Chapter 1: Summary of allegations and investigation
Ms Zaman’s complaint
1.Tahira Zaman is a member of the public who, having allegedly experienced financial and sexual exploitation at the hands of a faith healer, S, was put into contact with Lord Ahmed in the hope that he would be able to help her make a complaint to the Metropolitan Police about S.
2.Her complaint was that, instead of helping her, Lord Ahmed used the possibility of arranging a meeting with the Metropolitan Police to lure her to his house where he had sex with her, possibly after drugging her. They then had a sexual relationship that lasted from September to November 2017, during which time he continued to say that he was going to arrange the meeting with the Metropolitan Police.
3.During their sexual relationship she said that Lord Ahmed tried to pass her to an associate, X, for X’s sexual gratification.1 This associate deleted or made her delete all messages and other data to and from Lord Ahmed from her phone, which she believed was at Lord Ahmed’s instigation.
4.She also said that at their second meeting, in March 2017, Lord Ahmed had put his hand on her upper thigh, which had been unexpected and unwelcome.
5.The aspects of her complaint that could engage the Code of Conduct were that Lord Ahmed:
- put his hand on her upper thigh, which was unexpected and unwelcome;
- failed to progress her complaint and lied to her about his actions and intentions;
- lied to her by inviting her to his home to discuss the offer of a meeting with the police, when in fact his aim was to have sex with her;
- may have spiked her drink on her first visit to his house;
- tried to pass her to X, an associate of Lord Ahmed’s, for X’s sexual gratification;
- used X to delete compromising data about him from her phone; and
- exploited her emotionally and sexually even though he knew she was receiving treatment for anxiety and depression.
Lord Ahmed’s response
6.Lord Ahmed told us that he had indeed offered to help Ms Zaman and had written a letter to the Metropolitan Police about her concerns. He had not identified her when he wrote, as she had said she wanted to be anonymous. When he told her that he had written to the police she said that she did not want to pursue the matter if this would involve giving her name to the police or meeting them. His help as a parliamentarian ended at that point, he claimed, as there was nothing more he could do for her.
7.Lord Ahmed said that some months later they formed a social relationship and Ms Zaman showed she was interested in having an intimate relationship with him, which he politely rebuffed, saying that he was married and not interested. She asked to come to his house to discuss a proposal of marriage she had received and he agreed to this. When she was at his house she instigated sexual contact and they ended up having intercourse, which he had not been expecting. He said variously that the sexual relationship lasted a few days, two or three weeks, and from September to November 2017. He said that he tried to end it throughout.
8.He did not accept that any of the potential breaches of the Code of Conduct had taken place.
9.He said that his brief efforts to use his parliamentary status to help Ms Zaman had come to an end before a much longer period of social contact and, as he did not know she was vulnerable, allowing a sexual relationship to take place was not a breach of the Code.
1 X is an associate of Lord Ahmed's. I am aware of his identity but as this investigation is into Lord Ahmed's conduct, not X's, he is entitled to remain anonymous.