Thanks Justice
Below is advice I recieved sometime ago from Liberty, following correspondence I had with the Charity Commission and the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Not conclusive, and I have not yet gone back to the Charity Commission. In my mind, there are gaps in the way in which Government Departments and Agencies are applying the basics of the HRA. When the issues are widened to the SES's approach to women, gay people and disabled people, the Charity Commission seem to be at the nub of the problem i.e. they are granting Charity status without full checks on the way in which the HRA may bite. All a bit difficult, and the Charity Commission are not wholly responsible to any Minister or Government Department from what I can work out. But am posting it anyway, lest I forget!
"I have now had the chance to review the correspondence that you forwarded.
Human Rights Act 1998 and the Charity Commission
As you know, the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) applies to public authorities and it therefore applies to the Charities Commission. The Charity Commission actually state this on their website in relation to their role assessing whether a charity performs a ‘public benefit’:
“We also consider the impact of the Human Rights Act, which requires fair and equal treatment of the application of the public benefit principles to different types of charity, and that any differences in treatment are necessary, proportionate and legitimate” (
http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Ch ... state.aspx).
Whether or not the Charity Commission has breached the HRA (in granting charity status to the organisations you list) will be a matter of fact. You can get further guidance on this point from a solicitor specialising in charity and/or public law. Details of a solicitor in your area can be obtained from Community Legal Advice on 0845 345 4 345.
Article 9
Article 9 protects the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to exercise religion and the right to have no religion or have non-religious beliefs protected. The right to exercise, or manifest, one’s religion or belief will not generally be considered to be interfered with if a person is left with a choice as to whether or not to comply with his or her religious obligations. This is relative in that I assume attendance at the school is on a purely voluntary basis and students can leave should they be unhappy with any of the ‘tasks’ they are asked to undertake.
Please also note that Article 9 is limited and may be interfered with by a public authority if that interference is lawful, necessary and proportionate. Further detail on Article 9 can be found here
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights ... igion.html.
Claims under the HRA must be brought by a victim within one year of the breach. Further details on this process can be found here
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights ... -1998.html.
I am sorry I cannot assist further. I hope this information is useful. Thank you for contacting Liberty."
My reply:
"Thanks very much for your reply and for your advice, which is very helpful - especially on the issue of the application of the HRA to the Charity Commission's role.
I appreciate the finer pont about the voluntary nature of attendance at the school. I'm not sure how this would apply to children in the day schools, but the one year time limit would probably rule out any chance of a challenge by ex-pupils and members anyway.
Thanks again. I may well return to the Charity Comission to pursue the first point."
Expert lawyer needed it seems.No public interest where the SES discriminate against women, gay and disabled people in their "philosophy". Thankfully the courts are alert to these issues when the public interest is at stake - they ruled against foster parents who had strong Christian views about gay people and decided they should not be allowed to foster again. Progress bit by bit.
woodgreen