The amendment to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act [FCRA] rules, notified by the Union government this week, has made the law’s provisions more stringent, constraining the activities of NGOs and other organisations that fall under the law’s purview. This is the 10th amendment to these rules since 2011. Questions arise on the risks of repeated amendments altering the law’s character and eventually diluting its original purpose. Earlier this year, the government brought forward an FCRA Amendment Bill ahead of Assembly elections in some states, but shelved it following public criticism, especially from minorities groups. The question of legislative propriety is relevant, given that the latest amendment is seen as a revival of this aborted intent.
According to the new rules, all associations seeking foreign funding must register for a specific field of work, ending the broad permissions previously available under the law. NGOs are now required to disclose their social media accounts, websites, publications, and other activities, significantly expanding the obligations of compliance. While foreign contributions may still support social, educational, religious, economic, and cultural programmes, organisations must clearly specify both the purpose and location of fund utilisation; violations attract penalties. The rules identify 105 permitted activities but do not specifically include health, despite it being a major area of work for many NGOs. While religious education, documentation of faith traditions, and preservation of indigenous beliefs remain permissible, proselytisation is prohibited. Minority organisations fear that legitimate religious or cultural activities could nevertheless be interpreted as attempts at conversion, exposing them to scrutiny. By confining organisations to narrowly defined fields, the regulations may force many to curtail their work or seek multiple registrations, increasing costs without guaranteeing approval. Mandatory disclosure of publications is seen as restricting freedom of expression and undermining an organisation’s right to communicate its work.
The cumulative impact of these restrictions is to shrink the operational space of NGOs while raising the risk of penalties for actions that authorities may interpret as rule violations. The regulations also grant the government greater scope to monitor, influence, and potentially control the functioning of civil society organisations. Critics fear the rules could extend beyond minority organisations to target citizen rights groups, environmental organisations, research institutions, and other bodies that challenge official policies. The broad scope for interpretation raises concerns that dissent and criticism may be selectively suppressed. Reflecting these anxieties over the amended rules, some Christian organisations have called for June 28 to be observed as a Day of Prayer. (Source: DH)
