Charity linked to Duke of Sussex accused of perpetrating atrocities

[AliceOlive]

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/28/charity-with-prince-harry-as-director-investigated-over-and-torture-claims

“A charity with strong ties to Prince Harry has been funding rangers responsible for horrific abuses against Indigenous people in the Congo, including torture and rape, according to a major investigation published in the UK’s Mail on Sunday.”

“The investigation has uncovered evidence of countless atrocities committed by African Parks’ “armed militia” against local Baka people. The organization has known for years that the abuses were taking place, but they have continued unabated.”

edited to add quotation marks

Indeed Alice! Just about laughed my ass off !! 🤣

I’d love to see Harry use his power to do something about this. I don’t care if they drag him and every other person with knowledge of this org through the mud in order to get some real attention on what’s happening. It’s a good use of his name as far as I am concerned if he won’t use his actual influence to help fix it.

It doesn't matter who broke the story. Harry needs to condemn the brutality, implement an investigation and resign from the board either immediately or after the investigation concludes, whichever is the better course to ensure it's fulfilled.

@Neriah it was Survival International that brought Harry and Meghan front and centre of their campaign against African Parks. If you support SI, then I don’t understand your problem with anyone backing their approach - which is to highlight the highest profile individual involved, who uses his profile and influence as a so called humanitarian to persuade the public and potential donors that AP is a force for good. Why are you criticising the DM or anyone for giving SI the publicity it invited and so desperately needed?

Why are you castigating people just because they may not be aware of what’s been going on with the indigenous people and only just realising, in the holier than thou way you are doing on this thread? Surely you are happy that people are aware now that not everything is hunky dory with certain big profile charities, especially ones that use the smoke screen of celebrity to sell them as forces of right and good. That it is Harry that has brought them here is neither here nor there if awareness is raised.

Actually there have been a number of scandals, eg the Oxfam one mentioned above, that has turned many people off household name charities. Just have a look at some of the many charities threads on this site. Many people have stopped donating to the big international charities and channel their cash into local, grass roots causes that cut out all the big earners in the centre. They will all have learned to look a bit closer at big charities from investigations highlighted in the press.

You seem to be implying that, unless someone has been aware of an injustice since its inception, or aware of an investigation from the beginning, they have no right to care or talk about it. I doubt Survivors International would thank you for that attitude towards potential new supporters.

Absolutely. A reminder that it was Survivor International that chose to make their contact with Harry public.

And actually, Harry’s org is pushing back at SI saying the latter is refusing to cooperate. So poor put upon Harry and his org is having a good old fight back against the people you have been supporting all these years, @Neriah . How nice of them to go on the attack, rather than say what they are doing to help these indigenous people. Maybe you should ask why AP is acting like this is a surprise to them, when the issue must have been known to them for all the years you have been supporting SI.

I knew this happened, but didn’t know that there were charities involved. Is that widely known and if so, why would anyone support a charity like African Parks?

I just read the SI statement, seems to be a very callous statement, I don't see much compassion at all, rather a very negative clap back at Survival International, they really should have excluded that paragraph. Mud flinging at this point is only making them look worse.

African Parks said in a statement from its board and chief executive:

"We are aware of the serious allegations regarding human rights abuses by eco-guards against local people living adjacent to Odzala-Kokoua National Park in the Republic of Congo, which have recently received media attention.

"We became aware of these allegations last year via a Board Member who received a letter from Survival International. We immediately launched an investigation through an external law firm based on the information we had available, while also urging Survival International to provide any and all facts they had.

"It's unfortunate that they have chosen not to cooperate, despite repeated requests, and we continue to ask for their assistance.

"This is an active, ongoing investigation that is our highest priority as an organization, and we encourage anyone with knowledge of any abuses to report them to us or to the Congolese law enforcement authorities which will assist with the investigation and ensure that the perpetrators of any abuses are brought to justice."

I think SI’s strategy is to target Harry over any other directors there might be because of his profile, and really put the pressure on him to actually do something. Good on them.

