Islamic Cultural Centre in Dublin remains closed today following internal 'crisis'
THE ISLAMIC CULTURAL Centre of Ireland in Clonskeagh, Dublin will remain closed today for weekly Muslim prayer service following an incident last weekend.
The centre said this morning that a new board has been appointed and is now carrying out a 'full review' while the premises remain closed.
'The Islamic Centre in Clonskeagh has been temporarily closed by decision of the newly appointed Board of Directors as a preventive measure to ensure the safety and security of the property, staff, children and members of the public,' the centre said.
The centre said it was looking to undertake 'reforms' that it said will 'enhance the Centre's ability to fulfill its mission' as an educational and faith-based instition for Muslims in Ireland.
The breakdown in relations among the operators of the centre has been described as a 'crisis' by the Irish Muslim Peace and Integration Council, the national representative body for Muslims in Ireland.
It has urged parties to find a way to reopen the centre and ensure its place as a 'thriving hub of faith, education, and unity' for Ireland's Muslim community.
National school
The Muslim National School also sits on the grounds of the Islamic Cultural Centre, and
The Journal
understands that talks are underway to ensure it reopens next Monday after its annual spring break.
Advertisement
The centre was founded almost 30 years ago with funding from the Dubai-based Al-Maktoum Foundation.
A
sign posted at the gate of the complex this week
said that following 'a deeply troubling incident' last Saturday, 'we have no choice but to temporarily close the Mosque and Centre'.
The notice described Saturday's incident as 'an unprecedented attack on our mosque, centre and members of the board'.
Footage taken from inside and outside the centre over the weekend, and seen by
The Journal
, shows chaotic scenes and scuffles taking place.
In the videos, men can be seen shouting and pushing back and forth against one another. Gardaí are also present inside and outside the centre and in one video, they are seen removing a man from a room after breaking up a scuffle.
Gardaí told
The Journal
that they 'responded to a civil matter' at the property last Saturday and have had no further involvement since.
The Irish Muslim Peace and Integration Council said it was 'time for a fresh start' and added that the institute 'belongs to the Muslim community, not to any one group'.
'With our experience in community representation, mediation, and institution building, we are willing to play an active role in reconciliation efforts and the reopening of the ICCI; ensuring it becomes the inclusive, transparent, and dynamic mosque that Irish Muslims deserve,' the council said.
With reporting by David Mac Redmond
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Learn More
Support The Journal
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTÉ News
9 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Hopes of significant UK funding allocation for Casement Park
The UK's Chanceller of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves is to set out her spending review in the House of Commons later today. Many are hoping that a significant allocation towards the construction of Casement Park in west Belfast will be included. The stadium, the home of Antrim GAA, has been derelict for over a decade. It is estimated that the project will cost £260 million (€296.9 million), less than half of which is already in place. The Irish Government has pledged around £43 million (€51 million), the Stormont Executive £62.5 million (€74.2 million) and the GAA £15 million (€17.8 million). A shortfall of £140 million remains. It was hoped that the stadium could have been redeveloped for Euro 2028 but this did not come to pass. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said afterwards that he wanted an "alternative proposition". Many, including in the GAA, are quietly hopeful that a significant sum will be provided later today. However, the Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves is facing huge spending demands from across Whitehall. Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Hilary Benn, has been among cabinet members pushing for increased funding for his department, including money for Casement Park. However, Mr Benn has previously stated too that the UK government cannot plug the full £140 million gap. The Stormont Executive committed to redeveloping Casement Park in 2011 as part of a strategy to revamp football's Windsor Park and the rugby ground at Ravenhill. While the two other Belfast-based projects went ahead, the redevelopment of Casement was delayed. Intense lobbying efforts have been underway in recent times, with Ulster GAA visiting Westminster last week, to press politicians on the need to include a significant allocation in today's spending review. Last week Northern Ireland's First Minister Michelle O'Neill also called on the British government to provide substantial funding to help rebuild Casement Park. Taoiseach Micheál Martin stated last September that he would not rule out further money being provided by the Irish Government. The 34,500 capacity stadium has planning permission until July 2026 so it is hoped construction can start before then. This afternoon's Spending Review will be a pivotal moment for the UK government, as it maps out its day-to-day spending and investment plans for much of the remainder of the parliament. Defence, health and infrastructure are likely to be prioritised, in what is otherwise a constrained spending package.
