fcra licenses

MHA Cancels FCRA Licence of 3 Major Church-Related Charity Organisations, 2 Others

There has been a concerning rise in the list of NGOs whose FCRA licences have been cancelled or have not been renewed by the government.

New Delhi: After the cancellation of the Foreign Contribution Registration Act (FCRA) licences of five prominent non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on April 3, the home ministry has said that the action was taken following “due process of law”, the Economic Times reported.

CNI Synodical Board of Social Service, Voluntary Health Association of India (VHAI), Indo-Global Social Service Society, Church Auxiliary for Social Action and Evangelical Fellowship of India (EFI), are the five NGOs that lost their license.

EFI general secretary Vijayesh Lal confirmed that their renewal application of FCRA licence was denied. “It is very surprising that the umbrella and representative body of Evangelical Christians in India and one that is involved in significant inter-faith, charity, and prayer initiatives to bless and unite the nation, is identified as a body that can ‘prejudicially’ affect inter-religious, or social harmony,” Lal told the Economic Times.

“On the contrary, it is one of EFI’s main works to act as bridge builders and agents of reconciliation to bring together a society that is increasingly being fragmented on religious and political lines. We are still debating on the next course of action and will take a call on the same soon,” he added.

It may be noted that EFI collects and publishes data on attacks against Christians in India. Its reports include data on violence, attacks on churches or prayers meetings, harassment of those following their faith, ostracisation and limiting access to community resources, and false allegations, particularly those pertaining to ‘forced conversions’.

EFI has reported a massive increase in violence against christians under the Narendra Modi-led BJP government.

There has been a concerning rise in the list of NGOs whose FCRA licences have been cancelled or have not been renewed by the government.

Political analysts and civil rights groups say this is part of the Bharatiya Janata Party government’s move to suppress organisations that are critical of it.

VHAI, a federation of 27 State Voluntary Health Associations, links more than 4,500 health and development institutions across the country, according to its website.

The Synodical Board of Social Services is the development and justice board of the Church of North India (CNI). As per its website, CNI works on poverty alleviation and social justice for the poor and exploited, primarily with the Dalits and Adivasi communities and women who have been “socially and economically excluded”.

The Indo-Global Social Service Society, another NGO that lost its licence, works with the mandate for a humane social order based on truth, justice, freedom and equity, as per its website.

The Church’s Auxiliary for Social Action is the service wing of the National Council of Churches in India comprising the Orthodox and Protestant Church Societies in India. According to its website, it works “for the poorest of the poor irrespective of caste, religion, gender and political affiliations”.

The Union government had also cancelled the FCRA license of two Tamil Nadu-based christian organisations earlier this year – Tamil Nadu Social Service Society and World Vision India.

Over the past two years, more than 100 NGOs, including Centre for Policy Research, Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, Rajiv Gandhi Charitable Trust and Oxfam India, have lost their FCRA licences on charges of alleged misuse of foreign grants, the Economic Times reported.

FCRA Should Be an Instrument of Financial Accountability Not of Security

Amending the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) with some relevant clauses for the social sector could maintain financial accountability without bringing in security considerations for organisations. However, this did not find favour with the government.

The cancellation of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) license of Centre for Policy Research (CPR), one of the country’s famed think tanks, on the charges of multiple violations raises several critical questions regarding both the sides.

For CPR, which is celebrating its 50th anniversary, charges such as ‘hurting India’s economic interests’ by alleged ‘mis-utilisation of funds received from foreign sources for organising protests and funding non-FCRA entities to fight legal battles against development projects, including coal mines’ are serious.

In fact, the state surveillance of its activities has been on since 2014. On September 7, 2022 it was subjected to an Income Tax survey and its IT exemption was cancelled on 30 June 2023. It eventually got redressal, both, from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court. It is now left with just the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR) grant since it is one of the 24 ICSSR funded institutes.

The entities

Entities such as CPR are created by societies registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, passed by the British parliament. The Act exists in the Indian sub-continent as well as in some other former British colonies. It permits a group of desirous persons – presently seven in India – to register a society for literary, scientific and charitable purposes, framing a memorandum of associations (signing it too) and rules for its functioning. The Act has been partially modified in some states.

A very broad spectrum of societies is registered under this Act, that creates anomalies at times. No wonder, in cases of political dissidence, the government charges them for violating the terms of registration and memorandum of association. Late Dr Rajanikant and Dr Mabelle Arole, who founded the famous Jamkhed Rural Health Project in Maharashtra, told me during field work for my first research at CPR in 1981 that people came to them asking about strategies on how to pressurise the government and administration into bring civic amenities to their villages. Several entities face such predicament when their defined role performance creates situations for them to stick their neck out to advise people and groups at the grassroots level on how to overcome systemic resistance to change.

