00759-24 Islamic Student Associations of Britian v thetimes.co.uk

Summary of Complaint

1. Islamic Student Associations of Britain (ISAB) complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that thetimes.co.uk breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Charity with links to Iran investigated over ‘antisemitic chants’”, published on 14 February 2024.

2. The article reported on the opening of a Charity Commission investigation into an allegation that anti-Semitic chanting had been heard at an event in 2022. It opened by reporting:

“A foundation with close links to the Tehran regime, which allegedly hosted an event to commemorate the death of an Iranian general where antisemitic chanting took place, is being investigated by the charity watchdog. [A named organisation] is based in a former Methodist church in Hammersmith, west London. The Charity Commission is investigating an event held by an external organisation in 2020. The event was described as a ‘religious remembrance programme’ for Major General Qasem Soleimani, who was assassinated in a US drone strike in 2020”.

3. Subsequently, the article reported: “The BBC reported last month that chants of ‘death to Israel’ were heard at the events, which were promoted by the Islamic Students Associations of Britain. Footage of one of the talks shows Saeed Ghasemi, a former IRGC general, claiming that the Holocaust was ‘a lie and fake’, while urging British students to join an apocalyptic war against ‘oppressors and occupiers, Zionists and Jews’”.

4. The day after the article’s publication, the complainant complained to IPSO, and directly to the publication. It said that the article was inaccurate, in breach of Clause 1, because it had no involvement and had not “promoted” the remembrance event at which “death to Israel” chants were allegedly heard. The complainant said that it had been involved in two online talks – in September 2020 and January 2021 – but not the in-person event discussed in the article. It said that the BBC article, which appeared to be the source for the claims made in the article under complaint, made clear that it had not promoted the in-person event.

5. Further to the above, the complainant said that the article inaccurately reported on the talk given by Saeed Ghasemi. It stated that whilst it had no wish to defend Mr Ghasemi, nevertheless, the video referred to in the article did not show Mr Ghasemi “urging British students to join” a war. It also said that Mr Ghasemi was criticised during the talk, and apologised afterward, and the publication had omitted to report these details.

6. The complainant supplied IPSO with two BBC articles to support its position. The first, headlined: “UK officials probe Iran generals' antisemitic talks to students”, had been published on 22 January 2024. It opened by reporting: “Videos of antisemitic speeches by Iranian generals, given to UK students, are being investigated by the Charity Commission. The regulator is also looking at footage of ‘death to Israel’ chants at an Islamic charity's UK premises. Verified by the BBC, two of the videos show talks by members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. One described an apocalyptic war on Jews. The group that promoted the online talks said it respects all communities”.

7. The article added: “The videos seen by the BBC were recorded in 2020 and 2021 and show three events. Two were live-streamed speeches by former and active IRGC commanders. The other was an in-person event inside the Kanoon Towhid Islamic centre in west London, commemorating Iran's top military commander Gen Qasem Soleimani, who was killed in a US air strike in 2020. Chants of ‘death to Israel’ were heard at the event, but it is not known who was saying them […] The online talks were promoted in advance by the Islamic Students Associations of Britain (ISA) and its affiliates, which use the Kanoon Towhid centre as a meeting place”.

8. The BBC article also included a video. The video featured footage of the talks discussed in the article, accompanied by a subtitled translation, intercut with commentary from a BBC presenter. The video opened with footage of the in-person event, at which chants of “death to Israel” were heard. The video included the following excerpts:

Presenter: This was one of three events captured on video and seen by the BBC. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the IRGC, is one of the most powerful paramilitary organisations in the Middle East. Some MPSs fear its trying to radicalise UK students, and the security services say it’s plotting to kidnap or kill people on British soil.

[…]

Presenter: The two other events were online speeches by former and active IRGC commanders, promoted in advance by the Islamic Student Associates of Britian, who are based inside Kanoon Towhid.

[The video changes to showing footage of the online talk from Saeed Ghasemi]

Presenter: This is former senior IRGC commander Saeed Ghasemi. He is known for extreme speeches and in this clip he falsely claims the Holocaust was a fake.

Mr Ghasemi, in video footage: The real holocaust took place in your country. The one the Jews claim is a lie and a fake.

Presenter: He also glorifies the death of IRGC commander General Qasem Soleimani and describes his return from death in an apocalyptic war that will end the lives of Jews.

Mr Ghasemi, in video footage: This will bring an end to the life of the oppressors and occupiers, Zionists and Jews across the world.

Presenter: Look at the top left of the footage. The banner, written in Farsi, translates to the Islamic Students Associations of Britian.