The Journal
10 hours ago
- The Journal
US and Europe submit UN resolution condemning Iran 'non-compliance' with nuclear obligations
THREE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES and the United States have submitted a resolution to the UN's nuclear watchdog board condemning Iran's 'non-compliance' with its nuclear obligations. France, Germany, the UK and the US formally tabled the resolution at this week's board meeting of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is expected to come to a vote tomorrow evening at the earliest. It is the latest move in a years-long effort to restrict Iran's nuclear activities over fears that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, which it denies. The diplomatic manoeuvre comes as the United States and Iran have held several rounds of talks mediated by Oman aimed at securing an agreement on limiting Iran's nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. 'The text has been submitted,' three diplomatic sources told AFP tonight. The draft resolution obtained by AFP calls on Iran 'to urgently remedy its non-compliance' with its commitments under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). It also 'deeply regrets' that Tehran 'despite repeated calls from the Board and many opportunities offered… has failed to cooperate fully with the Agency'. The agency's 'inability… to provide assurance that Iran's nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful gives rise to questions that are within the competence of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC)', which can draw up sanctions. The resolution follows an IAEA report in late May that showed 'a general lack of cooperation' by Tehran, diplomats said, including in providing 'credible' answers to questions by the agency as well as the theft of confidential documents and the cleaning up of undeclared sites. Advertisement The report also criticised 'less than satisfactory' cooperation from Tehran, particularly in explaining nuclear material found at undeclared sites in the past. For years, the agency has been trying to obtain clarification on nuclear material and equipment found at undeclared sites and resulting from undeclared activities carried out until the early 2000s. Iran has accelerated its production of near-weapons-grade uranium in recent months. Iran's ambassador to the IAEA Reza Najafi rejected the recent IAEA report, telling AFP that it 'lacks a firm and hard foundation' and 'many issues in the report are referring to past issues'. 'Claiming that Iran is not cooperating fully is not acceptable,' he said, adding that the resolution was 'politically motivated'. Najafi also threatened that Iran will 'react very strongly', in case the resolution is adopted. Iran had earlier accused Israel of contributing 'unreliable and misleading information' to it. The development comes with high tensions in the Middle East over Israel's military offensive in Gaza. Iran has denied seeking nuclear arms and says it needs the uranium for civilian power production. © AFP 2025
RTÉ News
a day ago
- RTÉ News
How Trump's actions against LA protesters defy all precedents
Analysis: Trump's unilateral decision to take federal control over the National Guard pits the president against the state of California Violence has erupted on the streets of cities across southern California over the weekend, as protesters clashed with agents from the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency detaining people they suspected to be illegal immigrants. The US president, Donald Trump, took the unusual decision on Saturday to deploy 2,000 troops from California's National Guard, despite not being requested to by the state's governor, Gavin Newsom. Newsom has threatened to sue Trump over what he has called "an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act". Other California officials have also denounced the move, with Senator Adam Schiff calling it a "dangerous precedent for unilateral misuse of the guard across the country". Raids by ICE agents have increased significantly since mid-May when the Trump administration threatened to fire senior ICE officials if they did not deliver on higher arrest quotas. Several high-profile wrongful arrests of US citizens have further inflamed tensions. Protests have escalated in California, a Democratic stronghold and a "sanctuary state" where local law enforcement does not cooperate with ICE to detain illegal immigrants. At around 24,000 troops, California's National Guard is the largest in the United States. Each state has its own National Guard unit, a reserve force under the control of the governor which can be called upon in times of crisis – often to help out during natural disasters or other emergencies. For example, in January, Newsom activated several thousand troops to aid relief work during the devastating fires that threatened Los Angeles. In 1992, the then