MohammedAmin.com
Serious writing for
serious readers

Search this site

Custom Search

"The Times" newspaper has historically been the newspaper of record in the UK.

From the age of 40 my main newspaper has been "The Financial Times". Once I became a partner I received a copy every day paid for by Price Waterhouse. When I retired, I began an electronic Financial Times subscription.

Despite that, I have always had a high opinion of The Times. After retiring, I had an electronic subscription for many years, but discontinued it only for the reason that I I felt inundated by subscribing to far too many newspapers. (For my current reading, see "Pay for your news".)

However a recent experience led me to conclude that The Times's editorial standards have declined significantly.

What happened?

On 20 December 2024, TalkTV asked me for an interview about the previous day’s article in “The Times” by Dominic Kennedy “High Court fatwa ruling raises alarm over sharia courts in UK: A sharia council’s religious ruling influenced a judge’s decision in a life-or-death case with critics saying this undermined secular democracy.” (£) The eventual interview with Alex Phillips is embedded lower down on this page.

To prepare, I obviously needed to read the article. Since I cancelled my Times subscription several years ago, TalkTV emailed me a PDF copy of the full article.

The opening paragraph read:

“A British sharia council was given credibility by the High Court when a judge used one of its fatwas to decide a case.”

The article proceeded to give Dominic Kennedy’s summary of the High Court judgment. However, my career as a tax adviser drummed into me the importance of always reading the original source. Accordingly, I tracked down the full text of the linked 70-page High Court judgment.

When I saw the date of the judgment., I was stunned. The case was decided in 2019, but The Times was reporting it as if it was yesterday’s news.

Nowhere in his 823-word article does Dominic Kennedy say when the case took place, presumably because that would not suit his objectives. The nearest he gets is to say that the fatwa was handed down in 2019, but that could be perfectly true even for a December 2024 High Court decision.

Most of the judgment.’s 70 pages are devoted to summarising the very sad circumstances of the terribly ill child and the related legal issues. The judge uses the word “fatwa” only eight times, and it is clear that the fatwa played no part in his decision.

This is best illustrated by paragraph 169, reproduced in full below.

169 Turning to the principle of the sanctity of life, the parents have, understandably, placed emphasis on the contents of the fatwa secured from the Muslim Council of Europe. Within the context of these proceedings however, the fatwa is simply a valuable restatement of the sanctity of life, a sanctity recognised by all the great religions and also by those who view life through a secular or scientific prism. The sanctity of life is a fundamental, indeed sacred, principle from which there flows a strong presumption in favour of a course of action that will prolong life. Within this context, Tafida’s life has inherent value. It is also of value to Tafida herself, it is precious to her parents, sibling and family and even now it adds, in whatever small and incomplete way, to the body of collective human experience. Tafida is profoundly disabled but a life of disability is of equal value to all other lives.

Overall, I was shocked by this article.

My conclusion is that the journalist wanted to scare his readers by implying that this judgment. had just been handed down (rather than being given five years previously) and that the decision represented a major change in English law, which it was not.

The article plays to a narrative that we often see from one part of the political spectrum. Namely that “Muslims are taking over” or “Muslims are about to impose Shariah law on Britain.”

At one time, I would never have expected to see The Times publishing such material, just as I would never expect to see it today in any newspaper which takes accurate reporting seriously.

Sadly, my conclusion is that The Times can no longer be regarded as a quality newspaper.

Video of my TalkTV appearance

Hacked Off article

A little while after my TalkTV appearance, I was contacted by "Hacked Off", the "Campaign for a free + accountable press" which was formed after the phone hacking scandal.

They asked if I could contribute something for their website. I did, and they published a piece "The Times incorrectly claims a Fatwa ruling influenced a court's decision in a historic case" written by themselves but containing some quotes from me.