Unknown Teacher

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions herself. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel.

Teacher reference number:

1148549

Teacher's date of birth:

16 July 1984

Location teacher worked:

Bolton, North West England

Date of professional conduct panel:

14 January 2016

Outcome type:

Prohibition order

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with The Teacher's’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, a professional conduct panel was convened to consider the case of Mr Jamshed Javeed, formerly employed in Bolton, North West England .

The proceedings were held at 53 to 55 Butts Road, Earlsdon Park, Coventry CV1 3BH at 9.30am on 14 January 2016.

Teacher misconduct

Ground Floor, South

Cheylesmore House

5 Quinton RoadCoventryCV1 2WT

Email TRA.Casework@education.gov.uk

Telephone 020 7593 5393

Information about regulating the teaching profession and the process for dealing with serious teacher misconduct.

Mr Jamshed Javeed: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education January 2015 2 Contents A. Introduction 3 B. Allegations 4 C. Preliminary applications 4 D. Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 E. Decision and reasons 5 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 6 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 8 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Jamshed Javeed Teacher ref number: 1148549 Teacher date of birth: 16 July 1984 NCTL case reference: 12624 Date of determination: 14 January 2016 Former employer: Sharples School, Bolton A. Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the National College for Teaching and Leadership (“the National College”) convened on 14 January 2016 at 53 to 55 Butts Road, Earlsdon Park, Coventry CV1 3BH to consider the case of Mr Jamshed Javeed. The panel members were Mr Tony Woodward (teacher panellist – in the chair), Mr Tony James (teacher panellist) and Mrs Mahfia Watkinson (nee Choudhury) (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Miss Clare Strickland of Blake Morgan LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the National College was Mr Ben Chapman of Browne Jacobson solicitors. Mr Javeed was not present and was not represented. The hearing took place in public and was recorded. 4 B. Allegations The panel considered the allegation(s) set out in the Notice of Proceedings dated 16 October 2015. It was alleged that Mr Javeed had been convicted, at any time, of relevant offence, namely: 1. Engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts, between 1 July 2013 and 12 March 2014, contrary to section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006 for which he was sentenced at Woolwich Crown Court on 5 March 2015 to 6 years' imprisonment, licence extended by 3 years under section 226A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, a victim surcharge of £120 and a forfeiture and destruction order. 2. Engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts, between 1 July 2013 and 12 March 2014, contrary to section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006 for which he was sentenced at Woolwich Crown Court on 5 March 2015 to 6 years' imprisonment, licence extended by 3 years under section 226A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 concurrent. Mr Javeed has made no admissions. C. Preliminary applications The panel first considered whether to proceed in the absence of Mr Javeed. It was satisfied that the notice of proceedings has been properly served, and the panel was content that Mr Javeed has actual notice of these proceedings. It then considered whether to exercise its discretion to proceed in Mr Javeed's absence. The panel noted an email dated 12 January 2016 from the Senior Officer at HMP Manchester. She makes clear that Mr Javeed is fully aware of today's proceedings, does not wish to reply, does not make any representations, and will not be instructing a legal team. She reports that he will not be challenging the charges. The panel noted that this information was second- hand, coming as it did from the prison officer, but was satisfied as to its contents. In these circumstances, the panel is satisfied that he has made an informed decision to voluntarily absent himself, and that adjourning this hearing would not serve any purpose. The panel could see no public or other interest in adjourning today. The panel will of course ensure that it conducts this hearing with scrupulous care and take account of all points that could be put forward in Mr Javeed's favour. D. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology – page 2 5 Section 2: Notice of Proceedings and response form (blank) – pages 4 to 10 Section 3: NCTL witness statements – not applicable Section 4: NCTL documents – pages 13 - 65 Section 5: Teacher documents – none In addition, the panel agreed to accept the following:  Email from the Senior Officer at HMP Manchester, dated 12 January 2016 – this was added to the bundle at page 66 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents in advance of the hearing. E. Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: We have now carefully considered the case before us and have reached a decision. Mr Javeed was a chemistry teacher employed at Sharples School from 1 September 2012 to 11 November 2014. At the time of his convictions, he was 30 years old and had a wife and young child. By the late summer of 2013, he had become radicalised and committed to a violent Jihadist ideology. He became part of a small group of young men (including his younger brother) who were determined to travel to Syria and join ISIS. He provided essential funding and equipment that assisted his brother and three other men to travel to Syria and fight for ISIS. One of them has been killed; his brother has been missing for a year and the others have not returned. Mr Javeed made plans to travel to Syria himself, along with another, despite attempts by his family to stop him. They pleaded with him, and his wife told him she was pregnant in an attempt to keep him at home. But Mr Javeed was determined to go, and he fraudulently obtained a replacement passport after his family had hidden his original one. He replaced clothing and equipment that they had taken from him. Mr Javeed was arrested in December 2013, and initially denied intending to travel to Syria. He later pleaded guilty to two offences of engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts, and was sentenced to an extended sentence of 9 years' imprisonment comprising a custodial sentence of 6 years and an extended licence period of 3 years on each count concurrent. In sentencing him, the His Honour Judge Topololski said: I am satisfied … that you remain adherent to a violent Jihadist mindset, therefore you are in my judgment an individual whose potential danger to the public in this country or abroad is clear. 