Charities linked to terrorism at record high
Extremists pose deadly threat by abusing fundraising groups, warns watchdog chief
REPORTS of alleged links between charities and terrorism or extremism have surged to a record high, the charity watchdog has warned.
The number of times the Charity Commission has shared concerns about links between charities and extremism with police and other agencies has nearly trebled from 234 to 630 in just three years. The Commission also opened eight compliance cases and four formal inquiries into “allegations of abuse of charities for terrorist or extremist purposes” in 2015/16. In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, William Shawcross, the Commission’s chairman, warned that extremism was “the most potentially dangerous and deadly” problem faced by charities. He said: “It is the most dangerous because of the threat of Islamist extremism. It is not the most constant threat – it is the most potentially deadly threat.”
The 630 disclosures, which Commission sources said was a record figure, concerned “allegations made and concerns about abuse of charities for terrorist or extremist purposes, including concerns about charities operating in Syria and other higher risk areas, in which terrorist groups operate”.
Mr Shawcross called for Muslim charities to work with the regulator to tackle the threat of extremists taking them over to further their murderous objectives. He said that it was in the interests of the Muslim community to crack down on the problem because of the risk they could be caught up in a terrorist incident like the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby outside Woolwich barracks in south-east London in 2013.
He said: “A group of Muslim charity leaders came in to complain when I said this the first time and I said, ‘Look we are here to protect you if there were another atrocity on the streets of London, like the murder of Lee Rigby. And, if an atrocity like the murder of Lee Rigby were in any way associated with your charity it would be catastrophic for you. We are trying to protect you and protect Muslim charities from that kind of abuse’.”
Guarding charities from terrorism and extremism was one of three strategic priority risk areas: the other two are tackling fraud and financial abuse and protecting vulnerable beneficiaries.
Earlier this year the Commission stepped in to stop the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Anita Roddick Foundation funding Cage because it did not match their “charitable objectives”.
Mr Shawcross said that Cage, a
controversial human rights group, “was not a charity and there is no way in which Cage could represent any charitable purpose under British law”.
Last year, it emerged that Cage had used meetings on university campuses to encourage the “sabotage” of the Government’s official anti-extremism programme, Prevent.
Moazzam Begg, the former Guantánamo Bay detainee who is director of Cage, told students “any rightminded person” would oppose the Prevent strategy, likening it to the methods of the Stasi secret police in the former East Germany.
Raising concerns on issues pertaining to the erosion of civil liberties in the war on terror, he also said: “It is widely acknowledged amongst both academic and community groups that Prevent is ineffectual at stopping radicalisation, thus preventing Prevent in no way enables radicalisation”.
Cage describes itself as an “independent advocacy organisation working to empower communities impacted by the War on Terror”. Its focus is almost entirely on Muslims accused of terror-related offences.
There are growing fears that extremists are infiltrating Muslim charities to promote violence, fund terrorism and recruit vulnerable youngsters for jihad.
In 2013 the Commission also warned of a “risk that funds raised in the name of ‘charity’ generally or under the name of a specific charity are misused to support terrorist activities, with or without the charity’s knowledge”. It warned that “individuals supporting terrorist activity might also claim to work for a charity and trade on its name and legitimacy to gain access to a region or community”.
A spokesman added: “Charities providing humanitarian aid are themselves aware of the risk that their funds may be diverted and that their staff and local partners will be working in areas where militant groups and in some cases those who support terrorist activities operate. Their work is not easy.”
In his interview with The Telegraph, Mr Shawcross also reveals plans to force charities to fund a new advice line so that trustees can take action in the wake of a number of scandals about fundraising and data sharing.