Amnesty International Faces Reputation Crisis Over Controversial Report

London, United Kingdom Jul 19, 2026 ALN: Former Amnesty International employees in Scotland have warned that the organization risks damaging its long-standing reputation as it faces potential legal action from JK Rowling.

The UK branch of the leading human rights charity was forced to remove a report that labeled various organizations as 'anti-rights,' which included JK Rowling’s support center for victims of sexual abuse among a list of 117 organizations.

A number of Christian groups were also named in the report, including Christians in Parliament, which has numerous elected representatives as members.

The charity, founded in the 1960s, is renowned for its global action on war and torture. Domestically, it has championed support for Gypsy-Traveller communities and lobbied governments on issues like same-sex marriage and conversion therapy.

Former employees have told The Herald that the anti-rights report and the ensuing controversy have tarnished the positive work the charity has accomplished.

One former senior leader in the Scottish organization noted that there are robust processes that must be followed before research and reports can be publicly released.

However, Amnesty has acknowledged that the report did not adhere to its established internal review processes, which ensure consistency, accuracy, and alignment with the organization’s values.

Speaking about the report, the insider remarked, “You wonder what has gone wrong that somebody was able to pull this report together and at director level.”

They added, “I think this is what I find all a bit concerning. They’ve said they regret that it was published and didn’t go through its formal sign-off process. But you have to wonder how it got that far to actually end up on the Amnesty website.”

The Herald has sought answers from Amnesty International UK regarding who approved the report, but the organization has declined to answer specific questions.

The charity stated that the report was published online on July 8, 2026, and was not promoted externally or on social media.

“The briefing uses language that does not reflect the position of Amnesty International UK, which is why it was promptly removed on July 10, 2026,” a spokesman said.

“We are conducting a thorough review into how this serious issue occurred and are implementing additional measures to ensure our internal governance, approval, and publication processes are robust and consistently followed.”

Amnesty refused to confirm whether the report was authored by Chiara Capraro, the gender justice programme director for Amnesty UK. However, Capraro has publicly addressed the issue of 'anti-rights' movements.

Capraro described the gender-critical movement as a “whipped-up moral panic” and likened its supporters to far-right campaigners.

The now-deleted report was an update to a 2025 'anti-rights report,' which initially mentioned 65 organizations, including anti-abortion and ultra-conservative Christian groups.

In May, a report titled ‘Like a snowball: the growth and impact of the gender-critical movement in the UK’ warned of the “growth and influence” of the gender-critical movement.

It advised journalists to clarify that gender-critical views are an “ideological stance” that “seek to restrict the rights of trans people” in their reporting.

Amnesty has self-referred to the Charity Commission, which is now conducting a probe into the matter.

Barrister Barbara Rich indicated that there would be many “confidential internal discussions” within the charity and with legal advisors.

It is expected that Amnesty International UK will have to “renounce” the report and implement changes to avoid further jeopardy.

Rich stated, “That may be difficult and painful, seeing how entrenched the views it has published appear to be in the organization. But I don’t see how it can maintain a stance of asserting that organizations, including other charities, which uphold or are based on beliefs that are legally protected are 'anti-rights.'”

However, former employees fear it may already be too late for the charity to amend its reputation without incurring significant legal costs.

The former senior leader expressed concern, stating, “It’s quite worrying it managed to get this far. The fact they didn’t really say anything for several days is not great. They took down the report but didn’t explain to the media what happened. There was a vacuum. It’s not great reputationally for them.”

Another employee, who left the organization in 2020, said, “I am really concerned about where Amnesty goes from here. I don’t know how this will ever be forgotten.”

They added, “The sad part is that this report hasn’t just let down Amnesty; it has let down women’s organizations working to improve rights. It has also let down the transgender community it claims to protect.”

Amnesty has already received more than a dozen letters from organizations named in the report, and the International Secretariat, the governing body of the global charity, has distanced itself from the report, stating it does not align with the charity’s values.

JK Rowling has invited organizations considering legal action after being “targeted” to apply to her Women’s Fund, following the inclusion of her women-only sexual assault support center, Beira’s Place, in the anti-rights report.

Murray Blackburn Mackenzie (MBM), an Edinburgh-based policy and research group, has warned that an apology would not suffice.

A letter from the organization, seen by The Herald, stated that a public apology would be necessary, along with a goodwill payment to compensate for the time spent addressing the anti-rights report.

A Charity Commission spokesperson confirmed that they have opened a regulatory compliance case to further assess concerns regarding the briefing published by Amnesty International UK Charitable Trust.

Amnesty International UK has expressed regret that the briefing was uploaded without going through established internal review processes.

“Its use of language does not reflect the position of Amnesty International UK, which is why it was promptly removed,” the spokesperson stated.

“We remain committed to defending human rights, including both the rights of women and the rights of trans people. Human rights protections are strongest when they apply equally to everyone, and no community should be singled out for unfair treatment or denied their dignity and rights.”