An extraordinary row has broken out at Oxfam over the treatment of its outgoing chief executive.
Halima Begum had left the organisation, it confirmed on Monday, amid claim and counterclaim of bullying – with a split emerging among members of its board of trustees.
Reports first emerged on Sunday that trustees had unanimously decided Begum should go after an independent review – commissioned following complaints by current and former staff – painted a damaging picture of senior Oxfam GB leadership.
But on Monday a member of that same board denied this, saying: “Oxfam believes in and values kindness, justice and fairness. Sadly, Halima’s treatment has been anything but kind, just or fair.” Sources suggested that, rather than being sacked, Begum had resigned.
According to the Times, which first reported Begum’s departure, Oxfam said the trustees had commissioned an external review of Begum’s conduct that drew on testimony from 32 current and former Oxfam employees, as well as documentary evidence.
The paper quoted an Oxfam spokesperson saying the review had identified “serious issues in the CEO’s leadership behaviour and her decision-making, including breaches of organisational processes and values and inappropriate interference into safeguarding and integrity investigations”. It quoted the charity as saying: “The report’s findings have led the board to the conclusion that there is an irretrievable breakdown in its trust and confidence in Dr Begum’s ability to discharge the role of chief executive officer to the level required in Oxfam GB, and that her ongoing employment is untenable.”
The original reports said Oxfam had said its board unanimously passed a resolution to this effect on Friday and Begum “has therefore left the organisation”. But Dr Balwant Singh, a trustee of Oxfam GB since November 2022, said the statement made on behalf of the board had not been shared with him, and did not “reflect my views as a trustee”.
He said: “The person(s) who contacted the media and shared information and details that were confidential was apparently seeking to destroy Halima and her reputation, and to worsen the crises Oxfam is already facing.”
He said the findings of the investigation had not been shared with Begum and she had not been given a right of reply. By Monday morning, Oxfam was relying on a much shorter statement that confirmed Begum’s departure without specifying whether she had walked or been pushed.
The Times reported that staff had urged the board to investigate Begum. In a letter, dozens said a restructuring of the organisation she led had created “widespread animosity”. They claimed it created an “intense climate of fear” that had become “deeply rooted in Oxfam, including a very real fear of retribution from senior management”.
But Singh said: “Whilst many of those who raised concerns about Halima’s leadership hid behind anonymity by claiming fear of retribution and retaliation, it is sickening that Halima has been subjected to what appears to be a carefully orchestrated and intentionally brutal retaliation and retribution in the national media.”
Responding to Singh’s comments, an Oxfam spokesperson said: “Whilst it would be inappropriate to comment on individual circumstances, Oxfam acknowledges that, like many organisations, we operate in a world where racism and racial injustice persist, and we acknowledge that there is more work to do in OGB [Oxfam GB] on inclusion, equity, and culture. The board is committed to that work.
“We take seriously the voices of colleagues who may have experienced racialised bias or harm. These accounts help guide our ongoing efforts to strengthen accountability, fairness, and support across the organisation. Our commitment to racial justice and equality for our colleagues and communities we work with around the world remains unwavering.”
Lawrence Davies of Equal Justice solicitors, representing Begum, said: “Our client alleges that she was subjected to, and continues to be subjected to, a victimising witch-hunt. The truth of what actually happened will be revealed in due course.
“Our client has whistleblown to the Charity Commission about various public interest matters which we assume are now being investigated.”
