Jump to content

 

 

BrahimHemdani

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,099

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by BrahimHemdani

  1. BrahimHemdani
    "an internal matter that has unfortunately entered the public domain" (RST statement) as well as the names of the board members who have stepped down or been asked to step down temporarily or otherwise. (See edit to previous post.)
  2. BrahimHemdani
    The matter under investigation and the reasons why board members have stepped down or been asked to step down temporarily or permanently. Given its high profile, I would have thought that these are matters of concern to the wider Rangers community.
  3. BrahimHemdani
    I have always supported the aims of the Trust which is why I joined in the first place; I just disagreed with much of the modus operandi.
  4. BrahimHemdani
    I did say that the investigation has to be internal but that does not stop them saying who or what is being investigated.
  5. BrahimHemdani
    This is a pathetic statement that begs more questions than it answers and therefore adds to the speculation and further weakens the credibility of the Trust. They would have been better to say nothing.
  6. BrahimHemdani
    I am sure she will sort it for you. I have PM'd you her email address.
  7. BrahimHemdani
    That is something that I also noticed a good while back and found it extremely strange. I can't believe it's unintentional since it would have taken some action to remove that part of the information on the site. Has this occurred since the Trust AGM? If so it is definitely a breach of the rules because it is incumbent on the Trust to publish the results of the Board elections. I would need to do some research but I am fairly sure that if it is not a breach of SD rules to publish the names of the current office bearers at least if not the full board list then it would certainly be a breach of the principles of the rules, because the co-op is all about open government, proper elections etc. I can't think of any reason why it would be in the interests of the Trust not to publish the names of the board members. In any event I think that any member would be entitled to call on the Trust to publish the names of the current board members and to state the names of any who have stood down voluntarily or otherwise. Any investigation into allegations of wrongdoing SHOULD be internal but the results should be published after the parties concerned have been informed so as to maintain confidence in the society.
  8. BrahimHemdani
    I did not use the word "loan". As I sad, that is the description which was accorded the bounced cheques by the auditors; but for clarification if you buy something (in this case dinner tickets) and pay for it with a cheque that bounces, then effectively you have taken a loan of the cost from the organisation concerned. In this case it was a loan that contravened the rules of the Trust. Others might use different words to describe that type of action. I added that comment only to clarify what the auditors said at the time. I can assure you that I long ago ceased to have any bitterness towards the Trust. I have made it clear that I only responded to this thread because Zappa suggested that I might have been responsible for the current story and the theme was taken up by some others. Zappa has since apologised publicly, which I accept. There is nothing more that I can usefully add.
  9. BrahimHemdani
    That is exactly the point I was trying to make. The reason I posted at all was that my name and that matter was alluded to in at least 6 posts on this thread. I think I am entitled to reply. I made very brief reference to the events in 2010 to demonstrate that it appeared to be a different matter. I agree that it is old news and the full text of my resignation letters and statements were published on here at the time. I would just like to clarify two points if I may. The Trust, as I understand it, took advice from a firm of lawyers who said that there had been a breach of the rules (inasmuch as Mr Dingwall should have stood down at the time) and a conflict of interest but that there was no need for Mr Dingwall to stand down post the event. Secondly, the auditors said that the RST Rules did not allow for making loans to third parties and that as a result there were breaches of various Rules. The auditors stated furthermore that breaching these Rules could lead to action being taken by the FSA or RST's taxable status being challenged by the Revenue. In other words by making the loan RST could become taxable on its income. So far as I am aware no such action was ever taken and I repeat that I have no knowledge of any current reference to the FCA.
  10. BrahimHemdani
    I am indebted to a Gersnet member for drawing my attention to the story on STV last night. I was fairly sure that my name would come up in this connection, so I have reviewed this thread today. The reason I have not been on here for some time is that I honestly got fed up with all the boardroom shenanigans and decided to concentrate on watching the team play football. Gersnet can be a bit of an addiction and when I found myself being accused of spamming various threads I thought it was time to give it a rest for a while. I can state categorically that I am not the source of any current story about Mr Dingwall and have no knowledge whatsoever of any complaint against him at this time or indeed anything to with RST. I have not had any involvement with RST since I resigned from the Board in October 2010. However, since reference has been made to the events at that time I will say briefly that at an audit meeting on 4 August 2010 I questioned an unspecified debt of £2,690 in the accounts which the Treasurer, Christine Somerville then confirmed arose from bounced cheques issued by followfollow.com. The Trust’s subsequent statement confirmed the exact amount of the debt, £2,690, and conceded that this was outstanding for an “extended period of time”, actually from 12 to 23 months, during which period partial repayments were made. The Trust’s statement