UK Charity Terrorist Financing Exposure After Hamas Aid Arrest

The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) unsealed a three-count complaint on 31 July 2026 charging Mohammad Yousef Hasna, 45, a Turkish national resident in Istanbul and also known as "Orhan Korkmaz" and "Abu al-Baraa", with conspiring to provide material support to Hamas, conspiring to finance terrorism, and financing terrorism. Each count carries a maximum penalty of 20 years' imprisonment. Hasna was arrested in the United Kingdom on the same day and was ordered detained pending extradition proceedings before he can be brought to New York. The DOJ describes him as global director of a purported international charity registered in the United Kingdom, and states that United Kingdom law enforcement authorities and the Israeli Security Agency assisted the investigation.

The allegations are notable less for the sums involved than for the mechanics. According to the complaint, Hasna coordinated since at least 2023 with Ghazi Hamad, a member of the Hamas Politburo and minister for the Ministry of Social Development (MoSD) in Gaza, arranging cash deliveries, procuring supplies, moving goods into Gaza by road from Egypt and elsewhere, routing consignments to warehouses controlled either by the charity or by MoSD, and distributing them to recipient lists supplied by Hamad. Concealment was allegedly integral: supplies recorded as delivered to MoSD were in fact held in warehouses under Hasna's control, or were nominally delivered and then redistributed, while photographs and video of consignments were framed to exclude signage identifying warehouse location or control. The organisation's disclosures to UK authorities showed gross income rising from approximately US$41.8 million in the 2023 financial year to approximately US$81.56 million in 2024, with roughly US$91 million reported as spent on charitable activity in the year to 31 July 2025.

The domestic regulatory response followed within days. On 5 August 2026 the Charity Commission for England and Wales opened a statutory inquiry under section 46 of the Charities Act 2011 into Al-Khair Foundation, citing significant risk to charity property and to public trust in the sector, and issued an order under section 76(3)(f) restricting the charity's transactions with Hasna, his organisation, or Gaza without prior Commission consent. The inquiry followed a complaint received in July alleging connections between the charity, its partners and Hamas. The Commission has said it will seek to verify Hasna's connection to the charity, examine whether trustees carried out appropriate due diligence on international partners, and assess whether end use of funds overseas was effectively monitored. The charity reported income exceeding £74 million for the year ending 31 July 2025. Al-Khair Foundation has denied wrongdoing, confirmed it is cooperating fully, and states that Hasna is employed by one of its implementing partners delivering aid in Gaza rather than by the charity itself.

For institutions banking the non-profit sector, the exposure sits in a familiar blind spot. The alleged diversion occurred largely in commodities and in-country cash, downstream of the point at which UK payments left the regulated perimeter, and would not have surfaced through transaction monitoring calibrated to counterparty and jurisdiction alone. Doubling income following a humanitarian emergency is not itself suspicious; the residual risk lies in whether onward disbursement to implementing partners in a conflict theatre was subject to any verification of end use. Firms should expect trustee-level questions on partner vetting, warehouse and distribution controls, and reconciliation of aid manifests against delivery evidence, alongside review of sections 15 to 18 of the Terrorism Act 2000 exposure where funds were made available in circumstances giving reasonable cause to suspect diversion. Restrictive orders of this kind also generate immediate operational consequences for account activity, standing payment instructions and correspondent messaging referencing the charity or the Gaza corridor. Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) expectations under the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 (MLRs) require a proportionate response rather than blanket withdrawal of banking services from the sector, and any consequential suspicious activity reporting to the National Crime Agency (NCA) should reflect what is actually known rather than the fact of the inquiry alone. A complaint is an allegation, and Hasna is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

Read the press release here.