You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Committee Publications > All Select Committee Publications > Lords Select Committees > Standards of Conduct in the House of Lords > Standards of Conduct in the House of Lords
The conduct of Lord Ahmed Contents

Chapter 2: Investigation and evidence

10.This was a complicated investigation, partly because it had involved an initial complaint made in January 2018, which I found did not engage the Code of Conduct then in force, a subsequent police investigation and Newsnight programme about Ms Zaman’s allegations, and a renewed complaint in 2019, which I found did engage the Code following its revision in April 2019.

11.In addition, both Ms Zaman and Lord Ahmed provided evidence that was sometimes inconsistent. This is not unusual when people are reporting on events in the past and we had to evaluate all the inconsistencies that we found. We do not start from the assumption that inconsistencies were evidence that the person giving the inconsistent account was lying, as we accept that accounts may vary in telling and re-telling and that this is not, in itself, an indication of something untoward. However, we did evaluate all the inconsistencies that we found and that were drawn to our attention by Lord Ahmed and Ms Zaman and where these matters were relevant we have set out how we carried out the evaluation.

12.In some cases we obtained reliable corroborative evidence that allowed us to evaluate the most likely accurate account. Where the inconsistencies were on matters of detail that were not at the heart of the complaint, and we had no reliable corroborative evidence, we acknowledged that certainty was not possible. The standard of proof required by the Code of Conduct is that allegations are proved on the balance of probabilities as being more likely than not to be the case.

13.Another complicating factor was that information from the police investigation in 2018 was not disclosed to us until close to the end of the investigation in 2019 and 2020.

14.There are some matters in the events investigated which are not contested:

15.Although there are allegations and denials on particular matters where it would be difficult to say that on the balance of probabilities one account is more likely than the other to be accurate, there are others where supporting evidence tilts the balance. Some of these matters would not by themselves engage the Code of Conduct but were brought up in an attempt to support or undermine the reliability or accuracy of Ms Zaman’s or Lord Ahmed’s account. As they were elements of the conduct we were investigating, they were relevant.

Key events

16.This investigation took place throughout 2019 and into 2020 and covered events from February to December 2017. The key milestones in the complaint and leading to my investigation were:

Key evidence

17.This investigation involved gathering substantial amounts of evidence, most of which is reproduced in the body of the report and in the appendices.

18.Four elements of the documentary evidence gathered during the investigation that it is useful to highlight are:

Letter to Commissioner Dick and the reply from DSupt Prins

19.As they are essential to the case, the letter from Lord Ahmed to Commissioner Dick and the reply on her behalf from DSupt Prins are reproduced here.

Box 1: Lord Ahmed’s letter to Commissioner Dick, dated 2 March 2017

I am delighted to congratulate you on your new appointment as the Commissioner of the Police.

I have been asked to report the above gentleman [S] for serious misconduct, exploitation and possible criminal activities being pursued in Ilford. I understand that many venerable [sic] people with domestic, family, financial and health problems from across the UK are encouraged to meet with this fake Sheikh who is exploiting these innocent men and women.

My informant would like to remain anonymous for the fear of her safety and her children’s safety as [S] told her that her problems were spiritual and he has the powers to resolve, damage and hurt any person. He also mentioned an orphanage in Gambia he had setup and asks for donations of £300 as well as [sic]. [S] is a typical con merchant exploiting venerable [sic] people on monthly, weekly and daily basis. I understand that he charges £1500 for his spiritual powers to avoid prison sentence and £5,000 for spiritual fertility for women who cannot conceive a child.

I understand that he has advised a young female student of being victim of an “evil eye” and arranged for her to sleep with other married man [sic]. She is now suffering from depression. He has given his clients the impression that he is a witchcraft doctor from Gambia.

I understand that he sets up secret and temporary marriages for wealthy, married men and convinces the women to keep quiet and not tell anyone, thus alienating them from the traditional sources of help. I believe he exploits vulnerable women and supplies them to wealthy men for the purpose of sex.

One of his most wealthy clients is [J] who lives in Kent and has a Warehouse in [location] called as

He speaks to him over the phone on a daily basis. My informant would hear them discussing women several times and [J] would say things like “she does not go naked in front of me.” To which [S] would reply “don’t worry I have done the work.” [S] told her that people like [J] do not pay tax and when the Inland Revenue are after them, they come to him for help. [S] told her that [J] had confessed to him that he had employed illegal workers. [S] also told her that HMRC wanted to close [J’s] Warehouse down.

I understand that another of [S’s] wealthy client [T] had been observed passing over a lot of cash to [S].

It’s alleged that one of [S’s] another client is the landlady of this bed and breakfast, where he resides, also takes a share of his earnings.

