Case No. UKUT-00286-(IAC)

. (ii) The effect of the appellant’s positive contribution to the Afghan Muslim community in the United Kingdom and its interface with the wider community. This positive contribution is, not inappropriately, sometimes referred to as ‘good works’. (iii) The claim by the AICC of an unlawful interference with its freedom of choice in the selection of a minister. (iv) Findings of fact in relation to the availability of a replacement to serve the needs of the Afghan Muslim Community in the event of the appellant’s departure. (v) The competing interests of the Afghan Muslim community in retaining the presence of the appellant and preserving the benefits he provides to the community on the one hand and, on the other, the wider community whose interests the Secretary of State represents in the maintenance of a system of immigration control. 53. I shall deal with each of these matters in turn. The AICC as a religious organisation 54. Judge Petherbridge was not satisfied that the AICC was a religious organisation. I have not explored what material was before him although in finding that there was a material error of law, Judge Saini referred to the statement of Mr Hanafi and the AICC Chairman which cumulatively reflected upon whether the organisation was one that is principally or substantially religious in character, thereby engaging Article 9. Judge Saini found the First-tier Tribunal Judge failed to have due regard to this material. 55. I suspect that I have a much more complete picture. In a supplementary bundle there is a Certificate of Registration of a Place for Religious Worship in the registration district of Brent. The certificate emanates from the General Register Office in Southport and states that the premises are registered as a place of meeting for religious worship in accordance with the Places of Worship Registration Act, 1855. There are also entries provided by the Charity Commission in relation to the Afghan Islamic and Culture Centre naming the trustees, the date of registration, the adoption of the Constitution and providing that its charitable object is to advance Islamic religion in accordance with the teachings of the Qu’ran and Sunnah Prophet Mohammed (S.A.W.) to the Muslim community. I have no doubt that the Judge would have reached a different conclusion had he seen these documents. In addition, the Constitution of the AICC has been provided, the object of which (alongside offering facilities for recreation and leisure in the interests of social welfare) is that of advancing Islamic religion to the Muslim community. There is, therefore, overwhelming evidence that this is both an organisation in the sense that it is a legal entity as well as a religious organisation. 56. For my part, I would not regard it as a requirement of the definition of religious organisation that the organisation should have a legal personality. Whilst many religious communities or organisations may well have a distinct legal personality, it may not always be the case. Some may have charitable status such as to provide them with a legal personality but not all will. However, an established community of believers (or, perhaps, non-believers) whose activities are organised in the sense of having a group of elders, a board or governing committee might well be able to establish that, collectively, it is an organisation sufficient for the purposes of s. 13. The purpose, I assume, of making reference to an organisation is that, if the organisation may properly be treated as a separate entity, the elders, board or committee are able to speak as a collective voice on behalf of the community as a whole and thereby carry greater weight than the individual members who write or speak. Whilst the weight that is to be attached to the voice of an organisation will depend upon the specific circumstances of that organisation, its membership and decision-making capability (and will vary from case to case), it is reasonable that a religious community as a whole should have its views and interests taken into account.