6 Findings of fact Our findings of fact are as follows: We have had regard to the documents adduced by the presenting officer, including the certificate of conviction, police national computer printout and transcript of sentencing comments. In light of this evidence we are satisfied that Mr Javeed was convicted as alleged. Findings as to a conviction of a relevant offence The panel finds that Mr Javeed has been convicted of relevant offences. In doing so, the panel has had regard to the document Teacher Misconduct: The Prohibition of Teachers, which we refer to as “the Advice”. Mr Javeed has been convicted of two offences of terrorism and sentenced to a substantial term of imprisonment. We note that terrorism is listed in the Advice as an offence that is likely to be a relevant offence, and we agree that in this case, they are relevant offences. We have had regard to the fact that the offences were not specifically related to his teaching, but they are plainly in our view relevant to Mr Javeed's fitness to teach, amounting as they do to serious crimes against the state which go directly to the protection of the public and public confidence in the teaching profession. Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State The panel recommends that a prohibition order should be made, and that Mr Javeed should not be allowed to make a future application to have the prohibition reviewed. The panel considers that such an order is proportionate in light of the seriousness of Mr Javeed's convictions. They amount to a very serious departure from the personal conduct elements of the Teachers' Standards. His actions undermined fundamental British values of democracy, the rule of law and the mutual respect of those with different faiths and beliefs. His offences demonstrate a fundamental and deep seated attitude that led to harmful behaviour. When considering whether Mr Javeed should be allowed to make an application to review the prohibition order, we had particular regard to the assessment of His Honour Judge Topoloski that Mr Javeed was a dangerous offender. In March 2015, he was satisfied that Mr Javeed remained adherent to a violent Jihadist mindset and presented a clear potential danger to the public. This panel has received no evidence or information to cast doubt on that assessment or to suggest that the position has changed. 7 Mr Javeed actively promoted religious extremism from a position of trust as an older professional man over younger people, including his brother, albeit that this was not within a teacher/pupil relationship. The panel has had particular regard to the fact that teachers are role models, and can have significant influence over children and young people. In light of this, the panel considers that should Mr Javeed be allowed to teach in the future, he would present an unacceptable risk of harm to pupils. It would also fundamentally undermine public confidence in the profession for a person convicted of such a serious offence to be allowed to teach, and would wholly fail to declare and uphold proper standards for teachers. Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State The panel recommends that a prohibition order should be made, and that Mr Javeed should not be allowed to make a future application to have the prohibition reviewed. The panel considers that such an order is proportionate in light of the seriousness of Mr Javeed's convictions. They amount to a very serious departure from the personal conduct elements of the Teachers' Standards. His actions undermined fundamental British values of democracy, the rule of law and the mutual respect of those with different faiths and beliefs. His offences demonstrate a fundamental and deep seated attitude that led to harmful behaviour. When considering whether Mr Javeed should be allowed to make an application to review the prohibition order, we had particular regard to the assessment of His Honour Judge Topoloski that Mr Javeed was a dangerous offender. In March 2015, he was satisfied that Mr Javeed remained adherent to a violent Jihadist mindset and presented a clear potential danger to the public. This panel has received no evidence or information to cast doubt on that assessment or to suggest that the position has changed. Mr Javeed actively promoted religious extremism from a position of trust as an older professional man over younger people, including his brother, albeit that this was not within a teacher/pupil relationship. The panel has had particular regard to the fact that teachers are role models, and can have significant influence over children and young people. In light of this, the panel considers that should Mr Javeed be allowed to teach in the future, he would present an unacceptable risk of harm to pupils. It would also fundamentally undermine public confidence in the profession for a person convicted of such a serious offence to be allowed to teach, and would wholly fail to declare and uphold proper standards for teachers. 8 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State I have considered very carefully the findings and recommendations of the panel in this case. The panel has found the allegations proven, given Mr Javeed has been convicted as alleged, of a relevant offence. Mr Javeed has been convicted of engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts. His actions undermined fundamental British values of democracy, the rule of law and the mutual respect of those with different faiths and beliefs. I note that the panel has taken due regard to the fact that the offences were not specifically related to Mr Javeed’s teaching, but that they are plainly relevant to his fitness to teach. I have considered the public interest in this case. I agree with the panel that allowing Mr Javeed to teach in the future would present an unacceptable risk of harm to pupils. It would also undermine public confidence in the profession. Due to the serious nature of this case and for the reasons set out above, I agree with the panel’s recommendation, that a prohibition order should be imposed and that no review period should be allowed. This means that Mr Jamshed Javeed is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. Furthermore, in view of the seriousness of the allegations found proved against him, I have decided that Mr Javeed shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach. This order takes effect from the date on which it is served on the teacher. Mr Javeed has a right of appeal to the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court within 28 days from the date he is given notice of this order. Decision maker: Jayne Millions Date: 18 January 2016 This decision is taken by the decision maker named above on behalf of the Secretary of State.