I do think Harry needs to stand up here and make a statement. Personally , I think he likes being "head" of something when other people do the hard yards. But I may very well be wrong. He has been used to be feted and celebrated with a big strong team around him & now I think he has to think for himself a bit more.

I am not sure the DM is entirely to blame for bringing this to the fore. I do think attaching your name to a high profile charity brings with it some obligations.

BUT BUT BUT I suspect I don't know enough so happy to be contradicted.

Disingenuous (and directly copied and pasted from gov.co.uk without seeming to understand it, I note…)

I am therefore guessing you do not know that the majority of the small companies with one director were set up to take advantage of the tax loophole whereby you could enter into a contract to work for an employer in the name of the company's name, and the company (i.e. you) would procure your services to do that work. The employer pays the company, you are paid by the company in the form of dividends, and the company pays corporation tax rather than income tax on the income. No NI paid either. This loophole of “disguised employment”, which massively reduced people’s tax bills, was much reduced by the passing of IR35 many years ago. But the legacy of vast numbers of “one man band” companies remain. As they are not really trading companies, they aren’t relevant for enforcement purposes.

Also, partnerships are treated differently too, as they are private organisations. They also are irrelevant for enforcement purposes against directors.

That leaves the 2 million companies. This is not 2m new companies each year, but rather a stable population that will both grow and decrease each year as new companies are incorporated and others dissolved. So its 1,200 disqualification cases each year against a body of companies that only slowly grows.

And that’s just disqualification cases. It’s not investigations launched against directions by HMRC, the FRC, the FCA, the PRA, administrators, receivers, the shareholders etc etc.

Finally, you might want to ask yourself what the figures look like if you just focus on directors with an existing high public profile rather than Joe Bloggs of Small Local Enterprise Limited….

I would agree here with @BasiliskStare

Harry's not to blame for this at all, but if you take the positions where you are "the face" of a charity and you accept the plaudits and praise for that position, then it comes with also having to deal with any negative stories.

Agree and I think the campaigners are being savvy by making it about him and putting him under an enormous amount of pressure… I imagine he’ll complain it’s all a media conspiracy but I hope he proves me wrong.

Questions over a charity project Harold's linked to.

Who'd have thought?

@Thunderbird7 and @CathyorClaire 😁and 💐 I do think he needs to stand up to this. He isn't the only one but he is high profile so I think he needs to make a statement . Otherwise what's the point of having him as founder / head other than it suits him. In this instance I am not sure he can claim it is a media conspiracy. But who knows.

Well, apparently he was told in May 2023, and an investigation was launched. That was 9 months ago - surely there are preliminary findings?

Either 'we investigated, and found no wrong doing', or 'we investigated and found some matters of concern, and are taking action'.

Harry joined the Board since the allegations - which suggests he stands by AP. Why is that? Why would you do that if there was a question mark over human rights abuses? Unless you were confident they had been fully investigated and found not to be true. In which case, say that they have been fully investigated and found to be untrue.

The impression I get is that he just doesn't care. Because those are the little people who don't count compared to the white saviour who is saving Africa on behalf of the world.

I think Survival International have done an excellent job here of highlighting the issues between the tensions of conservatism versus the cultural significance, and traditional practices of indigenous communities in any area - they work across the globe to protect these communities and have often had issues with organisations like WWF, The Wildlife Project and African Parks because their work is often detrimental to them. They’ve been raising the flag in this particular issue in the Congo since 2013 and then wrote to Harry directly in 2023. We can see from African Parks what their approach has been (which appears to be local firings and arrests but could this be more widespread?).

It is absolutely right for Survival International to use Harry to bring this to the fore - particularly because of his SEO currently and presence on the board. Part of their campaign is for Harry to resign from the board - I think this would be great however - the concern I would have is that if Harry does resign, and the subsequent media interest dies down - how will Survival International’s aims of promoting sustainable land management practices that can benefit both conservation and indigenous communities be amplified?

I think the conversation about conservation is important and importantly rich western benefactors who fund these projects in other countries perhaps need to look to history closer to home to see how conservation/preservation can be used to exclude poorer and more marginalised people in their own communities. And how intent to do good does not always result in good outcomes. There are many examples of this in the UK. Perhaps they can think of how to help by funding local and indigenous projects as opposed to the top down approach many of them have.

