You're providing the means for these crimes to continue
In the long and unresolved struggle over land, law, and moral accountability, a British MP has raised a question that cuts to the heart of how democracies permit — or inadvertently fund — actions their own governments condemn. Thirty-two charities in England and Wales stand accused of channeling £28 million into Israeli settlements that international law regards as illegal, with British taxpayers potentially subsidizing £5.6 million of that activity through gift aid relief. The Charity Commission has opened a formal investigation, placing the tension between charitable freedom and legal obligation at the center of public scrutiny. What is at stake is not only regulatory compliance, but the distance — or lack of it — between a donor's intent and the harm that reaches a Palestinian farmer trying to harvest his own olives.
- A Labour MP has formally accused 32 charities of directing £28m toward Israeli settlements, triggering a Charity Commission investigation announced by the foreign secretary herself.
- The allegation that British taxpayers may have unwittingly subsidized £5.6m of internationally condemned settlement activity has sharpened the political and legal urgency of the case.
- Named organizations including Kasner Charitable Trust and UK Toremet are linked to West Bank institutions and pro-settler groups — one recipient, Shivat Zion Lerigvy Admata, was sanctioned by the UK government the very day the allegations surfaced.
- Palestinian residents describe direct, physical harm from the settlement expansion these donations help sustain, with one man recounting a settler attack while harvesting olives on his own land.
- Charities under scrutiny are defending their donations as educational and legally vetted, while the Charity Commission signals the review will be thorough, complex, and consequential for the organizations' futures on the charity register.
Labour MP Melanie Ward, a former chief executive of Medical Aid for Palestinians, has identified thirty-two charities in England and Wales that she says have sent at least £28 million into Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. Because many such donations likely claimed gift aid tax relief, she argues British taxpayers may have effectively subsidized around £5.6 million of activity that international law — and successive UK governments — regard as illegal. The Charity Commission has opened a formal investigation, with Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper announcing the inquiry this week.
Ward's letter to the regulator traces specific financial flows. The Kasner Charitable Trust and UK Toremet together directed approximately £5.7 million to a yeshiva high school in Susya in the occupied West Bank, while Kasner also donated to a yeshiva in Hebron. In 2022, UK Toremet transferred funds to Regavim, a group the European Union has sanctioned for its role in demolishing Palestinian homes and expanding settler outposts. UK Toremet operates through the Jgive platform, which processes donations to various pro-settler organizations — including Shivat Zion Lerigvy Admata, a group the UK government sanctioned on the same day Ward's allegations became public.
Spokespersons for the named charities maintain they have been found compliant by the Charity Commission and conduct due diligence before processing payments. They describe their donations as educational and argue that at least some of the funding supported projects within Israel's pre-1967 borders, making them technically distinct from settlement activity. Ward rejects this framing, contending the donations obstruct peace and support an occupation the United Nations, the International Court of Justice, and the International Criminal Court have all condemned.
The human cost of the dispute was given voice by Yaser Alkam, a Palestinian-American from the occupied village of Turmus Ayya, who was attacked by settlers while trying to harvest olives on his own land. He described the donations plainly: they provide the financial infrastructure that allows such harm to continue and expand. The Charity Commission has acknowledged the complexity of the case and indicated that its review — which will determine whether these organizations remain on the charity register — will take considerable time.
Melanie Ward, a Labour MP and former chief executive of Medical Aid for Palestinians, has identified thirty-two charities operating in England and Wales that she says have funneled at least £28 million into Israeli settlements across the occupied West Bank. If those donations claimed gift aid tax relief in the standard manner, she argues, British taxpayers would have effectively subsidized roughly £5.6 million of activity that international law deems illegal. The accusation has prompted the Charity Commission to formally investigate the matter, a task the foreign secretary Yvette Cooper announced this week.
