Comment byÂ Hugh Fitzgerald
Speaking afterwards Graham Edwards, said on behalf of Mr Jamil: ‘I think the panel’s decision was overall correct.
‘Although Mr Jamil had not acted with sexual motivation, and although he had crossed professional boundaries, it is clear that through his insight and his remedial actions and courses followed, the correct decision has been made to assess that he is not impaired. However it must be said that with Mr Jamil’s failure to observe professional boundaries, which brought him to this hearing, it is correct that the panel warned him about his future behaviour. The duration of the inquiry into these matters, being three years, has caused Mr Jamil and his family to be emotionally damaging, at a great deal financial of cost.’
[From the story in The Daily Mail]
If Khalil Jalil should ever take it upon himself to take to heart what the Qur’an and Hadith inculcate on the subject of non-Muslims, if he were ever to be enraged at some act of non-Muslims toward Muslims, in his immediate vicinity or thousands of miles away, if he were then to take out his revenge by deliberately mixing up or misfilling prescriptions, so as to endanger or take the life of some unsuspecting non-Musliim having his prescription refilled — a scenario that is not far-fetched but perfectly reasonable, or at least reasonable to those who have read and understood the texts of Islam and the attitudes and atmospherics of societies, communities, families suffused with Islam — then who should be sued? Who will be liable in such a case? Everyone who has suppressed knowledge, or the ability of citizens to acquire knowledge, of Islam. That’s who. A day of reckoning, or many days, of many reckonings.