Nigel Farage erupted at the Archbishop of Canterbury in a row over her giving an award to a Muslim cleric who praised Osama bin Laden. Hafiz Muhammad Tahir Mehmood Ashrafi received the honour for reconciliation and interfaith cooperation last week on the anniversary of 9/11.
But Dame Sarah Mullally was forced to withdraw the award following a backlash after it emerged he praised the mastermind of the terror attacks in comments made in 2007. Speaking on his GB News show, the Reform UK leader said: “Every time we get a new Archbishop I think it must get better, it doesn’t, it gets worse.”
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage (Image: GB NEWS)
Mr Farage added: “Why oh why is the Archbishop of Canterbury giving an award to a man who praised Osama bin Laden just a few years after the Twin Towers?”
Mr Ashrafi, the chairman of the Pakistan Ulema Council which is a group of Islamic scholars, received the award “for his outstanding work as an ambassador of interfaith harmony in Pakistan”.
But the honour sparked a backlash after past comments emerged that he made about Bin Laden.
Speaking after The Satanic Versus author Sir Salman Rushdie was knighted in 2007, Mr Ashrafi said: “We are pleased to award the title of Saifullah [sword of God] to Osama bin Laden after the British government’s decision to bestow the title of ‘Sir’ on blasphemer Rushdie. This is the highest title for a Muslim warrior.
“If a blasphemer can be given the title ‘Sir’ by the West despite the fact he’s hurt the feelings of Muslims, then a mujahid who has been fighting for Islam against the Russians, Americans and British must be given the lofty title of Islam, Saifullah.”
Lambeth Palace said in a statement yesterday that the award had been withdrawn.
It said: “The award was given for Imam Ashrafi’s longstanding support for religious minorities in Pakistan, particularly the Christian community – support that is valued by many Christians in Pakistan including its Anglican Church.
“It is a longstanding principle of interfaith dialogue and co-operation that we must engage with one another across deeply-held differences, and that remains the case.
“However, previous comments made by Imam Ashrafi have come to light that have led Lambeth Palace to reconsider this award and we can now confirm today that the award has been withdrawn. We have contacted Imam Ashrafi to make him aware of this decision.”
A spokesman for Mr Ashrafi and his council said his remarks had been taken “out of context”.
He said: “Our position against terrorism, extremism, suicide attacks and the killing of innocent people is clear and unequivocal. We have consistently worked for peace, moderation and interfaith harmony.”
Nigel Farage Hits Back at Archbishop of Canterbury After Row Over Award to Muslim Cleric
Nigel Farage has launched a fierce criticism of the Archbishop of Canterbury after a controversial award presented to a Pakistani Muslim cleric was withdrawn following the resurfacing of historic comments about Osama bin Laden. The Reform UK leader questioned the judgement behind the original decision, turning an already sensitive dispute into a wider debate about religious leadership, interfaith relations and accountability within Britain’s established institutions.
The controversy centres on Hafiz Muhammad Tahir Mehmood Ashrafi, a prominent Pakistani religious figure who received the Hubert Walter Award for Reconciliation and Interfaith Cooperation from Archbishop Sarah Mullally at Lambeth Palace in September 2026. The honour was intended to recognise his work supporting religious minorities, particularly Christians in Pakistan.
However, the decision came under intense scrutiny after comments Ashrafi made in 2007 about bin Laden became public. Following the backlash, Lambeth Palace confirmed that the award had been withdrawn.
Farage used his GB News programme to challenge the Archbishop’s judgement, asking why such an honour had been given to someone who had previously spoken positively about the al-Qaeda leader. The dispute has since raised difficult questions about how religious institutions assess award recipients and balance interfaith engagement with scrutiny of an individual’s past statements.
Farage Questions the Archbishop’s Decision
Farage’s reaction was direct. He criticised the Archbishop for presenting the award and suggested that the decision reflected a serious failure of judgement.
The Reform UK leader said he had hoped each new Archbishop of Canterbury would bring improvement, but argued that this latest controversy had made matters worse. He also questioned how a person associated with remarks praising bin Laden could be recognised for reconciliation and cooperation between religious communities.
For Farage, the issue was not simply the presentation of an award. It concerned the credibility of an institution that occupies a prominent position in British public life.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is one of the most recognisable religious leaders in the country, and decisions made at Lambeth Palace can attract attention far beyond the Church of England. When an award is given in the name of reconciliation, the recipient’s public record becomes particularly important because the honour carries an implied endorsement of their contribution.