Ward's letter to the regulator names specific organizations and traces their money across borders. The Kasner Charitable Trust and UK Toremet feature prominently in her findings. Together, these two entities directed approximately £5.7 million to the Bnei Akiva Yeshiva high school in Susya, located in the occupied West Bank. Kasner also donated to a yeshiva in Hebron, a Palestinian city. In 2022, UK Toremet transferred £38,479 to Regavim, a group the European Union has sanctioned for its role in supporting the demolition of Palestinian homes and the expansion of settler outposts.
UK Toremet operates as a processing intermediary through the Jgive platform, which allows British donors to contribute to various pro-settler organizations. Among the recipients available through this channel is Shivat Zion Lerigvy Admata, a group the UK government announced it would sanction on the same day Ward's allegations surfaced. When questioned about these connections, a UK Toremet spokesperson maintained that the Charity Commission had found the organization compliant with law and that it conducted due diligence before processing any payments. The spokesperson also claimed that Shivat Zion Lerigvy Admata was never an approved recipient under their framework and that the Regavim donation supported a project within Israel's pre-1967 borders, making it technically distinct from settlement activity.
Ward's core argument rests on a legal and moral distinction. She contends that funding Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory violates both UK and international law, a position endorsed by the United Nations, successive British governments, the International Court of Justice, and currently under investigation by the International Criminal Court on war crimes grounds. The charities in question, she writes, are not engaged in charitable work but in activities that obstruct peace and support the expansion of what the world community has deemed illegal occupation.
The human dimension of this dispute emerged through testimony from Yaser Alkam, a Palestinian-American living in the occupied village of Turmus Ayya. Alkam was attacked by settlers the previous year while attempting to harvest olives from his own land. He framed the donations bluntly: they provide the financial infrastructure for ongoing harm. "You're providing the means for these crimes to continue and to flourish," he said, describing how settlement expansion directly displaces Palestinians from their property and livelihood.
The Kasner Charitable Trust has previously stated that its donations serve educational purposes and have been vetted by the Charity Commission. The regulator itself has acknowledged the gravity of Ward's allegations, confirming that it is actively examining the legal and compliance questions surrounding charities' operations in Palestine. A Charity Commission spokesperson described the matter as complex and contentious, indicating that a thorough review would take time. The investigation now underway will determine whether these organizations should remain on the charity register or face removal for activities deemed incompatible with charitable law.
Notable Quotes
The existence and growth of Israeli settlements in the state of Palestine is globally recognised as one of the major impediments to peace. Any activity which supports the maintenance and the expansion of Israeli settlements is extremist and not of benefit to the UK public.— Melanie Ward, Labour MP, in her letter to the Charity Commission
Donating to these outposts and to these settlements is directly affecting Palestinians, the owners of the land in these areas.— Yaser Alkam, Palestinian-American resident of occupied West Bank village
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does it matter whether these donations claim gift aid?
Because gift aid is a tax subsidy. When a charity claims it, the government tops up the donation with public money. So British taxpayers are effectively funding settlements they may not support—and settlements that international law says are illegal.
The charities say they've been cleared by the Charity Commission. Doesn't that settle it?
Not entirely. The Commission has been investigating these links for a while now, and Ward's letter is pushing them to act more decisively. Being cleared once doesn't mean the activity is beyond scrutiny, especially when the legal and political landscape shifts.
What's the difference between donating to a yeshiva and donating to a pro-settler militia group?
A yeshiva is a school—arguably educational. But if that school is located in an illegal settlement and its existence depends on the settlement's expansion, the distinction blurs. And groups like Regavim aren't educational at all; they actively work to displace Palestinians.
The charities claim some donations went to projects inside Israel's pre-1967 borders. Does that change things?
Legally, it might. But the pattern matters. If a charity is routing money through platforms that also fund explicitly pro-settler groups, the intent and effect become harder to separate from the legal technicality.
What happens if the Commission removes these charities from the register?
They lose their tax-exempt status and can no longer claim gift aid. The funding pipeline shrinks significantly. But the real question is whether removal happens at all, or whether the Commission finds a way to allow them to continue.