The Charity Commission has launched multiple investigations and inquiries, focusing on alleged mismanagement and safeguarding failures across various charities, most recently including the Church of England, the We Care Foundation, and the Brighton Mosque and Muslim Community Centre.
On one front, the Charity Commission has written to members of the Church of England’s General Synod, reminding them of their safeguarding duties as charity trustees. This communication follows numerous safeguarding scandals within the church, most notable being the Makin Report published last year. This report criticized church officials for their complicity and failure to address abuse linked to one of their own lawyers. The commission's letter aims to draw attention to the legal responsibilities trustees have to protect vulnerable individuals and to improve safeguarding practices, particularly as the General Synod convenes for discussions on February 10-14.
David Holdsworth, chief executive of the Charity Commission, highlighted the importance of implementing changes soon rather than simply reviewing protocols. He stated, “The Makin Review underlined concerns about the sufficiency of changes made by the Church of England in implementing improvements to safeguarding,” emphasizing the need for concrete actions to combat these issues.
At the same time, the commission has full jurisdiction over the financial transactions of charities. Recently, the commission opened inquiries focusing on the Birmingham-based We Care Foundation, which provides aid to war victims but is currently facing scrutiny over its financial dealings. The investigation began after concerns emerged about payments made to the Qawafil Al Khair Association, identified as a sanctioned organization by Israel but not by the UK government. This significant discrepancy raises questions about the diligence exercised by UK charities working with partners abroad.
Concerns were escalated by UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), which claims ties between Qawafil Al Khair and Hamas, especially since the charity allegedly funneled money to the families of Hamas fighters. Caroline Turner from UKLFI stated, “If a UK charity is funding a charity in Gaza... this amounts to assisting Hamas, a terrorist organization.”
A spokesperson for the Charity Commission confirmed, “We are already investigating, within the scope of our inquiry, past payments by the charity,” reinforcing their steadfast approach to ensuring due diligence is met by charities engaged in high-risk areas. We Care Foundation representatives defended their actions, firmly denying any wrongdoing and insisting their work aims solely at humanitarian aid, citing rigorous evidence-gathering during aid distributions.
Similarly, the Brighton Mosque and Muslim Community Centre has come under criticism following its association with Abubaker Deghayes, a former trustee convicted for promoting terrorism. Deghayes was reported to have encouraged acts of violent jihad during sermons he delivered at the mosque. The Charity Commission's inquiry concluded there was “misconduct and/or mismanagement” within the charity, stating its operations were poorly handled. The inquiry revealed Deghayes had made inflammatory statements to the congregation, inciting violence and leading to his subsequent conviction. This incident underscored the pressing need for oversight and accountability within charities, particularly those under the veil of religious advocacy.
The commission emphasized its commitment to re-establishing proper governance at the Brighton Mosque by appointing interim management and ensuring future leadership adheres to more stringent operational procedures. There are worries from watchdog organizations like the National Secular Society (NSS) about systemic issues within religious charities, presenting Brighton Mosque as merely the “tip of the iceberg” related to extremism.
They voiced grave concerns over the potential exploitation of charity law by extremist elements, calling for urgent evaluation of how “the advancement of religion” as a charitable purpose may be facilitating extremist narratives. Megan Manson, head of campaigns at the NSS, advocated for revising the interpretation of the law to prevent exploitation by those promoting violent ideologies.
With these investigations occurring simultaneously, the overarching narrative showcases the urgent necessity for charities to operate transparently and ethically, maintaining their societal purpose to aid rather than detract from community welfare. Safeguarding abuses and financial malpractices highlight serious flaws within organizations historically viewed as benevolent, signaling systemic change is imperative.
The scrutiny from the Charity Commission, alongside pressure from advocacy groups, signals not only the need for reforms within the Church of England but also all charitable organizations handling public trust and resources. These incidents serve as cautionary tales for charities on compliance, accountability, and the ethical responsibilities inherent to their operations.
Moving forward, the outcomes of these inquiries could reshape the framework under which charities operate, prompting legislative revisions aimed at enhancing oversight and minimizing vulnerability to extremist ideologies. Stakeholders within the charity sector are now left to reflect on best practices and how they can genuinely serve their cause without compromising the safety and integrity of individuals relying on their assistance.