I am told that Just [sic] before Ramadan he was no longer allowed to continue his practice at the bed and breakfast due to complaints from other residence [sic]. After council investigation, he moved to [address].

The owner of these premises, [F], also charges clients £5 per visit. She was made aware that there were doubts about the [S’s] authenticity and his way of working. [S] sees approximately 30 clients a day, 7 days a week. Therefore I request you to look into this matter.

Looking forward to hear from you soon.

Box 2: Reply from DSupt Prins, dated 3 May 2017

Thank you for your letter to the Commissioner dated 2nd March 2017 regarding [S]. The information provided in your letter was passed to the Modern Slavery and Kidnap Unit (MSKU) for assessment.

The information has been researched against the databases held by the Metropolitan Police Service but unfortunately there is nothing within these systems that provides any supporting or additional information. There are a number of allegations made against [S] within the letter and it would appear that the informant has detailed and first-hand knowledge of this individual and his activities.

I understand that an officer from the MSKU has made contact with you with a view to arranging a meeting with the source of the information. Whilst I understand that the informant wishes to remain anonymous it is important if an investigation is to be progressed that she is spoken to by police officers so that a full assessment can be made of her information.

The officers within the MSKU are very experienced in dealing with vulnerable victims and witnesses and I can assure you that her details would not be disclosed if that were her wish.

Mobile phone data retrieved by Ms Zaman

20.On 16 January 2018, Ms Zaman used a data retrieval app—Dr Fone—to attempt to retrieve data deleted from her phone on 24 December 2017. She provided this data to us on 12 September 2019. It also included information that had not been deleted from her phone by X, for instance all the WhatsApp messages between Ms Zaman and X.

21.The material Ms Zaman provided included:

22.Among the messages there were:

23.In their written submissions both Ms Zaman and Lord Ahmed also provided screenshots of a selection of her WhatsApp messages with X. All of these were also present in the Dr Fone material.

Police interviews

24.After I had dismissed her initial complaint under the previous version of the Code of Conduct, Ms Zaman made a complaint to the police about Lord Ahmed’s conduct. The police interviewed her on 26 April 2018 and 11 July 2018. They interviewed Lord Ahmed on 26 July 2018.

25.On 28 November 2019 the police provided us with video recordings of those interviews from which we had transcripts made. We could only obtain these recordings with the consent of Ms Zaman and Lord Ahmed, and we thank them for giving their consent. We have quoted from the transcripts and provided accounts of their contents in the report and appendices. Lord Ahmed and Ms Zaman were provided with transcripts of their own police interviews but not of each other’s.

Interviews during this investigation

26.Lord Ahmed was interviewed by us on 13 August 2019, and Ms Zaman on 6 August and 12 September. Extracts from their interviews are included in the report, but the full transcripts are not included. However, Lord Ahmed has been provided with Ms Zaman’s transcripts and all three transcripts have been provided to the Conduct Committee.

Structure of this report

27.The following four chapters deal chronologically with the issues and allegations that arose in the course of the interactions between Ms Zaman and Lord Ahmed and I make findings of fact on those matters:

28.Chapter 7 deals with allegations made by Lord Ahmed throughout the investigation that Ms Zaman could not be relied on to tell the truth.

29.Chapter 8 sets out my findings in relation to the Code of Conduct. In Chapter 9 I provide an overview of the case and the material Lord Ahmed provided to be taken into account when considering an appropriate sanction, and recommend a sanction for consideration by the Conduct Committee.

30.Appendix 1 is a factual report, which provides a fuller narrative summary of the evidence. Other appendices include copies of any remaining evidence considered to be relevant during the investigation, and all these appendices are an integral part of the report.

31.I was assisted throughout the investigation by James Whittle, a Clerk at the House of Lords, and by Sam Evans, Associate Practitioner, CMP Solutions. Ms Evans has significant investigatory experience, which includes expertise in interviewing, and evaluating the evidence of, vulnerable people, including those who allege sexual abuse and exploitation.3

32.We worked as a team throughout the investigation, including analysing the evidence, making findings of fact, and reaching conclusions on breaches of the Code. However, the responsibility for the report, and the recommended sanction, rests with me alone.

2 Southall Black Sisters is an advice, advocacy and resource centre in West London, which provides support to women experiencing violence and abuse and other forms of gender inequality. https://southallblacksisters.org.uk/

3 In her earlier career she worked extensively with organisations supporting victims of sexual violence and abuse, helping to extend significantly the provision of Sexual Assault Referral Centres for victims of rape and provision for organisations supporting victims of current and historic sexual abuse. She also led work to establish the Government’s first funded support programme for victims of Human Trafficking (primarily female victims trafficked into prostitution in the UK).



© Parliamentary copyright 2020