Decision

[Withdrawn] Risks to charities from an individual associated with terrorism - Syed Hoque

Published 16 October 2017

This decision was withdrawn on 23 January 2020

This case report has been archived in line with our policy because it is over 2 years old.

Applies to England and Wales

1. Background

The Charity Commission (‘the Commission’) is publishing this regulatory case report relating to its actions in respect of Syed Hoque (‘Mr Hoque’) who acted as a volunteer for the registered charity Shade (‘the Charity’), registered charity number 1149699. Mr Hoque was convicted of offences under section 17 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (‘TACT 2000’)^{[footnote 1]} on 23 December 2016.

The court heard during his trial that Mr Hoque had utilised humanitarian aid convoys on a number of occasions as a cover for his support of an individual involved in terrorism in Syria. The Commission has been clear that it does not consider aid convoys as an effective means of delivering humanitarian aid and has cautioned those charities organising or participating in them of the inherent risks involved and that they will be subject to additional regulatory scrutiny so as to ensure that their trustees comply with their legal duties and responsibilities^{[footnote 2]}. These risks include the abuse for terrorist purposes – including the ability to use convoys as a means to move cash, goods and people – and fraud and theft.

Terrorism is a serious and continuing threat to both UK society, UK interests abroad and the wider international community. Terrorist involvement or association in the charitable sector, separate from any criminal offences, is completely unacceptable and corrodes public trust and confidence in charities. The risk of abuse of charities for terrorist purposes does not apply equally across the sector, however, some charities are more vulnerable than others by virtue of the activities that they undertake and/or by virtue of where they operate.

This case report outlines that Mr Hoque supported an individual involved in terrorism in Syria. Mr Hoque had previously obtained a letter of credential from the Charity in support of activities to assist those affected by the Syrian crisis. The Commission engaged with the Charity prior to Mr Hoque’s conviction because it operated in, or purported to operate in, high risk areas where terrorist groups exist and operate.

The Commission is publishing this case report to ensure that trustees take steps to minimise the risks associated with individuals seeking to abuse the charitable sector for terrorist purposes.

2. Why the Charity Commission got involved

The Commission, as part of its oversight and supervision of the charitable sector, monitors the work and activities of charities, registered and unregistered, based on the risks associated with their work^{[footnote 3]}. Through this monitoring the Commission is also able to identify unregistered charitable organisations, organisations making representations that they are charitable when they are not and individuals who raise funds from the public for charitable purposes.

Mr Hoque was an acquaintance of one of the trustees of the Charity^{[footnote 4]}. Mr Hoque travelled to Syria as part of a larger convoy and wore t-shirts promoting the Charity whilst there. The Charity also provided Mr Hoque with a supporting letter of credential, accrediting him as one of its volunteers. The trustees of the Charity confirmed to the Commission that they hoped to establish future projects of humanitarian work in Syria, and accepted Mr Hoque’s assurances that his travel there was an opportunity to promote the Charity in return for a letter of credential. The Charity issued the letter of credential and material belonging to the Charity without conducting any due diligence on Mr Hoque nor establishing appropriate measures of control or monitoring for the activities that he was expected to perform on the Charity’s behalf. The Commission considered the naivety and action on the part of the trustees to be misconduct and/or mismanagement.

3. About the Charity

The Charity is a registered charity, number 1149699, which has charitable objects to provide physical, educational and other activities to advance in life young people, advance education, provide recreational and leisure time activity, promote and protect the physical and mental health of the inhabitants of London and relief financial need and suffering amongst victims of natural or other kinds of disaster around the world. The Charity’s income was £142,117.00 for the financial year ending 30 June 2016.

The Commission initially engaged with the trustees of the Charity in October 2015 due to the failure of its trustees to submit the Charity’s accounts and Annual returns for the financial year ending 30 June 2014. The Commission was also aware that the Charity was advertising and soliciting donations for separate projects under different website addresses, including activities in Syria, without properly identifying these as activities of the Charity and ensuring that its registered charity number was appropriately displayed on each website.

After contacting the trustees of the Charity in October 2015, the Commission received information from the Metropolitan Police Service (‘MPS’) that Mr Hoque had been charged under section 17 of TACT 2000, and that he had been provided with an open letter of credential from one of the trustees stating that he was a volunteer for the Charity. The Commission also, under its powers set out in sections 54-56 of the Charities Act 2011 (‘the Act’), shares and receives information with other government partners where it is relevant to its regulatory function or those of the recipient organisation. A copy of the letter was shared with the Commission under section 54 of the Act.

4. What the Commission found

The Commission considered information publically available about the Charity, along with information it held on its systems, and considered that the Charity displayed the following risk factors:

• lack of partner/volunteer due diligence

• charitable funds expended in high risk locations

• charity letters of credentials provided to individuals without vetting and monitoring

• lack of oversight of the distribution of material with charity logos

• the level of verification of income sources, particularly cash loans

• the general governance of the charity

• the trustees’ failure to comply with their statutory duties

One of the trustees of the Charity had provided an open letter of credential dated 24 July 2013 to Mr Hoque with little or no due diligence or oversight having been completed. The letter requested:

any governments/officials to allow Syed Emdadul Hoque to travel freely in order to access the Syrian people.

