By P. Sreekumaran
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026 is back in the centrestage with the Union Government bent upon going ahead with it in the current session itself and the Opposition and Catholic organisations bent on preventing the Government from proceeding with it.
Reports have it that the Government will re-introduce the4 Bill again on August 12, a day before the Lok Sabha session is set to end. With both sides refusing to budge from their stated positions, the stage is set for a protracted politico-legal slugfest.
Various Christian organisations have had meetings with Union Home Minister Amit Shah in an effort to get the Government to roll back the Bill. But The HM has not responded positively to their request.
Among the Christian organisations leading the fight for withdrawal are the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India (CBCI) and the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. The first salvo was fired by the Syrian Church, which openly questioned some provisions in the FCRA Rules, especially the requirement that FCRA account holders furnish details of their social media accounts and publications. The decision is questionable as it amounts to an infringement of the fundamental rights. The Syrian Church sounded a note of warning that any attempt to widen regulatory scrutiny beyond financial transactions would be opposed tooth and nail.
The Church was also irked by the manner in which the revised regulations were introduced. They are of the view that the stakeholders should have been consulted before the changes were proposed. The new provisions could be construed as an indirect warning to organisations that are critical of the Union Government.
The new provisions are unnecessary as the financial transactions conducted through bank accounts are already subject to proper auditing and scrutiny. Any attempt to extend such scrutiny to the viewpoints and positions of organisations amounts to a challenge to the freedom of expression, according to Yuhanon Dascoros Metropolitan of the Church’s media wing. The move, the media wing said, has strengthened suspicions that accounts could be frozen if organisations criticized the Government. What is causing grave concern is that the proposed rules, which provide for hefty penalties even in cases of technical lapses could severely affect the functioning of institutions. The new rules could also disrupt the mission’s activities undertaken outside the State as well.
The hospitals and educational institutions established by Churches area symbol of their commitment, sincerity and love for the nation. The attempt to create suspicions about the activities of the Christian Mission of the Churches is unacceptable, the Church averred, adding that it is regrettable that while regulations are being simplified for industries, mining and other sectors, stricter regulations are being imposed on humanitarian service activities.
Further action on the FCRA issue would be taken after consultations with various Christian denominations. It may be mentioned that the Union Government had made an earlier attempt to push through the amendments to the FCRA framework. But it was stalled because of the strong resistance from Christian organisations. The assembly election campaign also forced the Union Government to put the proposal on hold.
On their part, the CBCI submitted a memorandum against the FCRA Bill to Union Home Minister Amit Shah during their meeting with him sometime back.
The CBCI was concerned over the Rules which mandate the NGOs to specify the list of activities that can be pursued by them under the five permitted categories – social, political, education, cultural and religious – besides stating the geographical areas where they would operate! The Rules permit conduct of religious education, moral instruction, satsangs, discourses and meditation retreats. But the Rules specifically bars “proselytation”.
The CBCI has demanded that the term should be omitted as it has no relevance to the FCRA activities and is bound to be misused in the absence of a definition.
The Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on March 23 but a discussion on it was deferred in view of the uproar by the Opposition parties. A key change proposed in the Bill is the appointment of a “designated authority” to take over, manage, or dispose of assets created from foreign funds when an NGO’s FCRA registration is suspended, cancelled or not renewed. The authority will enjoy the powers of a civil court and can order the transfer or sale of assets owned by the NGOs to either the Government or any other body.
The CBCI has opposed the provision on the ground that it could be applied retrospectively. The takeover of assets, it argued, should take effect only after finalization of the process of adjudication, including statutory appeal to a regular court.
In its response, Congress general secretary (organization) K. C. Venugopal has accused Amit Shah of lying to the CBCI about the FCRA and wrongly deflecting the blame to hide his government’s culpability in weaponising the FCRA laws. He further said that the Modi Government has been hell bent on using the FCRA to harass vocal civil society organisations and minority-run institutions and take over their properties. The Bill will be opposed both in Parliament and outside, Venugopal added. If necessary, the Opposition would launch a movement to thwart the nefarious designs of the Modi Government, he warned. (IPA Service)