9. The second BBC article, headlined: “Inquiry into 'death to Israel' chants at Islamic centre”, was published on 12 February 2024 – the same day as the article under complaint. It opened by reporting: “The Charity Commission has opened a statutory inquiry after footage of ‘death to Israel’ chants at an Islamic centre was revealed by the BBC”. It went on to report: “The BBC investigation also verified two videos […] showing online talks by active and retired members of the IRGC in September 2020 and January 2021, which the regulator is separately examining. One described an apocalyptic war on Jews. The footage also falsely claimed the Holocaust was ‘a lie and a fake"”.

10. The article also said: “The online events were promoted in advance by the Islamic Students Associations of Britain (ISA) and its affiliates, which use the Kanoon Towhid centre as a meeting place but told the BBC it had no role in organising and was not present at the January 2020 event to commemorate Gen Soleimani”.

11. It also referred to a statement from the complainant: “In a new statement to the BBC in relation to the online talks, the Islamic Students Associations of Britain said the speakers were not IRGC members and one had been misrepresented. In relation to the other, it said ISA members had raised criticisms with the speaker at the time and the committee had refused a request for a further event with him”.

12. In light of the complainant’s concerns, on 5 March 2024 – six days after the publication was made aware that the article raised a possible breach of the Editors’ Code – the publication offered to update the article which a footnote correction, and run a standalone correction in its Clarifications and Corrections column. The proposed correction read:

“We said the Islamic Students Associations of Britain (Isab) had been reported by the BBC to have promoted several events marking the death of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps commander Qasem Soleimani (News, Feb 14). While the Isab promoted two such online events, and on January 5 organised an in-person protest at the US embassy against Soleimani’s assassination, the organisation says it had no involvement with a vigil held at its west London base later the same day, at which chants of “Death to Israel” were heard. We are happy to put this on record”.

13. The publication noted that a protest outside the US embassy about Qasem Soleimani’s death, earlier on the same day that the event where the chants of “death to Israel” were allegedly heard, had been advertised on the Kanoon Towhid Telegram channel, and on a Telegram channel titled: “Assembly of Islamic Associations of British students”. It supplied both posts – both featured the name of the complainant. It also supplied a post, on the Kanoon Towhid Telegram channel, advertising the remembrance event. It stated that, in its view, it was unlikely that ISAB would organise and attend the protest, and not go to the remembrance event – where the chants had allegedly been heard – immediately afterwards.

14. It added that the BBC articles included a statement from the complainant which, it said, clarified its position that it was not involved in the remembrance event at which “death to Israel” chants were heard. It said that its proposed correction offered to do the same.

15. The publication did not accept that the article was inaccurate in how it reported on the footage of Mr Ghasemi’s talk. It noted, firstly, that the extract under complaint was prefaced with the words: “The BBC reported last month […]” – the publication said it was responsible for accurately reporting what the BBC had reported, which it considered it had done. In any event, the publication said that the video of Mr Ghasemi’s talk had been supplied to it, along with a translation, by a Farsi expert, who assured it the translation was correct.

16. The publication supplied IPSO with its correspondence with the expert in question. In these messages, the publication said: “they’re now claiming we were inaccurate to report that footage of the Saeed Ghasemi talk shows him ‘urging British students to join an apocalyptic war against oppressors and occupiers, Zionists and Jews’ [sic]””; the translator replied: “that is what he literally says. The BBC ran it. Had it verified too”.

17. The publication also stated the article was not inaccurate to report that British students specifically were urged to join a war: the online talk was promoted to British students by the complainant. To support its position on this point, it provided social media images and a poster for the event, both of which included the complainant’s logo. It also noted that the footage of the talk itself included a banner in Farsi, which translated to: "Audience: Islamic Students Associations of Britain".

18. In response, the complainant said that the proposed correction was itself inaccurate. It stated that the correction introduced new matters which were not material to the alleged inaccuracy, failed to identify the original inaccuracy, and implied that the in-person remembrance event, at which “death to Israel” chants were allegedly heard, was similar or equivalent to its online talk – which it said was inaccurate. It also disputed the relevance of the protest held on the same day as the event were the chants where allegedly heard; it said that a “a static protest” took place outside the US embassy to protest against the US’s actions in Baghdad in January 2020, and that this had no relation to the remembrance event at which the chants had been heard. Further, the complainant said correction reported that it had told the BBC it had no involvement in the in-person event, not that the BBC reported it had no involvement, and that it inaccurately referred to the church as its “West London base”; it said it did not own, and was not a trustee, of the building.

