Legal Prohibition on charitable political activities: content, procedure and reform

慈善政治活动的法律禁止：内容、程序与改革

• 批准号: AH/E003060/1
• 负责人: Alison Dunn
• 金额: $ 3.32万
• 依托单位: Newcastle University
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2008
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2008 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FE003060%2F1
• 关键词: Legal; Prohibition; charitable; political; activities

This project provides a rigorous jurisprudential analysis of current regulation in charity law of the prohibition against substantial political activities, the rule's development, the controversial questions raised for government and legislators, and of the crucial jural, social and moral concerns which reform may dictate. In questioning whether there should be reform and in framing reform proposals, this project also examines how other areas of English law have dealt with the issue of regulating political activities and also how different jurisdictions have regulated the political activities of their charities. This area of law raises interesting questions: can charities lobby Parliament, write to MPs or campaign to change the law? Should charities be able to discuss the voting records of MPs on controversial issues or support political parties for election? Would it be appropriate for charities to launch broadcasting campaigns putting forward a particular political philosophy, or arguing for a change in government policy in this country or in another country? Although charities have been at the heart of social change since 1601, at the beginning of the 20th century their contribution to pushing for legal or policy change was restricted by a regulatory prohibition on political purposes. Under current charity regulation charities may not pursue political activities as their main purpose (e.g. an organisation seeking legislation to prohibit the public from using fireworks would be pursuing a political purpose). Charities may only pursue political activities that are ancillary to their main legally acceptable charitable purpose and which are in furtherance of their main charitable purpose (eg an organisation seeking to protect animals or to provide guidedogs would be pursuing a charitable purpose and such organisation could lobby as an ancillary activity to seek legislation to prohibit the public from using fireworks on the basis that fireworks distressed animals). Although in effect for almost 100 years, this aspect of charity regulation is controversial and the rules have often proved to be difficult to apply in practice. The rules are applied by the Charity Commission with appeal to the High Court but, due lack of financial resources, the appeal process is rarely undetaken. For this reason, this area of law has escaped any meaningful analysis by the courts or policy makers. The latter is surprising since the concerns raised by the area go to the heart of current charity regulation. This project addresses these concerns.

该项目对禁止实质性政治活动，规则的发展，为政府和立法者提出的有争议的问题以及对改革可能决定的重要的吉拉尔，社会和道德关切的关键问题，对禁止实质性政治活动，规则的发展，有争议的问题进行了严格的法学分析。在质疑是否应该进行改革和框架改革建议时，该项目还研究了英国法律的其他领域如何处理规范政治活动的问题，以及不同的管辖权如何规范其慈善事业的政治活动。法律领域提出了有趣的问题：慈善机构可以大堂议会，写信给国会议员或竞选活动以改变法律吗？慈善机构是否应该能够在有争议的问题上讨论国会议员的投票记录或支持政党进行选举？慈善机构发起广播活动是适当的，提出了一种特定的政治哲学，或者主张该国或另一个国家的政府政策改变？尽管自1601年以来，慈善机构一直是社会变革的核心，但在20世纪初，他们对推动法律或政策变革的贡献受到政治目的的监管禁令的限制。根据现行的慈善监管，慈善机构可能不会从事政治活动作为其主要目的（例如，寻求立法以禁止公众使用烟火的组织将追求政治目的）。慈善机构只能从事辅助其主要可以接受的慈善目的并促进其主要慈善目的的政治活动（例如，寻求保护动物或提供指导者的组织将追求慈善目的，并且此类组织可以游说作为慈善目的一项辅助活动，以寻求立法，以禁止公众根据烟火苦恼的动物使用烟火。尽管实际上有近100年的历史，但慈善监管的这一方面是有争议的，并且经常被证明在实践中很难应用。该规则由慈善委员会适用，向高等法院提出上诉，但由于缺乏财务资源，上诉程序很少被取消。因此，该法律领域逃脱了法院或政策制定者的任何有意义的分析。后者令人惊讶，因为该地区提出的担忧是当前慈善监管的核心。该项目解决了这些问题。