Tate Britain has this week been accused of “blatant favouritism” for exhibiting a trustee’s art work.

Critics have complained of a conflict of interest at the charity as paintings by German artist Tomma Abts are being displayed as part of the gallery’s 'Painting Now: Five Contemporary Artists' exhibition. Abts is one of 14 trustees appointed by the Prime Minister to oversee the running of the organisation.  

In 2006 the Tate was condemned by the Charity Commission for showing “serious shortcomings” when it bought artwork from its own trustees. This included work by Chris Ofili, a former boyfriend of Abts.

The then-chief executive of the Charity Commission, Andrew Hind, said at the time: “There are serious shortcomings in the process for managing conflicts of interest. In any charity we would be concerned that such basic matters were neglected, but in a charity of the size and stature of the Tate we are very disappointed.”

Tate trustee not involved in artwork decision

Abts was neither paid for the use of her work in the exhibition nor involved in the decision to use it. The Tate also asked the Charity Commission for guidance and authority over the decision to use Abts’ work in the exhibition.  

A spokesperson from the Tate said: “As a matter of diligence Tate asked the Charity Commission to consider the case. They advised that Tate should follow its policies and processes concerning the management of conflicts of interest in the event of the inclusion of trustees' works in exhibitions.

“The Charity Commission concluded that it did not need to authorise the arrangement and that they were satisfied that there was no further role for the Commission in this matter.”

Artist Charles Thompson has been quoted in the Telegraph saying: “This is all very wrong. There are tens of thousands of artists in this country who would give anything to have their work at the Tate. It seems blatant favouritism that works by their own trustees should be repeatedly selected.

“And it goes without saying that having a painting exhibited at a prestigious national gallery can only enhance the artist’s earning power.”

A spokesperson from the Charity Commission said that it was approached in February 2013 by the Tate regarding the inclusion of Abts’ work in the exhibition. After looking at five factors, the Commission concluded that it did not need to exert any authority.

It stated that because Abts was not being paid for her work's inclusion and that the works included are not on the market, it decided that her reputation would not be enhanced as a result of the exhibition. The Commission also cited her already high regard and 2006 Turner Prize win.

It also took into account guidance about conflicts of interest concerning charitable museums and galleries issued jointly by the Charity Commission and DCMS, as well as assurances by the charity that not including Abts’ work would be an omission.

A Charity Commission spokeswoman said: “We told the charity that we would expect Tate Gallery to have set policies and processes concerning both curating and the management of conflicts of interest in the event of the inclusion of trustees' works in exhibitions, and that the trustees should be able to demonstrate, if asked to do so, that these policies and processes have been followed.”