A former chief executive of Oxfam GB has filed suit against the charity, alleging a “toxic antisemitic culture” and internal pressure to label Israel’s war against Hamas as genocide before legal standards were met. Her claims land at a moment when several major aid organizations are facing questions over their conduct and public statements regarding the Gaza conflict.

Halima Begum, who led Oxfam GB until December, told Channel 4 News that she is bringing a case before an employment tribunal accusing the organization of racism, sexism, and antisemitism. She described internal resistance when she declined to prematurely adopt the term “genocide” in reference to Israel’s military campaign against Hamas terrorists in Gaza.

“Because to use the word genocide, it has to be something that we arrive at with consultation and evidence and good legal advice,” Begum said. “And to try and use that term before we’re ready as an organization feels quite risky to me.”

She added, “We have to show consistency with other crises that are taking place in the world. And it always felt as though we were disproportionately working around the crisis in Gaza.”

“Essentially, it was very hard to hold on to neutrality and impartiality. And I say that as a Muslim woman.”

According to BBC reporting at the time of her departure, Oxfam’s trustees said her position had become “untenable” due to an “irretrievable breakdown in its trust and confidence” in her leadership amid allegations of bullying. In a statement to Channel 4 News, Oxfam GB said it refutes Begum’s allegations.

Oxfam operates in more than 70 countries, providing development assistance and emergency humanitarian aid. According to NGO Monitor, in fiscal year 2023–2024 Oxfam reported €1 billion in total income and €1 billion in expenses, with €14.1 million allocated to Israel, Judea and Samaria, and Gaza. Major donors include the European Union and governments including Germany, Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, and Australia.

NGO Monitor has reported that Oxfam “consistently paints a highly misleading picture of the Arab-Israeli conflict, departing from its humanitarian mission focused on poverty.” The watchdog group states that Oxfam statements erase complexity and assign exclusive blame to Israel, while ignoring intra-Palestinian limitations and factors affecting economic development.

In November 2024, Oxfam accused Israel of “ethnic cleansing,” stating, “Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the North Gaza governorate proves once again that it is operating with impunity from the dictates of international law.” In March 2024, Oxfam published a report calling for countries to “take all diplomatic, economic and political actions or measures within the state’s power to prevent genocide in Gaza, including by appealing to the UN Security Council” and “discontinuing any military assistance, including arms sales, that would enable or facilitate genocide, and other crimes under international law.”

Following the July 2024 advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice regarding “the legal consequences arising from Israel’s Policies and Practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” Oxfam claimed, “The Court confirmed that Israel is committing the crime of apartheid in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which is one of the most serious international crimes…This is a historic ruling that lays bare Israel’s criminal actions that have denied rights, marginalised and subjugated Palestinians for decades.”

In November 2023, Oxfam published a statement condemning Israeli military activity at hospitals in Gaza, asserting, “Attacks on hospitals packed with civilians in need of urgent treatment and seeking shelter are abhorrent and can never be justified….Indiscriminately firing on civilians in hospitals is not just a war crime, it’s an assault on humanity.” The statement did not reference Hamas’s documented use of hospitals and civilian infrastructure for military operations.

This scrutiny comes amid broader criticism of international aid organizations’ conduct during the Gaza conflict. Claims that some groups have adopted highly charged legal terminology while downplaying or omitting Hamas’s tactics have fueled debate over whether neutrality has been replaced by advocacy.

Humanitarian organizations command global influence. When they invoke terms such as genocide, apartheid, or ethnic cleansing without acknowledging the full context of a war against a terrorist organization embedded within civilian populations, they shape international perception in decisive ways.