The Human Dignity Trust's activities are not too political to be a charity, and the Charity Commission "fundamentally misunderstands" its work, the Charity Tribunal will hear this week.
The Commission will argue that Trust should not be registered as a charity as its activities are “fundamentally concerned” with changing particular laws abroad. The Commission ruled in October last year that the Trust’s main objective was political, not charitable.
The Human Dignity Trust campaigns against the criminalisation of homosexuality in foreign countries by challenging the law in court where it feels it is unconstitutional.
The Trust appealed to the Tribunal in November, with the support of several human rights charities and this week the Tribunal is hearing evidence from both the Trust and the Commission.
In its argument, the Trust will say the Commission’s view that the organisation is too political shows that it fundamentally misunderstands the nature of a constitutional human rights challenge. “An action upholding constitutional rights does not change the law of the relevant jurisdiction, but enforces and upholds the superior rights guaranteed by that country’s constitution,” it will say.
It will note instances when the Charity Commission has made clear that the promotion of human rights is a charitable purpose in guidance, and will refer to the activities of obtaining redress for victims of human right abuse and eliminating infringements of human rights.
The Human Dignity Trust will also argue that “it is inherent in the purpose of advancing human rights for the public benefit that an organisation may need to address the policies of a government which are (or are arguably) at odds with the State’s legal obligations with respect to human rights.
“The reality is that human rights only need to be advanced or protected where they are subject to, or at risk of, a breach by the State.”
It will say also that HDT’s work involves upholding human rights law and that HDT does not seek to change the law, and it does not campaign for the introduction of new or different constitutional provisions.
Definition of Human Rights
HDT maintains that its purposes fall within the description of the advancement of human rights under the Charities Act 2011. The Charities Act 2011 does not give a meaning for human rights, so HDT argues the meaning of ‘human rights’ falls under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) definition. HDT says the criminalisation of same-sex consensual private sexual conduct between adults involves serious violations of those rights.
HDT says the Commission’s own guidance on the subject refers to the UDHR, but that even so the Commission does not accept that the advancement of human rights under the Charities Act 2011 includes the body of rights set out under the UDHR.
HDT also says: “There is no warrant for such a restrictive interpretation of the 2006 and 2011 Charities Acts.”
It will conclude that HDT’s purposes are not political, it is not a campaigning organisation and does not seek to change the law.
“The purposes of ‘obtaining redress for victims of human rights abuse’ and eliminating infringements of humans rights’ are identified by the Commission in its guidance as charitable purposes in their own right”.
Charity Commission: HDT main purpose is to seek law changes
In its argument the Charity Commission will say that HDT’s chief executive Jonathan Cooper has said the HDT uses international human rights law to end the human rights infringements inherent in the criminalisation of same sex consensual sexual conduct.
It assists individuals by challenging the legality and validity of legislation criminalising this activity. “The examples of its work demonstrate that it is not simply concerned with seeking redress for those whose rights have been violated but is fundamentally concerned with challenging particular laws,” the Commission argument says.
It says the human rights in HDT’s object clause is broad and uncertain.
The case continues today.
