Anuradha Mittal, the former chair of Ben Jerry's independent board, has accused Magnum, the company that owns Ben Jerry's, of threatening to launch a public smear campaign against her if she did not step down from her role. Mittal, who chaired the board for seven years, claimed that Magnum had threatened to publish "defamatory statements" about her, according to a statement she made to the BBC.

Mittal's allegations stem from an increasingly bitter dispute between Ben Jerry's and Magnum over the independence of the board and its freedom to pursue its social missions. Magnum had commissioned an investigation into Mittal's role on the board, which concluded that she "no longer met the criteria to serve" on the board. In response, Magnum outlined changes to the way the board operates, including a nine-year limit for people serving on it. As a result, Mittal, along with two other board members, will be required to leave their positions.

According to Magnum, an audit of the Ben Jerry's Foundation, a charitable organization, had "identified a series of material deficiencies" that necessitated the changes. However, Mittal disputed this claim, stating that the audit was "flawed" and that the changes were an attempt to undermine the board's independence. "Magnum's actions are an attempt to smear me and undermine the board's ability to pursue its social missions," Mittal said in a statement.

The dispute between Ben Jerry's and Magnum has been ongoing for several years, with the two companies having different visions for the brand's social and environmental responsibilities. Ben Jerry's has long been known for its commitment to social and environmental causes, and its board has been instrumental in shaping the company's mission and values. Magnum, on the other hand, has been pushing for greater control over the brand and its operations.

The implications of this dispute are far-reaching, with many in the business community and beyond watching the situation closely. The use of threats and intimidation tactics by Magnum has raised concerns about the company's commitment to corporate social responsibility and its willingness to prioritize profits over people and the planet. As the situation continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how Ben Jerry's and Magnum will resolve their differences and what the future holds for the beloved ice cream brand.

In a statement, Magnum said that it was committed to maintaining the independence of the Ben Jerry's board while also ensuring that the company's operations are run in a responsible and sustainable manner. However, Mittal and other supporters of the board remain skeptical, citing the company's history of prioritizing profits over people and the planet. The situation is likely to continue to be closely watched in the coming weeks and months as the two companies navigate their differences and the implications of this dispute become clearer.