Also read: Centre for Policy Research Calls MHA’s Decision to Cancel FCRA Registration ‘Incomprehensible’

The UN had recognised the role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in rural development soon after its creation in 1945. NGOs became a major initiative for a large number of persons and groups driven by the zeal of social service. Social activist Anna Hazare’s initiatives in Maharashta’s Rale Gan Siddhi has acted as a model for many Indian activists since 1975, leading to proliferation of such entities for varied objectives.

By the 1990s there were efforts to redefine NGOs as voluntary or civil society organisations. A CPR study of 1993, of which I am a co-author, termed it as Volag (Voluntary Agency). All these organisations together have created a wide gamut of activities over decades. They have had very few funding sources within India – the Tata Trust was an exception. Corporate philanthropy has been limited in India. Foreign foundation such as the Ford Foundation emerged as major sources for most of them. Thus, foreign funding of such entities became routine in India.

The FCRA since 1976

Raising the bogey of “foreign hand”, Indira Gandhi brought the FCRA during the Emergency in 1976 and in a bid to create surveillance regime for the NGOs, put it under the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). For all such entities receiving foreign funds through foundations, corporate grants and so on, the FCRA license administered by the MHA became obligatory. It has not only continued thereafter, but has also become a permanent feature for the scrutiny of foreign funds for such entities. The FCRA has been amended four times since.

In 2010, in the wake of anti-nuclear protests driven by some human rights bodies in Tamil Nadu’s Kudankulam that were receiving foreign funds, the Manmohan Singh government tightened the FCRA. Yet, it did not stop the same government to consult and use them for creating a governance model using the National Advisory Council chaired by Congress veteran Sonia Gandhi.

Since the accountability of the voluntary sector in financial matters was questioned, the P.V. Narasimha Rao (1991-96) government had provided a window to them to explain, interact and cooperate with the government. Even as the voluntary sector accepted the need for accountability in view of the inevitability of foreign funding, following extensive deliberations, they suggested that instead of an instrument of surveillance and security, the FCRA should be used as one of financial accountability.

The purpose could be fulfilled by amending the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) administered by the Ministry of Finance, with some relevant clauses for the voluntary sector. This would have made it compulsory for the donors to report such funding to the MoF with mandatory annual account submission for the concerned voluntary organisations. This, they argued, would keep financial accountability without bringing in security considerations. However, this did not find favour with the government.

The questions regarding the transfer and use of the funds in other heads, including administrative heads, are more contentious. Rigid categorisation often does not work with such bodies as they do not generate a separate administrative grant. Many times, some related expenses are adjusted against foreign grants, giving the political dispensation an opportunity to ask uncomfortable questions and cancel the FCRA license, which has been resorted to in the case of CPR.

A careful look at the charges against CPR reveals the complexity of role performance that the Indian state uses to securitise studies and their dissemination process using the FCRA as an instrument of surveillance. Should an academic entity such as CPR not allow the use of its studies by activist groups to highlight the predicament of the underprivileged? How can they prevent a protest that uses its findings? A similar cancellation took place in the case of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, an entity that worked on human rights and police reforms. The list is indeed long.

The distrust against the voluntary sector

CPR and such institutions have been under scrutiny for years, irrespective of their emergence as an important segment of international developmental initiatives. However, since they are a significant part of international and the Indian social life, they must function within the structures of accountability created by the government, which must also be uniform and transparent.

The love-hate relationship between the government and the NGOs has continued in India with each regime. In both its avatars, the UPA had selected organisations as part of the NAC, but neither the FCRA was relaxed, nor other enabling reforms undertaken for the sector. In fact, in 2013 the MHA tightened the FCRA by imposing prohibitive conditions for donors. Several programmes had to be folded up mid-way. The NDA government since 2014 has followed the same path and they became even more severe in 2019.

Ajay K. Mehra is a political scientist. He was Atal Bihari Vajpayee Senior Fellow, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi, 2019-21 and Principal, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Evening College, Delhi University (2018).

‘Cease Needless Harassment of NGOs’: Former Civil Servants Urge Amit Shah on FCRA License Row

‘Every expression of difference of opinion or dissent cannot be construed as violating the integrity and sovereignty of the country or as being against the public interest,’ 86 former bureaucrats wrote to Amit Shah in an open letter.

New Delhi: Over 80 retired civil servants have called on Union home minister, Amit Shah, “to adopt a cooperative rather than an adversarial relationship” with nonprofit organisations working towards the cause of India’s marginalised sections.

Expressing concern over the cancellation or suspension of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) licenses of several NGOs in the recent past, the former bureaucrats in an open letter said, “Every expression of difference of opinion or dissent cannot be construed as violating the integrity and sovereignty of the country or as being against the public interest. The actions of your [Home] Ministry and the various law enforcement agencies give rise to a strong suspicion that independent assessments of or perspectives about socio-economic indicators of the country are not welcome.”