also said that their legal advice confirmed my view that there was a conflict of interest arising from the debt owed by Mr. Mark Dingwall and his position on the Board. The statement omited to mention that neither Mr. Dingwall nor the Chair brought this debt, or the conflict of interest arising, to the attention of the Board. I quote the following from my resignation letter to the then Chair, Stephen Smith: In my opinion your position as a Board member is untenable for a number of reasons not the least of which was your failure as Chair to advise the Board of the debt owed by Mr Dingwall from September 2008 to August 2010. Equally I am of the opinion that Mr Dingwall’s position is untenable for a number of reasons, principal amongst which was his failure to declare the conflict of interest that arose from his debt as required by rule or to stand down from the Board at that time. I call upon you and Mr Dingwall to resign forthwith. As stated I have had no subsequent involvement with the Trust and have no knowledge of the matters referred to in the OP.
  11. BrahimHemdani
    It did at that time.
  12. BrahimHemdani
    I am not arguing about the inference of the word "orange" in this context; I am just saying that a smart lawyer could mount a stiff defense. Yes they could indeed make arrests for Breach of the Peace but one of the main reasons for the introduction of the OBA was that the police were increasingly unable to obtain convictions for Breach of the Peace (where as I understand it' date=' it is necessary to demonstrate that a person has been placed in a state of [i']fear and alarm[/i]) in the contect of football matches because the standard defence was that it was "normal" or "acceptable" behaviour at football matches to sing offensive songs about the opposition or its fans. The whole point of the Act was to take away that defence; but by adding the "incite public disorder" clause it became more or less self defeating.
  13. BrahimHemdani
    The legislation and the formation of FoCUS came out of the so called "shame game" and was introduced because the SG were concerned about the damage it was doing to Scotland's worldwide reputation.
  14. BrahimHemdani
    I was in Eindhoven and can tell you that it was somewhat more than "the odd naughty song". My feeling at the time was that a certain section of our support thought that because it was Holland it was OK, basically anything goes. I did see one father berate his son; but as I can tell you from bitter experience there is absolutely no point in trying to reason with some people and it is extremely difficult to "mark them out" when no one is sitting in the correct seats.
  15. BrahimHemdani
    I would suggest there's a bit of a difference there but I take your point. One of the points that a lot of people don't appreciate in this context is that it all depends on how an individual police officer views the situation at the time; this was made crystal clear at the JRG. Calscot covered quite a few! Well, if I was a lawyer and if I was appearing for the defence; then I think I'd start with Orange as in phones or nights at the cinema; fortunately I am not a lawyer; but here again you may well be right about context. If complaints are made to the police we'll soon find out.
  16. BrahimHemdani
    Thanks for the question. I don't recall holding out that RST spoke for anyone other than RST members and certainly I wasn't guilty of overstating the numbers.
  17. BrahimHemdani
    The club could probably do it with their computer system; they do it for away tickets; someone independent would need to oversee it.
  18. BrahimHemdani
    I think that is an outstanding suggestion and of course there could be a shareholders association as well (or perhaps a "small" shareholders association).
  19. BrahimHemdani
    Such as the main stand at Ibrox.
  20. BrahimHemdani
    I think the answer to that is pretty obvious, as j1mgg demonstrates at #20.
  21. BrahimHemdani
    I believe I am correct in saying that when some criticised the last closed meeting there was a suggestion, I won't put it higher than that, that the next meeting would be "open".
  22. BrahimHemdani
    I didn't suggest that for one minute. I was merely pointing out that the vast majority of Rangers fans are not members of anything.
  23. BrahimHemdani
    Much as we and FdB and perhaps Dutch people in general might find that offensive (and it kept breaking up when I tried to play it, so I'll assume that was what was sung) in order to bring a charge under the OBA, you would need to be able to prove: That by using the word "orange" you were referring to a specific group of people, presumably Dutch people; and I don't think you would need to be much of a lawyer to contest that; OR perhaps Protestant people, even more difficult I would suggest; OR was behaviour that the mythical "reasonable person" would be likely to consider offensive; AND (and here's the rub) (i) is likely to incite public disorder, or (ii) would be likely to incite public disorder; BUT for the fact that—measures are in place to prevent public disorder i.e. the Police are there to prevent it (is not a defence). So you would then need to show that the Ajax fans or any neutrals in the crowd were likely to riot. I'm not sure how you would prove that. Personally I think it's bang out of order; but I also think that the chances of obtaining a conviction under the OBA are next to zilch, which is probably why no one was arrested for it.
  24. BrahimHemdani
    That's comparing all those charged v Rangers attendance in the period. I suspect that if you took it against ALL fans attending ALL games then the percentage would be about 0.01%. In this case I would agree that the law is an ass, and I am confident that if they didn't know it at the time the SG sure as hell know it now. However, the fact that the legislation was incredibly badly drafted doesn't mean that there isn't an issue, as some comments on this thread prove, I would suggest.
  25. BrahimHemdani
    In my case I am referring to offences under the OBA.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.