president, George H.W. Bush, backed the call of the then governor of California, Pete Wilson, call to deploy National Guard members to quell the South Central LA riots. From RTÉ Radio 1's Today with Claire Byrne, Los Angeles-based reporter Sean Mandell reports on the ongoing LA protests Now troops are back on the streets of LA. But this time not at the behest of the governor. Trump's unilateral decision to take federal control over the National Guard pits the president against the state of California – and importantly, against a state that has constantly resisted his anti-immigrant agenda. Newsom is seen by many as a possible contender for the Democratic Party's nomination in the 2028 presidential election. Historical precedents Is there a precedent for this? Yes and no. The Insurrection Act (passed in 1807, but revised several times) authorises the president to call on the National Guard in times of crisis or war to supplement state and local forces. This has been codified in title 10 of the US Code, which details the laws of the land. In 1871, the law was revised to specifically allow for the National Guard to be used in the protection of civil rights for black Americans. Legal experts have long called for reform of the Insurrection Act, arguing that the language is too vague and open to misuse. From RTÉ News, Trump calls deployment of troops in Los Angeles a 'great decision' In the past, former US presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson all invoked different sections of the Act to protect civil rights, particularly against segregationist states. While the act implies consent between governor and president, it does not require it. Two examples stand out. On June 11 1963, Kennedy issued executive order 11111 mobilising the National Guard to protect desegregation of the University of Alabama, against the wishes of Alabama governor George Wallace. Wallace's determination to block the registration of two black students, Vivian Malone and James Hood, produced a produced a sensational media moment when Wallace physically blocked the entrance of the university. Local law enforcement stood by the governor. With the state of Alabama in defiance of federal law, Kennedy saw no alternative but to deploy the guard. Less than two years later, in March 1965 Lyndon B. Johnson again deployed the guard in Alabama, bypassing Governor Wallace. In February, a state trooper in the town of Marion killed a young voters-rights activist, Jimmie Lee Jackson. This shooting, along with several violent attacks by the local police on voter registration activists in Selma, inspired a series of marches in support of the 1965 voting rights bill. On the eve of the march from Selma to Montgomery, tensions between local police and civil rights protesters were at a high. In response, Johnson bypassed Wallace and called in the National Guard to ensure, as he put it, the rights of Americans "to walk peaceably and safely without injury or loss of life from Selma to Montgomery". Before last Saturday, this was the last time a president circumvented the authority of the state governor in deploying the guard. But even in this instance, there was an implied request from Wallace, who explicitly requested federal aid in the absence of state resources. The subtext here is that Wallace did not want to be seen to call up the National Guard himself, so he forced Johnson to make that decision, allowing him to claim that the president was trampling on state sovereignty. Insurrection Act But this is not the current situation in California. The LAPD is the third largest police force in the US, with over just under 9,000 sworn officers. While its ranks have shrunk in recent years, it has been responding to the recent protests and unrest. There is no reason to think that Newsom would hesitate to call in the National Guard if warranted. In reality, Trump has invoked the Insurrection Act to protect ICE agents. Indeed, the National Guard has a complicated history of responding to civil unrest. The current situation is in stark contrast with the past, and faces serious questions of legitimacy. It is difficult not to see this as the latest move by the Trump administration to subjugate California. In early January Trump threatened to withhold federal aid to rebuild after the wildfires. In past months he threatened to withdraw all of the state's federal funding to punish it for its stance on campus protests and the inclusion of transgender athletes in women's sports. Unlike his predecessors, Trump has not mobilised the National Guard to protect civil rights against a hostile police force. Instead, he appears to be using this as leverage to undermine a political opponent he views as blocking his agenda. Circumventing gubernatorial powers over the National Guard in this way has no precedent and heralds the next stage in an extended conflict between the president and the state of California.