Referring to the cancellation or suspension of four well-known nonprofits – Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Oxfam India, Centre for Policy Research (CPR), and Centre for Equity Studies (CES) – the former bureaucrats said, their activities are aimed at addressing the problems of the most marginalised sections of Indian society.

“The cancellation/suspension of the FCRA licences of these organisations and the initiation of punitive action by various law enforcement agencies of the Government of India is an outcome of the highly flawed provisions of the FCRA,” they said.

The statement further went on to say that it seems as though, using the FCRA, the Government of India seeks to deter civil society organisations from seeking funding from foreign sources while allowing the private sector, digital and print media, and political parties freely access foreign funds.

Calling for a drastic overhaul of the FCRA, they said it should be made more “facilitating rather than a restrictive piece of legislation”.

“We hope your government will take steps in this direction and direct agencies under your control to cease needless harassment of organisations serving the people of India, especially its most marginalised and disadvantaged sections,” the retired civil servants urged Amit Shah.

The letter and full list of signatories are reproduced below.

Dear Home Minister,

We are a group of former civil servants of the All India and Central Services who have worked with the Central and State Governments in the course of our careers. Our group has no affiliation with any political party, and we, as its members, believe in impartiality, neutrality and commitment to the Constitution of India.

We write today to express our concern over what appears to us to be the very negative approach of the Government of India in renewal of FCRA licences of nonprofits engaged in different sectors in India. Newspaper reports indicate that the FCRA registrations of nearly 5933 NGOs lapsed as of 1 January 2022. While there are undoubtedly cases where NGOs have not applied in time for renewal, the denial of renewal to a number of internationally reputed NGOs occasions cause for concern.

In the recent past, FCRA licences of four well-known nonprofits – Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Oxfam India, Centre for Policy Research (CPR) and Centre for Equity Studies (CES) – have been cancelled or suspended. These are all institutions whose activities are aimed at addressing the problems of the most marginalised sections of Indian society. Rights to food, work, wages, health and shelter and the right to lead a dignified life based on the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India feature prominently in the work of these organisations. Oxfam has been working in India since 1951 and has been involved in a number of humanitarian and development activities over the past seventy years in various parts of India. CHRI activities range from advocacy of the right to information of citizens to prison and police reforms and promoting media freedom and the right to free expression. CPR is a prominent public policy think tank, with distinguished former civil servants and corporate professionals on its Governing Board. CES, set up in 2001, aims to influence public policy and law for sustainable long term solutions towards the rights and care of underprivileged sections of society.

The cancellation/suspension of the FCRA licences of these organisations and the initiation of punitive action by various law enforcement agencies of the Government of India is an outcome of the highly flawed provisions of the FCRA. It seems as though, using the FCRA, the Government of India seeks to deter civil society organisations from seeking funding from foreign sources, although such access to foreign funds, through other legally sanctioned means, is freely available to the private sector, digital and print media and political parties. Section 3 of the FCRA virtually prohibits the free expression of opinion by anyone associated with an NGO obtaining foreign contributions. Section 5 gives sweeping powers to the Government of India to declare any organisation as “of a political nature”, thereby rendering it ineligible to receive foreign contributions. The scope of Section 7 of the FCRA has been narrowed down, by its 2020 amendment, to prohibit transfer of foreign contributions from one FCRA-registered party to another. Section 12 uses broad terms like “sovereignty and integrity of India” and “public interest” to give the government full discretion to decide whether to permit foreign contributions to any organisation/person.

All these restrictive and vaguely worded clauses in the FCRA have been used to act against organisations that take an independent view on economic, social and political issues, which may not be to the liking of the government. Thus, columns by persons like Harsh Mander and his associates, relating to their professional areas of competence, have been deemed to be violative of Section 3. The provisions of Section 7 have been broadly interpreted to exclude even collaboration between CES and other non-FCRA organisations in the joint publication of reports. Payments received by Harsh Mander and his associates for specified outputs (and not for articles written by them) have been deemed to violate Sections 3, 8 and 12(4)(vi) of the FCRA. The Central Bureau of investigation has reportedly alleged violation of Sections 8 and 12(4) of the FCRA in payments made by Oxfam India to CPR. Detailed clarifications from all four organisations to queries by the Ministry of Home Affairs have elicited no meaningful response from your Ministry.