The letter was provided after the first date to which Mr Hoque’s charges related.

It was also noted that the trustee’s letter did not specify timeframes relating to Mr Hoque’s travel needs, therefore rendering the letter to be ‘open ended’ for use as and when Mr Hoque felt it was required. This was a failure in the trustee’s duty of care and misconduct and/or mismanagement by the trustee. Furthermore, the trustee had advised the Commission that they were merely acquainted with Mr Hoque and did not know him very well. The Commission considers there was naivety on the part of the trustee to provide an open ended letter of credential to an individual with little or no due diligence having been conducted or consideration as to how the letter may be misused, and also on the part of the other trustees in failing to oversee that trustee’s actions in issuing the letter of credential in the first instance.

The action they took was misconduct and/or mismanagement in the administration of the Charity by the trustees; they did not have control over how the letter of credential may be used by Mr Hoque whilst in Syria or elsewhere. The Commission does not know the extent to which Mr Hoque used the letter of credential.

5. The action the Commission took

The Commission met with the trustees of the Charity to discuss its activities. The Commission issued an Action Plan (‘the Action Plan’) under section 15(2) of the Act to the Charity which required its trustees to carry out appropriate and proper due diligence on all individuals and organisations that it grants funds to or uses to carry out charitable projects and help deliver its work.

The Action Plan also required the trustees to create and implement a policy whereby conditions are attached to the use of material and paraphernalia belonging to the Charity by trustees, staff and volunteers in all situations and especially in areas of high risk to avoid a similar situation occurring in the future. Other actions were set out in the Action Plan to address other governance failings identified by the Commission; compliance with the Action Plan was monitored by the Commission.

In compliance with the Action Plan, the trustees of the Charity promptly removed all images or references to Mr Hoque from its website and other social media prior to his conviction.

6. Impact of the Commission’s involvement

The trustees of the Charity recognised that there were failings on their part in issuing an open letter of credential to Mr Hoque. The trustees also developed a Volunteer Policy and Volunteer Agreement form which they confirmed has been implemented.

7. Working with the police

The Commission used its statutory information sharing powers under the Act to share relevant information about the Charity and Mr Hoque with the MPS, and to receive information from the MPS.

Additionally the Commission provided witness statements relating to Mr Hoque in support of the criminal investigation and subsequent prosecution. Where the Commission becomes aware, through its regulatory work, that a criminal offence may have been committed it will support the police in supporting investigations and bringing prosecutions where relevant.

8. Lessons for other charities

The abuse of charities for criminal, including terrorist purposes, is wholly unacceptable. Separate from any criminal investigation and prosecution, the Commission will take any regulatory action it considers appropriate to end such abuse and ensure that charitable funds and property are protected and properly applied. As a civil regulator the Commission will work collaboratively with the police and other regulators and partners as appropriately in support of the criminal investigation and any subsequent prosecution.

There is a risk that charitable aid convoys to Syria may be abused for non-charitable purposes, including facilitating travel for fighters or providing support for those involved in terrorism. This is of serious regulatory concern to the Commission and impacts on public trust and confidence in those charities and the charitable sector more generally. Trustees of charities and charitable appeals providing humanitarian support need to carefully consider whether organising and/or participating in a convoy is really the most effective way to deliver aid to those in need.

Trustees are under a legal duty to ensure that their charity’s assets are only used to support or carry out the charity’s purposes. They must also be able to demonstrate that this is the case. Therefore, in order to show that they are complying with their legal duties, trustees must keep records and an adequate audit trail to show that the charity’s money has been properly spent on furthering the charity’s purposes for the public benefit.

Members of the public should exercise care and caution when asked to donate to an individual soliciting funds and/or property with a representation that it is for charitable purposes whether they are being asked to donate in person, on Twitter, Facebook or other social media. The Commission produces Safer Giving advice for the public on how to donate safely to support the work of registered charities.

A significant aspect of a trustee’s legal duty to protect charitable assets, including the charity’s reputation, means that trustees must take steps to mitigate risks to the charity. Charity trustees must conduct appropriate due diligence checks and put in place necessary safeguards within their means to protect their charity.

Funds raised for charitable purposes in England and Wales, even if they are not raised by a charity, fall within the Commission’s regulatory jurisdiction. People who manage and are responsible for appeals for charitable purposes (including those created by non-charitable organisations) hold the position of trustee and have the legal duties and responsibilities of trustee.

1. Section 17 of the Terrorism Act 2000 makes it an offence for an individual to become involved in an arrangement as a result of which money or other property is made available or is to be made available to another and he knows or has reasonable cause to suspect that it will or may be used for the purposes of terrorism - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/17 ↩

2. See for example “Syria and aid convoys – regulatory alert”, February 2014 - http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/our-regulatory-work/how-we-regulate-charities/alerts-and-warnings/syria-and-aid-convoys ↩

3. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/how-we-ensure-charities-meet-their-legal-requirements/where-we-monitor-charities ↩

4. Registered charity 1149699 - http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/CharityWithoutPartB.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=1149699&SubsidiaryNumber=0 ↩