MEND Statement: New Charity Commission Powers Must Not be Used to Police Political Dissent

MEND is deeply concerned by proposals contained within the Government’s new “Protecting What Matters” social cohesion strategy which seek to expand the powers of the Charity Commission to suspend trustees and ultimately shut down charities on the basis of alleged “extremist abuse.”

While safeguarding the charitable sector from genuine criminality is essential, the language used in the strategy is notably broad and vague. Terms such as “extremism,” “hate,” and threats to “cohesion” lack clear legal boundaries and risk enabling regulatory action based not on genuinely unlawful conduct, but on politicised interpretation. Indeed one is forced to conclude this is precisely the objective.

Recent European experience demonstrates why such powers must be treated with extreme caution. In France, successive governments have used authoritarian administrative powers to dissolve Muslim civil society organisations on the grounds that their public messaging allegedly promoted ideas contrary to republican values, having a chilling effect on the democratic rights of French citizens. In France, and now in the UK, human rights organisations warn these measures have a chilling effect on free speech by producing widespread self-censorship across civil society. These are the kinds of measures expected in Vladimir Putin’s Russia, not the democratic states of modern Europe.

Sadly, a similar trajectory risks emerging in UK government policy. Powers framed around protecting cohesion could easily be politicised and weaponised against charities expressing lawful views that the government may not like – for example, on Israel-Palestine. Future governments may interpret these authorities even more aggressively. Should parties such as Reform UK enter government, such mechanisms could be used to dismantle large parts of Britain’s Muslim civil society sector, alongside left-wing and human rights organisations that challenge state policy.Many mosques and other muslim community organisations operate as charities, and there is a significant risk that these new sweeping powers will be used to shut down such organisations that advocate ‘unwelcome’ political views. This is not merely fanciful conjecture, historically we have accusations that the Charity Commission has disproportionately targeted Muslim charities in its investigations.

These proposals also appear to reflect the securitised framing advanced by former minister Michael Gove and the controversial Shawcross Review, which blurred distinctions between non-violent political activism and extremism.

The Government must reconsider granting such sweeping powers, especially without robust safeguards. At minimum, a full public consultation must be held involving a broad range of affected stakeholders – including mainstream grassroots Muslim organisations such as MEND and the Muslim Council of Britain.

The long-term health of British civil society depends on protecting freedom of association and lawful dissent, not weakening it. The Charity Commission needs to remain politically neutral and undertake its regulatory function based on evidence of criminal wrongdoing not subjective assessments of ‘extremism.’