Trojan Horse probe could hear from ex counter terror chief Row over identification of anonymous witnesses
THE Metropolitan Police’s former counter terrorism commander could give evidence about the ‘Trojan Horse’ inquiry in a legal battle about witnesses’ anonymity.
Peter Clarke, now the chief inspector of prisons, could be asked to appear before a panel which is considering whether five former Birmingham headteachers failed to conduct themselves properly.
Mr Clarke produced a Government report in summer 2014 to look into the Trojan Horse scandal, which involved a hardline Islamist ethis being forced upon pupils at city schools.
He concluded there had been “clear evidence” of a group of likeminded individuals working to support “extremist views” in classrooms but found no evidence of terrorism, radicalisation or violent extremism.
The allegations sparked several inquiries into Birmingham schools’ operation and governance, includ- ing Park (PVET).
It led to five former PVET head teachers – Monzoor “Moz” Hussain, Lindsey Clark, Razwan Faraz, Arshad Hussain and Hardeep Saini – being put before an NCTL disciplinary panel.
Last year, that three-member panel directed the statements of the anonymous witnesses Mr Clarke had interviewed should be handed to the headteachers’ lawyers.
But in a move criticised by teaching unions and the council as “extremely alarming”, it emerged the identities of those witnesses would also become known to the teachers.
The issue of their anonymity is now subject to a challenge by the council and the unions, with the panel meeting this week to hear evidence.
Ajay Ratan, the NAHT’s lawyer, said some of the witnesses feared risk of harm if their identities were circulated. View Educational Trust
He added that Mr Clarke would have been available to the panel to support his statement to the NAHT in person, but was inspecting prisons this week. Mr Ratan said: “If the only way the panel is willing to accept what is said is by seeing this witness and hearing from him, then we will take that on. Subject to the confirmation of Mr Clarke, he will appear on any day we ask him to.”
The accused headteachers’ lawyers claim much of the evidence was “prejudicial”. Lawyer Colin Henderson, for Mr Hussain and Mr Saini, said some of the witnesses’ claims were “so wild as to be scarcely believable”.
Claire Darwin, Mr Faraz’s lawyer, claimed that Islamaphobia may have coloured some of the concerns. Ms Darwin also claimed the Clarke inquiry witnesses had signed consent forms expressly allowing disclosure to third parties, but the teaching unions reject that was ever the case.