19. The complainant also maintained that the article inaccurately reported that Mr Ghasemi “urged British students to join an apocalyptic war”. It said that Mr Ghasemi was not a current or former "General" of the IRGC, and that the footage did not show him “urging” anybody to join a war – there was nobody physically present at the talk, and he did not request or demand anyone join a conflict. Further, it stated that the publication had not reviewed attendees of the online talk, and that there was no evidence any British student specifically had attended – it added that there was no criteria for its members to be British, and the publication could not prove that ISAB’s members were British.

20. The complainant also said the speech did not include any mention of a “war”, or reference to “British students”, but rather referred to the “religious end of times not a man made war”.

21. It also added that, although Mr Ghasemi referred to the Holocaust as a “somewhat for a lie”, he had been discussing the “Holocaust” which happened in “Iran, a hundred years ago during the First World War” – he was criticising the “lack of education regarding the history of Iran and 9 million Iranians”, and the article was misleading to omit this information.

22. In response, the publication stated that the complainant’s position took no account of the context of his talk. It stated that the footage of the talk showed Mr Ghasemi saying: “"God willing, we will also be sharing the celebration of the victory in our apocalyptic war with them”. It also referred to the BBC article, which had reported: “[Ghasemi] describes the same apocalyptic war which ‘will bring an end to the life of the oppressors and occupiers, Zionists and Jews across the world’”. The publication therefore stated that, in light of these statements, and where the speech was an “emotive glorification of an Iranian military commander assassinated by the US”, the publication had sufficient basis for reporting that he was “urging” his audience to join a war.

23. In response, the complainant stated that the Mr Ghasemi did not use the term “apocalyptic war” – it said the relevant statement translated to: “end-time victory”, and that this had been confirmed by a translator it had contacted. The translator’s translation stated: “We will also share with them in the end-time victory. God willing”. It also said that the publication’s translation was flawed as it was conducted by the same person who had provided the publication with the video.

24. It added that the publication should not rely on the BBC articles to support its position, as it also disputed the accuracy these articles.

25. The publication proposed a change to the offered correction to ensure that it was as precise as possible. The amended wording read:

“We said the Islamic Students Associations of Britain (Isab) had been reported by the BBC to have promoted several events marking the death of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) commander Qasem Soleimani (News, Feb 14). While the ISAB promoted two online talks by active and retired members of the IRGC, and on January 5 organised an in-person protest at the US embassy against Soleimani’s assassination, the organisation says it had no involvement with a vigil held at its west London base later the same day, at which chants of “Death to Israel” were heard. We are happy to put this on record.”

26. In response, the complainant stated that the other speakers had both retired from the IRGC a “long time before” the events in question.

Relevant Clause Provisions

Clause 1 (Accuracy)

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.

ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and — where appropriate — an apology published. In cases involving IPSO, due prominence should be as required by the regulator.

iii) A fair opportunity to reply to significant inaccuracies should be given, when reasonably called for.

iv) The Press, while free to editorialise and campaign, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

Findings of the Committee

27. The Committee began by considering the complainant’s complaint that the following was inaccurate: “The BBC reported last month that chants of ‘death to Israel’ were heard at the events, which were promoted by the Islamic Students Associations of Britain”. It recognised that this claim was clearly attributed to the BBC – the article did not report as fact that chants had been heard at the event. Rather, it claimed that the BBC had reported this.

28. In considering the question of whether or not care had been taken not to publish inaccurate information on the above point, the Committee therefore carefully reviewed the BBC articles in question. One of the articles reported on three events under investigation by the Charity Commission, and the Committee noted that it clearly stated that “[t]he online talks were promoted in advance by the Islamic Students Associations of Britain (ISA) and its affiliates, which use the Kanoon Towhid centre as a meeting place”, differentiating the online talks – promoted by the complainant – with the in-person talk, where the allegedly antisemitic chant had been heard. The BBC’s article did not report that the complainant had promoted the in-person remembrance event at which the chants were heard. Therefore, as the article under complaint inaccurately said that the BBC reported that the complainant promoted the in-person event, when in fact it did not say this, the Committee considered that this constituted a lack of care taken over the accuracy of the article. There was a breach of Clause 1(i).

29. The Committee turned to whether the inaccuracy was significant and therefore in need of correction under Clause 1(ii). The Committee noted the reputational implications of reporting, inaccurately, that an organisation had promoted an event at which “death to Israel” chants were heard – it therefore considered that this constituted significantly inaccurate information, which required correction under the terms of Clause 1(ii).

