Regulatory Scrutiny Intensifies in Harry and Seeiso Charity Dispute

Charity Commission Clears Sentebale of Widespread Bullying, Finds Governance Failures in Prince Harry Dispute

LONDON – A review by the Charity Commission for England and Wales has found no evidence of widespread bullying or misogyny at sentebale, the Africa-based charity co-founded by Prince Harry and Prince Seeiso of Lesotho. However, the commission’s report, released Wednesday, heavily criticizes the charity’s governance, stemming from a public dispute involving Harry and former chair Sophie Chandauka.

The commission launched its investigation in april following the resignations of Prince Harry as patron and several trustees, triggered by a breakdown in the relationship between the board and Chandauka. Chandauka later accused Prince Harry of orchestrating a campaign to force her removal.

The core of the dispute, according to the commission, revolved around disagreements over a proposed new fundraising strategy focused on the United States, surfacing in 2023. The initial complaint regarding the internal conflict was formally lodged with the commission in February 2025.

“Sentebale’s problems played out in the public eye, enabling a damaging dispute to harm the charity’s reputation, risk overshadowing its many achievements, and jeopardizing the charity’s ability to deliver for the very beneficiaries it was created to serve,” stated David Holdsworth, CEO of the Charity Commission.

Harry’s Response & Ongoing Support

Prince Harry’s spokesperson sharply criticized the report, arguing it failed to hold Chandauka accountable for the consequences of her actions, which they believe will ultimately impact the children Sentebale supports.Harry has indicated he will explore alternative avenues to continue assisting young people in Botswana and Lesotho.

Sentebale was established in 2006 by Harry and Seeiso as a memorial to their late mothers, Princess Diana and Queen Mamohato of Lesotho, respectively. The charity provides vital support to young people living with HIV in Southern Africa, offering healthcare, education, and psychosocial support.

Evergreen Insights: The Fragility of Charity Governance

This case highlights the critical importance of robust governance structures within charitable organizations, particularly those with high-profile patrons. While the commission found no systemic issues of bullying,the public fallout underscores how easily internal disputes can damage a charity’s reputation and hinder its mission.

Several key takeaways emerge:

Clear Roles & Responsibilities: A clearly defined division of roles between trustees,patrons,and staff is essential to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure accountability.
Conflict Resolution Mechanisms: Charities should establish formal, clear processes for addressing internal disagreements before they escalate into public disputes.
Protecting Beneficiaries: All governance decisions must prioritize the well-being and needs of the individuals the charity serves.Public disputes can divert resources and attention away from the core mission.
The Impact of High-Profile Involvement: While celebrity patronage can significantly boost fundraising and awareness, it also introduces unique challenges related to public perception and potential conflicts.

Chandauka welcomed the report, stating it validated the governance concerns she had previously raised and acknowledged the “unacceptable behaviors” displayed during the adverse media campaign launched following the resignations in March 2025.

What potential penalties could Sentebale face if found in breach of regulatory compliance?

The Core of the Controversy: Sentebale and the Allegations

Recent reports have highlighted a deepening dispute between Prince Harry,Duke of Sussex,and Prince Seeiso of Lesotho over the running of their joint charity,Sentebale. This isn’t simply a personal disagreement; it’s attracting significant regulatory scrutiny from both UK and Lesotho authorities. The core of the issue revolves around allegations of financial mismanagement and concerns regarding the charity’s governance structure. Key terms surfacing in investigations include charity governance, financial transparency, and regulatory compliance.

Understanding Sentebale’s mission and Structure

sentebale,meaning “forget-me-not” in Sesotho,was founded in 2006 by Prince Harry and Prince Seeiso to support children and young people affected by HIV/AIDS in Lesotho and Botswana. The charity provides a range of services, including education, healthcare, and psychosocial support.

Initial Funding: Primarily reliant on donations and fundraising events.

Operational Model: A combination of direct program delivery and grants to local organizations.

Governance: Traditionally overseen by a board of trustees, with both Princes actively involved.

The current dispute centers on changes to this structure and alleged deviations from established charitable best practices.

Key Areas of Regulatory Examination

The escalating tensions have prompted investigations by the Charity Commission for England and Wales, and equivalent bodies in Lesotho.Here’s a breakdown of the primary areas under review:

Related Party Transactions: Scrutiny is focused on financial dealings between Sentebale and organizations linked to individuals connected to the Princes. this falls under the umbrella of conflict of interest regulations.

Executive Pay and Benefits: Reports suggest concerns over the compensation packages received by senior staff, including potential discrepancies and lack of clear justification. Executive remuneration is a key focus.

Fundraising Practices: Authorities are examining whether fundraising campaigns were conducted ethically and transparently, and if funds were allocated appropriately. Charity fundraising regulations are paramount.

Governance Changes: The recent restructuring of Sentebale’s leadership and decision-making processes is being assessed for compliance with charity law. The distinction between regulatory and regulative (as highlighted in sources like Baidu Zhidao) is relevant here – are the changes actively regulating the charity effectively, or simply descriptive of a new structure?

The Role of the Charity Commission & Lesotho Authorities

The Charity Commission for England and Wales has the power to:

1. Open a statutory inquiry: This is the moast serious form of investigation, allowing the Commission to examine all aspects of a charity’s operations.
2. Issue orders and directions: The Commission can instruct a charity to take specific actions to address concerns.
3. Disqualify trustees: Individuals found to have breached their duties can be removed from their positions.

Similarly, Lesotho’s regulatory bodies are empowered to investigate and enforce non-profit regulations within the country. Collaboration between the two sets of authorities is expected, given Sentebale’s operations in both jurisdictions.

Potential Consequences for Sentebale

The outcome of these investigations could have significant repercussions for Sentebale:

Reputational Damage: Even the appearance of wrongdoing can erode public trust and impact future fundraising efforts.

Financial Penalties: Charities found to have acted improperly can be fined.

Operational Restrictions: Regulators could impose limitations on Sentebale’s activities.

Charity Status Revocation: In the most severe cases, the charity could lose its charitable status altogether.

Impact on Philanthropic Organizations & Donor Confidence

This dispute casts a shadow over the broader philanthropic landscape. Donors are increasingly demanding accountability in charities and impact reporting.Incidents like this can lead to decreased giving and a reluctance to support organizations perceived as lacking robust governance structures. Due diligence by donors is now more critical than ever.

Best Practices for Charity Governance: A Checklist

To mitigate risk and ensure charitable transparency, organizations should prioritize:

Independent Trustees: A board comprised of individuals with diverse skills and experience, free from conflicts of interest.

Clear Financial Controls: Robust accounting systems and regular audits.

whistleblowing Policies: Mechanisms for reporting concerns without fear of reprisal.