Charity watchdog to examine mosque attended by Manchester Arena bomber and his family

An inquiry into the attack criticised Didsbury Mosque for 'wilful blindness'

Manchester Arena bomber Salman Abedi holding a 50 calibre machine gun in Libya, where it is believed he was radicalised. Photo: Manchester Arena Inquiry

The UK's charity watchdog has announced it is examining the mosque attended by the Manchester Arena bomber Salman Abedi and his family.

It comes after the publication of an inquiry into the atrocity, which criticised Didsbury Mosque, also known as Manchester Islamic Centre, for allowing "toxic" political meetings about Libya to take place on its premises even after the attack.

Suicide attacker Abedi exploded a bomb hidden in his backpack at the end of an Ariana Grande concert at the arena in May 2017.

It led to the deaths of 22 people and injured more than 1,000 others.

Last week a report into the attack examined the mosque Abedi attended and concluded it had a form of "willful blindness in respect of the activities that occurred" at the site.

"That was weak leadership," Sir John Saunders said in his report.

"On any view, in the years leading up to the attack, the leadership of the mosque did not pay sufficient attention to what went on at its premises and did not have policies in place that were robust enough to prevent the politicisation of its premises, which I find occurred. It should have done. That is a lesson that all religious establishments must learn."

Sir John said he had stepped back from reporting the mosque to the Charity Commission and said the watchdog was "best placed to reach its own judgement about whether further action is required".

Following his comments, the Commission has told The National it is assessing the concerns raised in the report.

"We are actively considering the findings of the Manchester Arena Bombing Public Inquiry report and have opened a regulatory compliance case to assess concerns raised about The Islamic Centre," it said.

“We previously met with trustees at The Islamic Centre as part of our regulatory casework and as a result issued advice and guidance.

"We also issued an action plan, which sought to address regulatory concerns to improve the charity’s management and administration. Upon further engagement with the trustees, we determined that the action plan had been complied with.”

Abedi and his family attended the mosque for years. His father held the calls to prayer and his mother and elder brother volunteered there.

Sir John concluded the Abedi family had a long relationship with the mosque.

"In the course of engaging with the inquiry the leadership should have investigated matters more thoroughly and provided a more complete and accurate account of the Abedis’ connection," he said.

However, he did conclude the mosque was not an active factor in his radicalisation.

Salman, who died aged 22, and his brother Hashem, 25, who was sentenced to life in jail for his role in plotting the 2017 attack, had visited Libya during the civil war in 2011 and they were probably involved in the fighting, Sir John said.

The report concludes that the brothers were radicalised in Libya and had probably received training or assistance from there in building the bomb used in the attack.

Sir John has concluded political meetings regarding Libya did take place at the mosque.

"The leadership of the mosque must have known that during this period there existed what Dr Wilkinson correctly concluded was a “very toxic political environment” among members of the congregation related to the situation in Libya," he said.

"First, in 2011, the leadership of the mosque dealt with a situation in which one of the imams, Mustafa Graf, had been detained in Libya amid claims that he had been fighting; an image of him in military fatigues had emerged. Then subsequently, the leadership of the mosque had to deal with a controversial sermon delivered by Mustafa Graf, which in one view, although not the only view, encouraged support for armed jihad in Syria and other parts of the Muslim world.

"It must have been clear to the leadership that the political situation in Libya was a prominent issue in the mosque for years before 2017.

"I do not consider that the evidence enables me to go so far as to say that the meetings were organised by those who supported extremism, but I do accept that meetings took place that were focused upon the political situation in Libya and at which individuals who supported the fighting there were present. I also accept that such meetings continued in the years after the attack; video evidence of one such meeting in February 2020 was produced."

Didsbury Mosque has denied Libyan extremist meetings took place.

“There were no meetings of radical Libyan groups at the mosque. Evidence was provided to the Inquiry that proved there is a longstanding policy of not allowing overseas politics at the mosque,” the mosque leadership said.

“Like many mosques the meeting room was hired for humanitarian aid work in Libya and for other countries. This is not evidence of extremism.

“We did not accept weak management in [overlooking] Libyan or other politics."

The inquiry found the attack was underpinned by authorities’ failure to assess and address the threat posed by terrorists returning to Britain from Libya.

Last week the chief of MI5 made an unprecedented public apology as he acknowledged the security service did not seize the “slim” chance it had of thwarting the Manchester Arena terror attack.