than ever and continue to be a part of the blossoming tree. May God enable us all to do so.”

(Friday Sermon 26th November, 2010)