Police are facing criticism for failing to investigate allegations of widespread election fraud as the judge who sacked Britain’s first Muslim mayor warned of ‘postal voting factories’

The Metropolitan Police has come under fire for failing to do anything to address concerns about Rahman’s behaviour since he became leader of the council in 2008 and then the elected mayor two years later.

Instead it was left to four ordinary voters who picked up the case after it was dropped by the police to convince the courts of Rahman’s corruption.

On Thursday night senior Met commanders were locked in an urgent meeting to decide whether the findings of the Electoral Court warranted a full criminal investigation. (Of course they bl**dy do)

And with less than two weeks to go before Britain goes to the polls in the general election, the spectre of voting fraud was also raised when the Election Commissioner warned of “postal voting factories” where thousands of fake votes were being cast. 

In a damning ruling handed down by election judge Richard Mawrey QC, the court heard that such was the level of corruption that the 2014 mayoral election in Tower Hamlets was void and would have to be run again. The former mayor, who was not in court for the judgment, was ordered to pay £250,000 costs, with possible liability for far more.

Rahman’s demise came only after four ordinary Tower Hamlets voters risked personal ruin to bring the case. 

Andy Erlam, the leader of the petitioners, said that police and the Electoral Commission had been “useless” and had “done nothing” to bring Rahman to justice.

“Electoral fraud cases were brought to the attention of the police before the petition started but they didn’t take it seriously,” he said. “They were far too close to the mayor. It is quite wrong that individuals should have to risk bankruptcy. If we’d have lost, the costs would have been about £1 million, we would have lost everything.”

Mr Erlam said that police took bogus complaints by Rahman’s supporters against him seriously and at one point threatened him with being interviewed under caution. Meanwhile, he said, they did nothing to tackle the core allegations or the “serious intimidation” conducted against anti-Rahman witnesses in the case. Some such witnesses withdrew or changed their evidence as a result, he said.

In his landmark verdict, Mr Mawrey ruled that Rahman ran a “ruthless and dishonest” campaign and was guilty of “bribery, treating and undue influence,” “making false statements against another candidate” and “undue spiritual influence” – using religion to influence votes.

Rahman’s supporters registered or cast hundreds of fake postal votes, the judge ruled, and a handwriting expert gave evidence to the court that hundreds of ballot papers may have been completed by the same person. They also lied to voters that his main opponent, Labour’s John Biggs, was a racist and said that voting for Rahman was an “Islamic duty”.