Khalid Mehmood didn’t believe in paying $1 million tax – but the government didn’t have much sympathy and sent him to prison.
Now, the restaurateur says jail itself is against his religion: he isn’t fed a halal diet, he can’t pray because the other inmates are too noisy, and he doesn’t have access to an imam.
Again, authorities are unsympathetic. This week, the Court of Appeal upheld his three-year sentence in Northland Region Corrections Facility.
Mehmood’s appeal failed after judges found no records of the prison receiving his complaints, and noted he had since moved to a newly-built prison in South Auckland where he was able to observe his duties.
He was sentenced last year after pleading guilty to filing 144 false tax returns through his business Areeb Khan Foods, which operated three halal restaurants in Auckland and Hamilton.
He appealed the sentence, claiming it was “disproportionately severe” because it prevented him from observing daily religious protocols. He argued it was a hardship not generally suffered by other prisoners.
His lawyer Jonathan Krebs said sentencing Judge Gerard Winter had not given Mehmood an appropriate discount for his “good character and for his fragile depressive state”.
According to the appeal judgment, the restaurateur fled civil war in Afghanistan, arriving in New Zealand in 1996 before founding Areeb Khan Foods, during which time he was given advice on his company’s tax liability.
For five-and-a-half years up until 2010, he understated staff wages by paying them partially in cash. The total amount avoided, including interest and penalties, was about $3.4m, court documents said.
The judgment said following an IRD investigation he claimed his wife divorced him and moved to Pakistan but investigators later discovered he had transferred $700,000 there – payments the Crown was pursuing as part of a separate proceeding. He also devoided himself of assets and other funds to “frustrate the IRD”.
Mehmood initially pleaded not guilty to the offending and later was assessed as being depressive and suicidal, leading to an application for a stay in his trial’s proceedings, which was declined. In July 2014 he pleaded guilty to the offences but two months later claimed he’d been framed by a business competitor and the IRD.
In his appeal, Mehmood said he couldn’t pray in his prison cell because it had a toilet, or in other areas because fellow inmates were too noisy. He said he had no access to an imam, couldn’t wash before and after praying, and refused to eat food that wasn’t halal or vegetarian.
The court had just one case precedent it could refer to: the 1995 case of a social welfare fraudster sentenced to five months periodic detention. In that case the defendant objected to his work induction on a Saturday because he was a “committed Seventh Day Adventist” whose faith prevented him from working Saturdays.
That appeal was dismissed too, although Justice Sian Elias did remark on the “inflexible approach” of the detention centre.
The Court of Appeal noted Mehmood had since been moved to a new facility where he had his own cell, could shower four times a day, had access to an imam, was provided a halal or vegetarian diet, and was given his two meals at 5pm everyday so he could eat after sunset and before sunrise.
Dismissing his appeal, the court said Mehmood was not entitled to a discount for good character or his depressive state due to the significance of his offending, and his “spectacular lack of remorse”. “If anything, the discount the judge allowed was generous,” the judgment said.
The Federation of Islamic Associations in New Zealand’s chief religious adviser Sheikh Mohammad Amir said the Islamic religion required Muslims to observe their faith wherever they were – inside or outside the wire. “The prison is not a place where they have a holiday from their religious obligation.”
Muslims saw prison not as a punishment but an opportunity for reform, and Amir believed an inability to practice their religion would impede their rehabilitation. Mehmood’s insistence on being able to practice was a “good sign” that hinted at his reform, Amir said.
“We don’t want to interfere with the law, the law is applicable for everybody,” he said. “But what we would expect is that person is not deprived of their basic rights. We’re not talking luxury or anything.”
Serco, who runs the recently opened Auckland South Corrections Facility where Mehmood is incarcerated, said the Corrections Act required the jail ensured all prisoners could practice their faith, spirituality and religion “fully and without bias, while maintaining the safety and security of the prison”.
A spokeswoman said the prison had multi faith rooms, worship areas for all faiths “within reason” and prisoners were allowed to have religious artefacts “provided they do not pose a risk to safety or security”.
Prisoner’s food was also prepared and served according to religious and cultural requirements, she said.
Corrections commissioner Jeremy Lightfoot said all prisons in New Zealand had a chaplain service and there were eight different menu categories including vegetarian, low fat and vegan food. He said: “Corrections is committed to enabling prisoners to have the opportunity to practise their religious and spiritual beliefs. That practice needs to be in the context of the safe and secure operation of the prison.
“If a prisoner feels they are being stopped from freely practising their religion they are able to file a complaint with the Ombudsman or the Prison Inspectorate.”
Corrections said prisoners self reported religious preferences but statistics weren’t readily available.