Nevertheless, Farage’s criticism should be distinguished from the formal decision made by Lambeth Palace. His comments were a political response to the controversy, while the Archbishop’s office subsequently confirmed that the award had been withdrawn after reviewing the historical remarks.
Why the Muslim Cleric Received the Award
The Hubert Walter Award for Reconciliation and Interfaith Cooperation was intended to recognise Ashrafi’s work promoting relationships between religious communities in Pakistan.
According to Lambeth Palace, the honour recognised his longstanding support for religious minorities, particularly the Christian community. The office also noted that his work had been valued by some Christians in Pakistan, including members of the Anglican Church.
The award was presented during the 2026 Lambeth Awards ceremony, held at Lambeth Palace on September 11. The ceremony marked the first Lambeth Awards presented by Sarah Mullally since she became Archbishop of Canterbury.
The awards recognise contributions across several areas, including service to the Church of England, the Anglican Communion, education, community work and interfaith cooperation.
The stated purpose of Ashrafi’s award was therefore connected to his work with religious minorities, rather than an endorsement of every statement he had made throughout his life.
That distinction is important. Individuals involved in interfaith initiatives may have complicated histories, and their current work cannot always be understood through a single past statement. At the same time, historical comments can become relevant when an institution chooses to honour someone for promoting reconciliation.
The central question is whether the background information available about a potential recipient was adequately considered before the award was presented.
The 2007 Remarks That Sparked the Backlash
The controversy centres on comments Ashrafi made in 2007 following the decision to award British author Salman Rushdie a knighthood.
Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses had generated intense controversy in parts of the Muslim world. Some religious figures regarded the book as offensive, while Rushdie’s supporters defended his right to literary expression and freedom of speech.
In the aftermath of the knighthood announcement, Ashrafi said he would give bin Laden the title Saifullah, meaning “Sword of God”. He described bin Laden as a Muslim warrior and referred to fighting against Russian, American and British forces.
The remarks attracted renewed attention because bin Laden was the founder of al-Qaeda and the figure associated with the planning of the September 11 terrorist attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people in the United States in 2001.
Ashrafi’s comments were made several years after those attacks and became particularly contentious when they resurfaced in connection with the award.
The timing of the honour added another layer to the controversy. It was presented on September 11, 2026, the 25th anniversary of the attacks.
Critics argued that recognising someone whose past comments had praised bin Laden was difficult to reconcile with an award intended to promote harmony between religious communities.
Lambeth Palace Withdraws the Honour
On September 17, Lambeth Palace announced that it had withdrawn the Hubert Walter Award presented to Ashrafi.
In its statement, the Archbishop’s office explained that the award had originally been granted in recognition of his work supporting religious minorities in Pakistan. However, it said previous comments had come to light that led the institution to reconsider its decision.
The announcement confirmed that the award had been withdrawn and that Ashrafi had been informed.
The statement also reaffirmed the importance of interfaith dialogue. Lambeth Palace said that cooperation between people with deeply held differences remained a longstanding principle.
This distinction matters because withdrawing an award does not necessarily mean abandoning the idea of engagement between religious communities. Instead, the Palace’s decision indicated that the historical remarks had become sufficiently serious to warrant reconsideration of the honour.
The reversal also raises questions about the process used to assess award recipients. If information about controversial historical statements emerges only after a public ceremony, institutions can face criticism for failing to identify potential reputational risks beforehand.
Lambeth Palace has publicly explained why the award was withdrawn, although the available statement does not provide a detailed account of the checks carried out before the original presentation.
Ashrafi’s Representatives Defend His Position
Ashrafi’s representatives have rejected the suggestion that the disputed remarks should be treated as an endorsement of terrorism.
A spokesman argued that the comments had been taken out of context and said Ashrafi’s position against terrorism, extremism, suicide attacks and the killing of innocent people was clear.
The defence centres on the argument that the 2007 remarks were part of a comparison concerning the anger some Muslims felt over Rushdie’s knighthood, rather than a declaration of support for attacks on civilians.
That explanation does not remove the controversy surrounding the words themselves. The remarks remain the reason the award attracted criticism and was ultimately withdrawn.
However, it is important to distinguish between the documented wording of a statement and the broader conclusions people draw from it. Ashrafi’s representatives dispute the interpretation that the comments demonstrate support for terrorism, while Lambeth Palace concluded that they were serious enough to reconsider the honour.
The public debate therefore involves both the content of the historical remarks and the question of how those remarks should be weighed against an individual’s later activities.
The Difficult Balance Between Dialogue and Accountability
The controversy highlights a challenge faced by religious organisations that promote cooperation across different faiths.
