Going to extremes: can regulation protect charities from abuse?
5 Jul 2023
Charities have found themselves at the heart of a regulatory debate over extremism and free speech, writes Jon McLeod.
A review of the Home Office’s counter-extremism Prevent programme has triggered a fierce debate about how to protect charities from being exploited by those extremists the initiative is designed to deter.
The newly knighted Conservative Lord, Lord William Shawcross (a former Chair of the Charity Commission), undertook a review of Prevent.
The review drew the rather circular conclusion that Prevent-funded programmes were themselves attracting severe critics of the programme, who, in turn, exploited the platform provided by charities to denounce Prevent.
Some prominent charities, notably Amnesty International, criticised the appointment and the findings.
The review was undertaken in the wake of the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019. Shawcross’ findings published in February made 34 recommendations, which the Home Office has accepted.
Notably, he said that Prevent concentrated too much on far-right extremism and paid insufficient attention to Islamist extremism.
“Prevent-funded civil society organisations and counter-narrative projects should take on extremism-linked activists who seek to demonise the scheme. Civil society organisations should be ready and able to challenge and expose groups which promote disinformation about Prevent, particularly through media and social media campaigns,” Shawcross concluded.
Critics refused to engage in the Prevent review, asserted that Prevent itself is anti-Islamic and the review was biased. Academics have wondered whether regulating charities is a good way to tackle extremism.
However, in the background, a new chapter of the regulatory framework governing charities was published in November 2022 by the Charity Commission. Aimed at trustees, it is designed to help charities discharge their legal obligations and manage the risks associated with being exploited by extremism, terrorism or other illegal acts.
Charities clearly face new challenges in the modern age of public advocacy. Making sure they remain free to speak out, while observing the guard-rails which prevent them from tipping over into unlawful activity or regulatory breaches. Trustees must tread a fine line.
Jon McLeod, DRD Partner
Some have argued that the guidance will have a chilling effect on civil society, while, for its part, the Commission makes clear that the presumption of free speech and the right to express unpopular but lawful views should remain absolutely something charities can support.
The guidance also provides valuable insights into the concept of ‘public benefit’ – the test which charities must pass to justify their actions – in this context. Clearly, it is not a benefit to the public to promote violence, nor is it such to inflame prejudice among one group in society vis-à-vis another. Interestingly, the Commission argues that, to secure public benefit, the work of charities should be outward-facing and open to all, encouraging the voluntary sector to play a full and active role in civil society.
Charities clearly face new challenges in the modern age of public advocacy. Making sure they remain free to speak out, while observing the guard-rails which prevent them from tipping over into unlawful activity or regulatory breaches. Trustees must tread a fine line.
All eyes now are on the Home Office’s expected dialling up of the tension over Prevent as we approach the General Election in 2024, with a King’s Speech this autumn which may well provide a nudge to charities that the current Government – and Home Secretary – will be vigorous and unabashed in voicing their respective expectations of the sector. Watch this space.