Transgender Group Fails to Have LGB Alliance Struck Off Charity Register

UK-based transgenderism group attempted to have a charity representing the interests of the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual community struck off, arguing it actually existed to further anti-transgender views.

The appeal by Mermaids to strip the LGB Alliance of its charitable status through the courts has failed, with the Charity Commission — the UK government body which governs the charity sector — being moved to publish a statement saying charities should not demonise and undermine “those who think differently” in response to the ruling.

The verdict was returned after seven months of deliberation by two judges, and found Mermaids did not have the right to bring the case in the first place. It was the first time a charity had sued to cancel the charitable status of another, and had the complaint been upheld it would have set a major precedent for other charities with opposing views to attempt to bring each other down in the courts.

The tribunal ruled:

Charitable status does not come with… any freedom from criticism or debate. It is no part of the Commission’s function (nor of this
Tribunal) to tell people what to think, or to regulate public debate in a context where there are deeply held, sincere, beliefs on all sides of the discussion…

…the fundamental rationale of the democratic process upon which our society is founded is that when competing views, opinions and policies are publicly debated and exposed to public scrutiny, the good will over time drive out the bad and the true will prevail over the false. Only when differing views are expressed, contradicted, answered and debated will the legislature be able to obtain the fullest picture of the views held by those they represent…

…It is very clear to us that Mermaids profoundly disagrees with the Commission’s Decision… However, applying the facts to the actual legal issue before us, the fact that Mermaids and those they support have been affected emotionally and/or socially is insufficient to provide them with standing to bring this appeal, no matter the depth of the feelings resulting from the Decision or the strength of their disagreement.

As previously reported, when arguments were presented to the court Consortium, an umbrella organisation of LGBT groups accused the LGB Alliance of not existing to promote the rights of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual people, but rather that it was founded as a front to launch attacks against transgender people. The head of Consortium, which blocked the LGBA from becoming a partner group because it didn’t feature transgender people, told the court in September that LGBA existed to “promote transphobic activity rather than pro-LGB activities”.

Mermaids said that their argument against LGBA was that it didn’t tackle “problems facing lesbian, gay and bisexual people, but rather is seeking to prevent the resolution of problems facing transgender persons”. This, it was said, was transphobic activity and consequently disqualified the LGBA from being a legal charity.

The LGBA responded that the attempt to have their charitable status stripped was motivated by ideology, not law.

During the case, there were arguments about what constitutes a lesbian, with the LGB Alliance rejecting the notion that a lesbian could have a penis. Responding to a question in court over whether a lesbian could be a man with a penis, LGB Alliance co-founder and veteran lesbian and gay rights activist Kate Harris replied:

I’m going to speak for millions of lesbians around the world who are lesbians because we love other women… We will not be erased and we will not have any man with a penis tell us he’s a lesbian because he feels he is… A lesbian is attracted to another biological woman, full stop.

Responding to today’s finding, the Charity Commission signaled that it is a government agency that would not be drawn into political or moral discussions, and existed purely to enforce the law on charities. They said:

We welcome this judgment. As the judges confirm, it is not the Charity Commission’s role to regulate public debate on sensitive issues on which there are deeply held, sincere beliefs on all sides. Our role is to apply the law, and we consider that we did so in registering LGB Alliance as a charity.

All charities, ultimately, must deliver on their purposes for the public benefit. We understand both charities hold opposing views, but when engaging in public debate and campaigning, they should do so with respect and tolerance. Demonising and undermining those who think differently is not acceptable behaviour from any charity on our register.

Separately, Mermaids is presently under a statutory inquiry by the Charity Commission, investigating “concerns about its governance and management”. The inquiry will examine the “administration, governance and management of the charity”, whether trustees have “complied with and fulfilled their duties and responsibilities as trustees under charity law”, and “Whether there has been any misconduct and/or mismanagement by the trustees.”

Per the Commission’s database, the inquiry is still ongoing.