HC Deb 09 February 1988 vol 127 cc125-6W
Mr. Wilshire

To ask the Attorney-General if he will specify the sources and nature of the evidence obtained while preparing for the now abandoned appeal against the decision not to remove charity status from the Unification Church.

The Attorney-General

The Treasury Solicitor, on my behalf, obtained and considered evidence from some 70 persons, and from additional groups, who have in the past been associated with the Unification Church or who have had experience of its activities. They fell within the following categoriesThose who gave evidence in the libel action against Associated Newspapers Group Ltd. Those identified by Members of Parliament and others as potential witnesses; Those identified from television programmes and from other media sources as potential witnesses; Those who came forward as potential witnesses.

Inquiries were also made of persons and groups who were believed to have special knowledge of the Unification Church. Evidence was additionally obtained from a professor of the history and philosophy of religion and from a reader in sociology.

Mr. Wilshire

To ask the Attorney-General pursuant to his statement of 3 FebruaryOfficial Report, column 978, if he will specify in what ways the evidence gathered for the now abandoned appeal against the decision not to remove charity status from the Unification Church was found to be insufficiently reliable.

The Attorney-General

In most cases the evidence obtained on my behalf was directed to specific matters or events from which the court would have been asked, in support of my appeal, to draw inferences as to the general character of the practices and teachings of the Unification Church. The process of considering and testing the evidence adduced in these proceedings by the defendant trustees, together with further material which since the institution of the proceedings has become available to me, has now satisfied me that I can no longer properly invite the court, on the basis of the evidence originally available, to draw those inferences to which I have referred.

In so concluding, I have had in mind that the court would require strong evidence before inferring that the practices and teachings of the Unification Church are open to such objection as to deny it the strong legal presumption of charitable status which the law accords to all religions without distinction, and to which 1 referred in my oral answer of 3 February.

Forward to