Interfaith dialogue often involves engaging with people whose beliefs, political views or histories differ significantly. The purpose is not necessarily to establish complete agreement, but to create opportunities for cooperation, reduce hostility and protect communities facing discrimination.
In Pakistan, where religious minorities have faced significant challenges, efforts to build relationships between Muslim and Christian communities can have practical importance.
However, institutions that recognise individuals for this work must also consider whether their public record is consistent with the values represented by the award.
There is a difference between engaging in dialogue with a controversial figure and formally honouring that person. Dialogue can provide an opportunity to challenge beliefs and encourage cooperation. An award, by contrast, publicly recognises someone’s contribution and can be interpreted as an endorsement of their standing.
Critics of the original decision argue that Ashrafi’s comments should have been identified before the ceremony. Others may argue that a person’s wider record deserves consideration and that historical remarks should be assessed in their proper context.
The challenge for institutions is to apply transparent criteria without treating every past controversy as automatically disqualifying.
Why the September 11 Anniversary Matters
The date of the award ceremony became a major element of the backlash.
September 11 is associated with the attacks carried out by al-Qaeda in 2001. The anniversary is a time of remembrance for victims and their families, including the British citizens who died in the attacks.
Presenting an award to a cleric whose past remarks praised bin Laden on the 25th anniversary of the attacks created an obvious reputational problem for Lambeth Palace.
The available evidence does not establish that the ceremony was intended to make a statement about the attacks or bin Laden. The award was formally connected to reconciliation and interfaith cooperation.
Nevertheless, the date intensified scrutiny once the historical comments became public. It also demonstrated why the context surrounding an award can be as important to public reaction as the stated reason for presenting it.
Farage’s Political Criticism and the Wider Debate
Farage’s intervention has brought the controversy into a broader political argument about religious leadership, integration and the responsibilities of established institutions.
The Reform UK leader has frequently criticised institutions that he believes fail to respond adequately to concerns about extremism and public accountability. The Ashrafi case provides an example he can use to question how decisions are made by prominent religious organisations.
However, the controversy should not be taken as evidence about Muslims generally. It concerns a particular individual’s historical remarks, a specific award and the decision by the Archbishop’s office to withdraw it.
Nor does the dispute establish that interfaith cooperation itself is misguided. The official explanation for the award focused on support for religious minorities, and Lambeth Palace has maintained that dialogue across religious differences remains important.
The more specific issue is how an institution should assess a person’s past statements before publicly recognising their work.
That question is relevant not only to religious awards but also to charities, universities, public bodies and other organisations that confer honours.
What the Controversy Means for the Archbishop
For Sarah Mullally, the affair has created scrutiny early in her tenure as Archbishop of Canterbury.
The withdrawal demonstrates that Lambeth Palace was prepared to reverse its decision after the historical comments came to light. However, it has also prompted questions about whether more extensive checks could have prevented the controversy.
A clear and consistent process for assessing award recipients could help institutions identify relevant statements, distinguish between disputed allegations and documented facts, and explain why a person is being honoured.
Such procedures would not eliminate disagreement. They could, however, make decisions easier to understand and reduce the likelihood of institutions being forced into public reversals.
The case also shows that promoting reconciliation requires credibility. An institution that recognises someone for bringing communities together must be prepared to explain how it assessed the person’s record and why it believes the honour is justified.
Conclusion
Nigel Farage’s criticism of the Archbishop of Canterbury has intensified a controversy that began with the presentation of an award to a Pakistani Muslim cleric and grew after historic remarks about Osama bin Laden resurfaced.
The key events are clear: Ashrafi received the Hubert Walter Award for Reconciliation and Interfaith Cooperation, his 2007 comments attracted renewed scrutiny, and Lambeth Palace subsequently withdrew the honour.
Ashrafi’s representatives have defended his wider record and disputed the interpretation of the remarks. The Archbishop’s office, meanwhile, has reaffirmed its commitment to interfaith cooperation while explaining that the historical comments prompted the reversal.
The affair raises important questions about due diligence, institutional accountability and the balance between recognising someone’s work and scrutinising their past.
Farage has used the episode to challenge the Archbishop’s judgement, but the broader issue extends beyond the political dispute. Institutions that confer public honours must be able to explain their decisions, especially when the values represented by an award are central to its meaning.
The challenge is to ensure that genuine efforts towards reconciliation are recognised while maintaining clear standards for public honours. That requires careful scrutiny, transparent reasoning and a willingness to reconsider decisions when important new information emerges.