AN animal rescue charity which worked to evacuate dozens of animals from Afghanistan has been cleared of any wrongdoing by a watchdog.

Paul "Pen" Farthing, a former Royal Marine from Dovercourt, launched a high-profile campaign to get his staff and animals out of the country after the fall of Kabul last year.

His British-based animal welfare charity, Nowzad, worked on an evacuation mission, known as Operation Ark, as the Taliban seized power.

The campaign to rescue the animals and charity staff raised more than £200,000 in days.

The Charity Commission confirmed it did not identify any regulatory concerns about the operation.

The commission concluded the objectives of the mission were made clear to donors during fundraising and trustees’ decision-making and actions were “reasonable”.

Harwich and Manningtree Standard: Pen FarthingPen Farthing

The UK Government sponsored clearance for a charter flight, leading to allegations that animals had been prioritised over people in the exit effort.

No 10 repeatedly said Prime Minister Boris Johnson had no involvement in pushing for help for the charity.

However, a whistleblower leaked email exchanges in which Foreign Office officials suggest the PM “authorised” their rescue, despite Mr Johnson previously saying it was “complete nonsense”.

The Charity Commission said: “It was not within [our] remit to consider the role the government may or may not have had in the evacuation of animals and staff from Afghanistan.

“The Commission has been engaging more widely with the trustees as they consider and plan for significant challenges and fundamental questions over the future operations of the charity, as the situation in Afghanistan continues to evolve.”

Reacting to the news, Mr Farthing said: “11 months of stress.

“As well as press issues, the Charity Commission launched a case against Nowzad in August 2021.

“It concluded [in July] and obviously no wrongdoing to be found. They investigated so much more than just Operation Ark.”

Tracy Howarth, of the Charity Commission, said: “We take all concerns raised with us seriously and will always assess them impartially and expertly against the Commission’s own criteria and the law.

“In this case, we did not find evidence of wrongdoing and recognised the trustees’ ongoing efforts to manage the charity under difficult circumstances.”