Anyway - I hope Harry engages his stubborn streak and doesn’t resign solely to ensure that this story continues to be reported and hopefully some justice comes to the victims. And also so more people support campaigns like Survival International.

Good post skullbabe.

You said it so much better than I could.

I’m still not informed enough and it’s not completely clear (at least to me).

As I was reading the Mail and Guardian and the SI site, I was struck by how much what is happening to the Baka people seems just like colonisation. First Dispossession, then further victimisation and brutalisation of the traditional and rightful land owners.

I hope Harry chooses his response wisely and whatever choice he makes, that he is able to facilitate change and fairness. It is very wrong the Baka cannot access their own land and suffer when they try to. This needs to change.

A friend works for a Senteballe charity for education which Harry used to be heavily involved in. He worked very hard for them without a fancy title but that was before marriage and children. I don't know his involvement now.

His heart is in the right place.

The only reason the Mail has named him and nobody else is because they love kicking Harry (and to be clear, I can't abide any of the royal family). They have never given a shit before, they don't give a shit now, and they won't tomorrow. And the same goes for most of the people on this board.

I'm inclined to agree here. I question the Mail's motives and doubt they'd be as interested if it was a charity without links to Harry. I also cynically think they're more concerned with attacking Harry than getting to the bottom of the situation, which sounds appalling.

However as a board member Harry does have a responsibility to know more of what's going on and it's fair that this is investigated and those who have not been diligent in their roles are held accountable. It's not enough for public figures to want the accolades, travel and humanitarian/philanthropist image if they're not actually invested in doing things properly and avoid accountability.

because they love kicking Harry

I think there is an element of that too, but likely more about exposing how disingenuous he is.

It does continue to cement how much of a hypocrite he is, pseudo humanitarian who doesn't really want to face any real humanitarian crises, pseudo eco warrior who doesn't really give a shit about the environment. Continuing to work with Netflix after they showed utter disregard for his mothers' dignity by reenacting the crash scene from her death. Pseudo media 'dragon slayer' who has become an actual 'dragon' in insulting, hurting, and invading the privacy of his own family.

Not much admirable about Harry, neither his motives nor his ethics, deserves to be exposed.

Well if Survival International have been campaigning about this for 20 years, why haven’t news outlets like The Guardian covered it? Why does it take the DM to report on it, for whatever motives they are doing so? And why would anyone object that it is an issue now getting the coverage it deserves and focussing on the person Survival International themselves reached out to and pointed the finger at - Harry? SI wrote an appeal direct to him and Meghan and felt that nothing was being done. That is why this is news. I assume you would be ok with it had the Guardian, Independent or BBC broke exactly the same story in exactly the same way laying out the same objective set of facts and timeline? If you would, then you are simply shooting the messenger.

Most people don’t give a shit about most things that don’t directly impact their daily lives. More people, even if it’s just a few more people, will now care about SI’s work than would ever have been the case before, and wary of organisations like African Parks before they book their eco holidays and hand over their cash for conservation with a terrible price. And Harry being held to account is absolutely right and proper as the most high profile name involved, as the president of the org for 6 of the years these abuses have been going on, as someone who chose to join the board after being informed about what’s going on, and as someone who uses Africa Parks to sell himself as a humanitarian and pick up awards as one. Don’t blame the DM for any of that - that is all on Harry.

because they love kicking Harry

I think there is an element of that too, but likely more about exposing how disingenuous he is.

I think there are element of both but mainly a recognisable name involved in a scandal sells papers.

I've always found it odd though how lauded Harry was for his "African work" especially in USA whereas Mr Beast - who seems to have found a self funding way of doing philanthropy and appears to be giving communities what they ask for - gets decried as a white savior.

I had to look up Mr Beast as I’ve never heard of him.

Youtube algorithm kept showing me for and against him videos when he did his big 100+ water wells upload it's why he sprung to my mind as it was same sort of time as some stuff for PH was getting press coverage.