FCRA amendment bill: Yet another tool to intimidate NGOs

The government argues that the bill is intended to plug loopholes in the 2010 legislation, but in reality, it will render NGOs more vulnerable and liable to arbitrary action.

The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, introduced in the Lok Sabha last week, is aimed at further constraining the functioning of Non-Government Organisations (NGOs), and extending greater government control over them. It envisages the setting up of a “designated authority” for the management and disposal of foreign funds and assets of NGOs whose registration is cancelled, surrendered or ceased under the law.

The government argues that the bill is intended to plug loopholes in the original legislation of 2010, but in reality, it will render NGOs more vulnerable and liable to arbitrary action. The government’s hostility to NGOs is no secret, and the amendment will give it another tool to harass them. The government has adopted policies in the past to make the working of NGOs difficult, and even to kill many of them. 

One controversial provision is the proposal to grant the government the power to take control of assets created from foreign contributions by NGOs whose licences have been cancelled or suspended. The authority is empowered to manage, use, transfer, or dispose of such assets for ‘public purposes’. There is a bar on transfer or disposal of assets created from foreign funds without prior government approval. This affects the operational autonomy of the organisations. The mandate for state governments to seek the Centre’s prior approval for initiating any FCRA-related investigation limits the states’ powers and is against federal principles. 

These moves are a continuation of the amendments made to the 2010 Act in 2016, 2018 and 2020, all of which made its provisions increasingly stringent. The powers granted to the ‘designated authority’ is discretionary, which means there is scope for subjectivity and arbitrariness. The provision for takeover of assets is an extreme provision—it could mean the end of the organisation. In many cases, assets are created with both domestic funds and foreign contributions.

Separating them will be difficult. The bill also focuses on compliance. The need for compliance to rules often becomes a need to conform to the government’s line. Even rules and provisions which are sound and good could be misinterpreted and misused to target organisations which question the government’s policies or work in areas not liked by the government.

NGOs that promote human rights and such other citizens’ rights have always been at the receiving end. In a little over a decade, the foreign contribution licences of 20,711 organisations have been cancelled, leaving only about 16,000 bodies with an FCRA certification. The FCRA is increasingly seen as a political weapon used by the government. The Opposition has termed the bill ‘’dangerous’, and it has given rise to wide criticism from civil society groups.