Morning:
8°c
The Charity Commission has reprimanded a number of Muslim charities for signing an open letter in support of Ken Livingstone.
The letter, organised by the British Muslim Initiative and published in The Guardian, said that it was "in the best interest of the Muslim communities of London" to back him in May.
But 16 of the 63 signatories were from registered charities, which are banned from expressing support for political candidates.
The Charity Commission today said the letter was "not acceptable" and said it had written to the charities concerned to point out they were in breach of the rules.
"Our guidance for charities on campaigning and political activities clearly states that charities cannot support a political candidate or political party," a Commission spokesman said.
"We have written to the charities to advise them that it is not acceptable for a charity to support a political candidate."
In a "clarification" posted on its website, the British Muslim Initiative said the representatives of the charities had "signed merely in their personal individual capacities and have not and will not be involving their organisations.
"The mention of individuals' titles is for the sole purpose of identifying the signatories and the posts they hold. This is wholly in accordance with charity law, which fully entitles members of charitable organisations to support candidates in a personal capacity."
The letter, published on 3 January, attracted fierce criticism from some Muslim commentators and others who said it was divisive. However, Mr Livingstone welcomed the statement, saying it was proof of his success in building "the most tolerant city on earth".
The Charity Commission said it acted after receiving a number of complaints about the letter. A spokesman for the British Muslim Initiative blamed "Rightwing neo-con supporters" for the complaints.
The Mayor's office declined to comment.
Reader views (1)
As a trustee of a couple of charities, I know full well that you must not associate yourself with political candidates or causes. To argue that signatories to this letter only mentioned their charities so that people would know who they were is either sophistry or naivety. If you put your name to a letter and put the name of a charity you work for or whose board you sit on, then any reasonable person is going to assume you are acting officially on behalf of that charity. No amount of specious argument can avoid this fact.
- Roy Stockdill, Watford, Herts
