Tafheem
Al Masyal
Takbeer TV, 17 October 2010 to 26 March 2011
Takbeer TV broadcasts religious and general entertainment
content mainly in Urdu (as spoken by South Asian Muslims), and
is available on cable and satellite platforms.
Tafheem al Masyal is a religious discussion programme, during
which viewers are invited to call in and put their questions on
Islamic religious matters, to a presenter and guest presenter in
the studio.
Ofcom received 267 complaints about five editions of Tafheem
Al Masyal. We noted that complainants were from the Ahmadiyya
religious community. This is a comparatively small Islamic
movement founded by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani that grew out of
mainstream Islam in the nineteenth century, whose followers
believe themselves to be true Muslims. Followers of Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad are known as Ahmadis or Qadianis or Ahmadiyya.
Complainants considered that the programmes variously: consisted
of abusive content about Ahmadis and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad; or
incited hatred and violence towards the Ahmadiyya community.
Ofcom highlighted many examples of abusive comments
including:
A presenter: In our last
programme, a Qadiani friend had asked some questions. Though
these questions were not related to the nonsense spoken by
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, his lies, his cunning and
deceit, and his false claim to prophet hood, still I would
like to answer these questions;
A presenter: We have been
telling about [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad?s] lies in the past but
today we will focus specially on these. We will tell you
about his lies.
A presenter: As to what is the
punishment of apostasy in Ahmadis, we can discuss it with
them only if we have a link with them. Among Muslims, the
penalty for apostasy is death. An apostate deserves to be
killed but the right to implement this penalty is the
prerogative of an Islamic government. An individual or a
party does not have this prerogative. An Islamic court,
Islamic government, a Qazi 6 can implement this penalty or
make a decision about it.
Ofcom considered rules of their programme code:
- 3.1: Material likely to
encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to
disorder must not be included in television or radio
services.
- 4.2: The religious beliefs of
those belonging to a particular religion or religious
denomination must not be subject to abusive treatment.
Takbeer TV said that We deeply regret any offence caused
to any of our viewers and unreservedly apologise for the same.
It also outlined a number of steps it had taken in response to
the complaints: relevant channel staff had been severely
reprimanded and formally disciplined and given updated
training on the Code; additional training was being given to all
presenters and producers on the Code and their obligations under
it; and the channel had appointed a bi-lingual Quality
Controller…who will take responsibility to oversee programme
quality and output to prevent any such incidences occurring
again.
Takbeer TV added: Tafheem Al Masyal had been discontinued
indefinitely since early April 2011; the lead presenter of
the programme had been suspended and is no longer appearing
on our Channel; and We do not intend to deal with any of
the specific issues raised [i.e. relating to the Ahmadiyya
community] that have caused controversy in respect of these
complaints in any future programmes and have advised our
presenters to avoid the same. The broadcaster added that
through the various steps it had taken, it was confident that
we will not receive any future complaints of this nature.
Ofcom Decision: Breach of Rule 4.2
In considering Rule 3.1 we are required to address the
likelihood of the commission of a crime, in this case a hate
crime, against an Ahmadi follower. We recognised that
overarching tone of almost all of the various comments
identified above were clearly critical of the Ahmadiyya
community, its beliefs and its founder. However, Ofcom believed
that these criticisms, in themselves would not, on a reasonable
view, have been likely to: encourage or incite the commission of
a crime against any existing or named group (e.g. harm or
prejudice against members of the Ahmadiyya community) or an
attempt to lead viewers to disorder; or clearly advocate any
potentially criminal action.
Notwithstanding the above, we did consider whether the
following statement by a presenter during the 29 January
programme, could be construed as a form of incitement:
As to what is the punishment of
apostasy in Ahmadis, we can discuss it with them only if we
have a link with them. Among Muslims, the penalty for
apostasy is death. An apostate deserves to be killed but the
right to implement this penalty is the prerogative of an
Islamic government. An individual or a party does not have
this prerogative. An Islamic court, Islamic government, a
Qazi can implement this penalty or make a decision about it.
We considered this statement to have been potentially
offensive. However, we considered that the speaker in this case
made clear his belief that only an Islamic court, Islamic
Government or Islamic judge (Qazi) would have the ability
to determine whether someone was an apostate, and not
individuals. He also did not openly say that members of the
Ahmadiyya community should be subject to the death penalty, but
rather was setting out his view about the potential treatment of
apostates by the appropriate Islamic authorities. Given this
context, we considered that this particular individual was not
advocating that, or inciting, private individuals to kill
apostates, but rather was expressing his view that the death
penalty could be an appropriate sanction for apostasy to be
carried out by the appropriate governmental or judicial
institutions.
Given the above, we considered the programmes were not in
breach of Rule 3.1 of the Code.
When considering abusive treatment in religious
programmes under Rule 4.2, we considered that during the
programmes, there were a number of statements made by the
presenters and by members of the audience that could be classed
as being derogatory and abusive references specifically about
the Ahmadiyya community and its founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
Examples of these references are laid out in the Introduction.
In particular, Ofcom noted that during the programmes,
members of the Ahmadiyya community were variously labelled as:
stupid; non-believers; illiterate; and
accursed liars. We also noted that many statements were made
that were highly critical and derogatory of the Ahmadi founder,
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Given the above, it was Ofcom's view that
the use of such terms and references when taken together
amounted to abusive treatment of the religious views and
beliefs of members of the Ahmadiyya community.
Ofcom considers that the broadcaster was clearly and
seriously in breach of Rule 4.2.
Ofcom therefore assessed whether to consider the Licensee for
a statutory sanction but we decided on balance not to do so.
This decision had regard to all the relevant circumstances of
this case, but principally the immediate acknowledgement that
the complaints were justified and the various measures the
Licensee took to further improve compliance. The Licensee is put
on notice however that any further breaches of the Code in this
area will lead to Ofcom considering a statutory sanction.
