Irene Khan hires lawyers to clarify payment details 5

Governance | Tania Mason | 21 Mar 2011

Irene Khan, the former Amnesty International Ltd secretary-general, has instructed lawyers to clarify details about the salary and severance package paid to her when she left the organisation.

Solicitors Russell Jones & Walker wrote to Civil Society today to say that it was not accurate of Amnesty International to record in its 2009/10 accounts that the amount of £532,000 was paid to Khan as remuneration for that year alone.

They said the sum included income that Khan was owed for several years previously, and payment for several different purposes.

They also said that Amnesty International Ltd’s salary scale for all staff including Khan was assessed by an independent agency and benchmarked against similar international NGOs. Khan’s salary was set by the International Executive of Amnesty International according to that pay scale.

And they quoted a statement from AI chair Peter Pack, who said of Khan: “We recognise the considerable and impressive changes you have achieved, and the strong, decisive leadership you provide.”

Read the full letter here.

Directory: Amnesty International

Place a comment

Dee
25 Mar 2011

Russell Jones & Walker (lawyers) suggests that Khan received a sum of money for relocation-for her to return abroad from where she had been recruited.
But
She had taken on the role at the Charities Commission at £350 per day (min 2 days per month) she had no intention of returning from where she came therefore in my opinion this part of the pay off was illegal.

[Reply]

Nigel Edward-Few
CEO
24 Mar 2011

Why doesn't Ms Khan just go away to wherever it is that is now so far away that she hasn't got time to do the job that she was paid for and that alleegedly brought about her resignation?

Nobody is interested in her or her petty justification of an obscene pay off amount, even for however many years she says it might be for.

If she needs lawyers to work out what she was paid and for when and what, that is worrying in itself that she doesn't know. How can she not know what she has been paid and why? It doesn't speak well to her ability to hold such high positions as she has held at Amnesty and at the Charity Cimmission. It seems to me that the sector could now be well rid of her.

[Reply]

Wayne
22 Mar 2011

Here, here, Jamie! Indeed, the point seems entirely missed. The hiring of a law firm to ensure the proper spin is simply indicative of how completely out of touch Ms Khan is with the crux of the matter.

[Reply]

Stolen
22 Mar 2011
Response to [Wayne]

It is a usual step in setting the ground to end the public airing of a much discussed matter ridden with half-statements.

[Reply]

Jamie
22 Mar 2011

The outrage is not about whether the payment was legally possible but whether it was morally right, especially for someone who then took on public office as Charity Commissioner. Better that Irene Khan responds to calls for returning the money so that it can be put to good use in defending victims of human rights abuses instead of wasting it on legal fees.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.