Charity trustees and social media — Gary Mond case clarifies Charity Commission’s stance

In February, the First Tier Charity Tribunal overturned the Charity Commission's disqualification of JNF Charitable Trust Chair and Trustee (and former Parliamentary candidate) Gary Mond. 

In the same month, Naomi Campbell was granted permission to appeal the Commission’s decision regarding her own disqualification as a charity trustee. Campbell was disqualified from acting as a trustee for five years following the Commission’s statutory inquiry into the charity she founded called Fashion For Relief. 

Mond’s Disqualification Order was overturned on the grounds that although some of his conduct — specifically, social media activity that the tribunal considered could be “perceived as anti-Islam” — had been capable of damaging public trust and confidence in charities, this wasn’t enough (on its own) to establish his unfitness to be a charity trustee or that it was in the public interest to disqualify him. 

Here, Imogen Trafford from our charities, not-for-profits and social enterprises team explores what happened in Gary Mond’s case and why this offers more clarity to trustees around social media activity.

Gary Mond’s Disqualification Order

The Commission had opened its assessment into Mond in 2021 and reviewed comments and likes relating to ‘anti-Islamic’ social media posts dating from 2014 to 2021.

In Gary Mond’s case, the Commission relied on Condition F — that any past or continuing conduct by the person, whether or not in relation to a charity, is damaging or likely to be damaging to public trust and confidence in charities generally or in the charities or classes of charity specified or described in the Order. 

Clearly, Condition F is very wide and offers a low threshold for the Commission to rely on. Mr Mond argued that the Order unjustly interfered with his freedom of expression and that section 181A of the Act should be interpreted in-line with the European Convention on Human Rights. 

The tribunal found that Mr Mond has been politically active for many years and his involvement in charities and the community stemmed from seeking to represent and pursue a particular political viewpoint. It also found that some criticism and press coverage of his conduct were motivated by partisan views of political opponents but that Mr Mond responsibly resigned from certain trustee positions when asked due to the publicity around his social media posts and likes, which were considered to be damaging by some charity colleagues and Jewish publications.

Yet while the tribunal found that this activity could damage the charities that Mr Mond was a trustee of, it held that his conduct in making the 2014 post, 2016 post and the 2017 likes over a period of many years didn’t justify a conclusion that he’s unfit to be a charity trustee. His activity was limited, low-profile and not obviously connected to any charity. The tribunal also noted that Mr Mond had acted responsibly by stepping down from trustee positions when asked. 

The tribunal concluded that Mr Mond's conduct — as defined by section 181A (7) — was past conduct unrelated to a charity. This highlights that not only current or ongoing conduct can meet the disqualification criteria but also past conduct, regardless of its connection to charities. Ultimately, any activity done online — even likes or comments — at any point during your life is capable of constituting an action that can be used by the Commission to disqualify you as a trustee or senior manager of a charity. The Tribunal ultimately concluded that making the Order in these circumstances wasn’t in the public interest, as it could set the bar too high for trustees and affect public trust by deterring capable individuals with a history of social media use from becoming trustees.

A victory for free speech?

Although some view the decision as a victory for free speech, it's important to acknowledge that the tribunal identified some of the views expressed as Islamophobic. Clearly, its decision didn’t endorse Mr Mond's social media posts and trustees must ensure that they don’t perceive this decision as granting unrestricted freedom for charity trustees to engage in offensive social media activity. The decision is specific to the facts of this case. 

Further to Lord Moylan’s query to the DCMS, in the last five years the Charity Commission has disqualified six individuals in cases that relate to their use of social media. An individual’s use of social media was the sole basis for disqualification in three of those cases, while in the others this was one of several grounds relied on. 

According to Civil Society, the Commission commented that the outcome of this case brings more clarity to trustees’ appropriate use of social media, underlining the need for all trustees to act in the best interests of their charity including while posting in a personal capacity. It’ll be interesting to see what lessons the Commission draws from the tribunal’s ruling and how this will be applied in practice, especially in the context of the Commission’s Social Media Guidance published in September 2023. 

Potential recruitment concerns

The Commission’s power to disqualify individuals from trusteeship is designed to make sure that charities live up to their purpose. The Commission is seen to play an important role as a regulator in granting confidence that charities are robustly and effectively governed and deliver on their critical roles in society.

However, the record number of Disqualification Orders issued in 2023-2024 and low bar on which the Commission can rely raises potential concerns that the Commission's stringent standards may deter diverse volunteers, potentially harming public trust and confidence in charities. This issue is critical, as trustee recruitment is widely recognised as challenging for the sector — especially given the voluntary nature of the role. It may be that the Commission doesn’t always fully consider this impact in its regulatory efforts.

However, the tribunal emphasised the importance of recruiting diverse trustees for the charity sector, noting that setting a high bar for conduct could protect public trust but might also deter potential trustees, affecting the sector's diversity and effectiveness.

Mr Mond was described as having strong political and religious views, expressing himself publicly on social media and broadcasting, which carries risks. The tribunal noted that the charity sector could benefit from motivated individuals like Mr Mond and requiring all trustees to always express themselves in measured terms could deprive the sector of passionate trustees.

Talk to us

If you have questions about a Disqualification Order, talk to us. Our specialist charities, not-for-profits and social enterprises team is recognised by The Legal 500 as a leading team of experts with a national reputation for providing accurate, pragmatic and commercially focused advice.

Get in touch with our experts today by giving us a call, sending us an email or completing our contact form below.