The Intelligent giving blog

Our views on Lepra

Adam Rothwell - Wednesday, August 22, 2007

A bee OUR RELATIONS WITH LEPRA, an international aid charity, have made the news in this week's edition of the charity-workers' bible, Third Sector.

"The donor-advice website Intelligent Giving has asked Lepra to stop using its 'top-rated charity' quality mark after allegations made by a group of the ... charity's former employees," it says.

This is correct. As eagle-eyed visitors to this site may have noticed, in recent weeks over 60 comments have been posted to our profile of Lepra. The majority of these have been written by two people unhappy with the way in which allegedly the charity has been run. In addition to these postings, we have also seen documents purporting to have come from Lepra HQ, which suggest that the charity has not been transparent in all its dealings.

After seeing these allegations and the 'evidence', we were left with no option other than to ask Lepra to remove our 'Top-Rated Charity' icon from its website. This icon - which we consider awarding to charities with Quality of Reporting scores of over 75 per cent - indicates that the charity in question is transparent. But we can no longer vouch for this in Lepra's case.

Little has been proven against Lepra. We are trying to get to the truth behind the allegations. And we await the outcome of the employment-tribunal cases it faces with interest.


Login or register to comment


Submitted by Ginsters Dragon on Mon, 03/09/2007 - 11:50am.

I take rather a different view.... I don't believe that publishing the allegations would amount to contempt of court for two reasons:

1) The allegations have already been made at an Employment Tribunal in a public hearing. Newspapers and other media were free to report them not as established fact, but as statements from witnesses made under oath.

2) None of the remaining (three) Employment Tribunal cases will reach a determination on the allegations, 'sub judice' is therefore not a relevant consideration. Put it another way, LEPRA could win all three cases and not be cleared of the allegations. On the other hand they could lose all three cases and not be proven guilty of what I and others are accusing them of.

The series of Employment Tribunal cases will only decide whether or not LEPRA treated their employees fairly (and they're not off to a good start). The other matters - which I will not repeat here - should rightly be widely reported and investigated by the relevant bodies.

Don't shoot the messenger


Submitted by jan42 on Mon, 03/09/2007 - 11:08am.

This is a very frustrating thread but I suspect IG can't allow even the allegations to appear here because they'd be in contempt of court, since there are proceedings ongoing. But it is IG's duty to alert us all to the results of the court cases when they are announced.

=====:)======


Submitted by Ginsters Dragon on Thu, 23/08/2007 - 5:48pm.

Hi Cameronweaver

 As I understand it the problem is a legal one. My intial post laid out all the allegations against LEPRA (selected Senior Management and Trustees) quite clearly but it had to be pulled on legal advice. I can totally appreciate IG's position but it is very frustrating. Given the histrory I won't attempt to reiterate here, but IG will forward any emails to me so that I can correspond with you direct if it would help. Contrary to what some (almost certainly the select few I refered to earlier) have said, Ihave no interest in causing trouble. My sole intention is to hold people accountable for wilfully damaging a charity which does a great deal of good work overseas.

It would genuinely be good to hear from you.

Don't shoot the messenger


Submitted by cameronweaver on Thu, 23/08/2007 - 5:27pm.

I've been trying to follow the ebb and flow of discussion about LEPRA for some time now, and still do not fully comprehend precisely what the situation is. All that is clear is that some people think LEPRA is a badly run charity. Could IG provide a summary of the allegations that have been levelled against LEPRA?


Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.