Lutfur Rahman was elected as mayor of Tower Hamlets, but he was removed from office

A former London mayor has declared himself bankrupt sparking a High Court battle over half a million pounds of legal costs.

Lutfur Rahman was elected as mayor of Tower Hamlets, but he was removed from office after being found guilty of corrupt and illegal practices after accusations of claiming racism and Islamophobia to silence his critics.

Four voters, led writer and filmmaker Andy Erlam, had taken legal action against him under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act.

He was found guilty of wrongdoing in by Election Commissioner Richard Mawrey after an Election Court trial in London in April this year.

Rahman is the first person since the 19th century to be found guilty of the Victorian-era misdeed of unlawfully using religious influence.

He was ordered to pay the voters' legal costs, estimated to be around £500,000 and was also forced to pay £250,000 at the time.

However, the voters say they have not been given a penny and have taken legal action against him again.

In hope of generating cash, they are trying to force Rahman to sell a property which they say he owns, but Rahman's wife claims she is a part owner.

A judge is analysing the claims at a trial in the High Court in London. The hearing started today and is due to finish later this week.

Lawyers for the four voters said Rahman, who was not in court today, had been 'adjudged bankrupt on his own petition' about two weeks ago.

They said the bankruptcy was 'plainly motivated' as an 'attack' on the voters' position.

Andy Erlam (left), Angela Moffat (centre) and Azmal Hussein (right) after the ruling which they won in April

Barrister Simon Johnson, who is representing the voters at today's High Court hearing, indicated that his clients wanted to be able to sell a property in east London in order to raise cash to cover legal expenses.

He said records showed that Rahman was the '100% owner' of the property.

But he said Rahman's wife, Ayesha Farid, was now indicating that she was a part-owner.

Mr Johnson added that the judge would have to make a decision on the true position.