30. The publication had contacted the complainant, and offered to run a correction, six days after IPSO had made it aware that the complaint raised a possible breach of the Editors’ Code and – by extension – informed it of the correct position. The Committee was satisfied that this represented prompt action by the publication, as required by the terms of Clause 1(ii). The Committee also considered that, in light of the fact that the publication had offered both a standalone correction and a footnote correction, and the inaccurate information had appeared only once in the text of the article, that the proposed position of the corrections were duly prominent.

31. The Committee then considered whether the correction put on record the correct position, as the publication was required to do to fulfil the terms of Clause 1(ii). The Committee noted the complainant’s disagreement with parts of it, including that it introduced new information, and contained a further inaccuracy. However, in the Committee’s view, the correction identified the reported inaccuracy: that the publication had reported that the complainant promoted several events, including an in-person event at which chants of “death to Israel” had allegedly been heard. The Committee was also satisfied that it put the correct position on record, which was that the complainant had informed the publication that they were not involved in promoting the in-person event – one of the BBC articles had also reported this. The Committee also did not consider the correction inaccurate to refer to the Kanoon Towhid as the complainant’s “base” – it may not own the building, but as both BBC articles reported, the complainant used it as a “meeting place”. In all, the Committee was satisfied that the publication had offered to correct the inaccuracy in line with its obligations under Clause 1(ii) – there was no breach of Clause 1(ii).

32. The Committee then turned to the following alleged inaccurate statement in the article under complaint: “Footage of one of the talks shows Saeed Ghasemi, a former IRGC general, claiming that the Holocaust was ‘a lie and fake’, while urging British students to join an apocalyptic war against ‘oppressors and occupiers, Zionists and Jews’”.

33. The complainant had said that it was inaccurate to report that the footage showed Mr Ghasemi “urging British students to join an apocalyptic war”, as he had actually used the words “end-time victory” and his speech was not aimed at British students. However, given that the BBC had reported this and a translator working on behalf of the publication had also positively confirmed this was the correct translation, the Committee did not consider this to be inaccurate, misleading, or distorted in the manner the complainant had suggested. While the Committee accepted that the complainant disputed the accuracy of this translation, as their own referred to an “end-time victory”, it did not consider that using the phrase “apocalyptic war” instead of the term preferred by the complainant’s translation represented inaccurate, misleading, or distorted information - in any event, it was not in dispute that he had referred to the “victory of the end times”, along with the “end to the life of the oppressors and occupiers, Zionists and Jews”.

34. Given the talk had been advertised by an organisation called “Islamic Student Associations of Britain”, the Committee considered that the article was not inaccurate to refer to Mr Ghasemi urging “British students” in particular; whether or not they were physically present at the event and held British citizenship, it was clearly advertised to students studying in Britain. The Committee also did not consider that the article was inaccurate or misleading in its reference to Mr Ghasemi as a “general” – it was not in dispute that he was formally a high-ranking member of the IRGC. There was no breach of Clause 1 on either point.

35. Next, the Committee turned to the complainant’s contention that the article inaccurately reported that Mr Ghasemi claimed the Holocaust was "a lie and fake”, as he had been discussing the “Holocaust” which happened in “Iran, a hundred years ago during the First World War”. The video of Mr Ghasemi’s speech showed Mr Ghasemi stating: “The one the Jews claim is a lie and a fake” – there was therefore a clear basis for the publication’s contention that he was referring to the Holocaust committed in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s, given the reference to Jewish people. The Committee noted that the BBC article also reported this, and the complainant had accepted that Mr Ghasemi had referred to the Holocaust as a “somewhat of a lie”. Further, the Committee noted that the complainant did not know the precise intention behind the General’s words. The article was not inaccurate or misleading to report his statement, and the Committee did not consider the omission of the further context provided by the complainant rendered the article inaccurate or misleading. There was no breach of Clause 1.

36. Finally, the Committee considered whether the article was inaccurate or misleading to omit to report that Mr Ghasemi had been criticised for his speech and had apologised afterwards. Newspapers have the right to choose which pieces of information they publish, as long as this does not lead to a breach of the Code. In this case, whether or not Mr Ghasemi had faced criticism later apologised was not information which, when omitted, rendered the article inaccurate, distorted, or misleading, given that the focus of the article was on the various Charity Commission investigations. There was no breach of Clause 1 on this point.

Conclusions

37. The complaint was partly upheld under Clause 1.

Remedial action required

38. The publication had offered a correction promptly, and with due prominence. It should now be published.

Date complaint received: 15/02/2024

Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 27/08/2024

Independent Complaints Reviewer

The complainant complained to the Independent Complaints Reviewer about the process followed by IPSO in handling this complaint. The Independent Complaints Reviewer decided that the process was not flawed and did not uphold the request for review.