The Government of India should clarify how nonprofit organisations can access foreign contributions if every moment is spent in complying with restrictive legislative provisions. Every expression of difference of opinion or dissent cannot be construed as violating the integrity and sovereignty of the country or as being against public interest. The actions of your Ministry and the various law enforcement agencies give rise to a strong suspicion that independent assessments of or perspectives about socio-economic indicators of the country are not welcome. It ill behoves a government professing adherence to democratic ideals to be intolerant of criticism of its policies and encourage its agencies to adopt intimidatory practices, such as searches, seizures, inquisitorial questioning and information leaks to the media aimed at damaging the reputation of these organisations in the minds of the public. These organisations are helmed by persons with an impeccable and rich record in public life.

Rather than facilitating socio-economic initiatives by civil society organisations, the hobbling of the operations of major nonprofits and entangling them in tortuous, long-drawn legal battles will lead to a drastic reduction in the involvement of such organisations in catalysing community involvement in socio-economic development. The Government of India stands to lose valuable inputs it can obtain in planning policy initiatives if it fails to develop a healthy interaction with field-level and public policy nonprofit institutions.

The relentless harassment of voluntary organisations amounts to cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face. For what these organisations are doing is to supplement the government’s efforts in crucial areas of health, education, employment, human rights, conservation of nature etc. They work in areas where the government’s own reach is limited or ineffective. The government should view them as partners and not as adversaries. Most importantly, these organisations work at the lowest levels of our society, with mostly marginalised groups who have fallen through the cracks in the government’s own welfare schemes, and have no safety net to take care of them. Deliberate denial of even this modicum of assistance or advocacy to them does not do credit to a government whose rallying cry is “sabka saath, sabka vikas, sabka vishwas“.

As former civil servants closely associated during our careers with development processes at different levels of government, we would urge you to adopt a cooperative rather than an adversarial relationship with these essential components of any civilized society. The FCRA need to be drastically overhauled to make it a facilitating rather than restrictive piece of legislation. We hope your government will take steps in this direction and direct agencies under your control to cease needless harassment of organisations serving the people of India, especially its most marginalised and disadvantaged sections.

SATYAMEVA JAYATE

Yours faithfully,
Constitutional Conduct Group (86 signatories, as below)

1.	Anita Agnihotri	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Department of Social Justice Empowerment, GoI
2.	Anand Arni	RAS (Retd.)	Former Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat, GoI
3.	G. Balachandhran	IAS (Retd.)	Former Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal
4.	Vappala Balachandran	IPS (Retd.)	Former Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat, GoI
5.	Gopalan Balagopal	IAS (Retd.)	Former Special Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal
6.	Chandrashekar Balakrishnan	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Coal, GoI
7.	Sushant Baliga	Engineering Services (Retd.)	Former Additional Director General, Central PWD, GoI
8.	Rana Banerji	RAS (Retd.)	Former Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat, GoI
9.	Aurobindo Behera	IAS (Retd.)	Former Member, Board of Revenue, Govt. of Odisha
10.	Madhu Bhaduri	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Portugal
11.	Ravi Budhiraja	IAS (Retd.)	Former Chairman, Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust, GoI
12.	Sundar Burra	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra
13.	Maneshwar Singh Chahal	IAS (Retd.)	Former Principal Secretary, Home, Govt. of Punjab
14.	R. Chandramohan	IAS (Retd.)	Former Principal Secretary, Transport and Urban Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi
15.	Rachel Chatterjee	IAS (Retd.)	Former Special Chief Secretary, Agriculture, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh
16.	Kalyani Chaudhuri	IAS (Retd.)	Former Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal
17.	Gurjit Singh Cheema	IAS (Retd.)	Former Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Govt. of Punjab
18.	F.T.R. Colaso	IPS (Retd.)	Former Director General of Police, Govt. of Karnataka & former Director General of Police, Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir
19.	Anna Dani	IAS (Retd.)	Former Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra
20.	P.R. Dasgupta	IAS (Retd.)	Former Chairman, Food Corporation of India, GoI
21.	Pradeep K. Deb	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Deptt. Of Sports, GoI
22.	M.G. Devasahayam	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Govt. of Haryana
23.	Sushil Dubey	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Sweden
24.	A.S. Dulat	IPS (Retd.)	Former OSD on Kashmir, Prime Minister’s Office, GoI
25.	K.P. Fabian	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Italy
26.	Prabhu Ghate	IAS (Retd.)	Former Addl. Director General, Department of Tourism, GoI
27.	Arif Ghauri	IRS (Retd.)	Former Governance Adviser, DFID, Govt. of the United Kingdom (on deputation)
28.	Suresh K. Goel	IFS (Retd.)	Former Director General, Indian Council of Cultural Relations, GoI
29.	S.K. Guha	IAS (Retd.)	Former Joint Secretary, Department of Women & Child Development, GoI
30.	H.S. Gujral	IFoS (Retd.)	Former Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Govt. of Punjab
31.	Meena Gupta	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Ministry of Environment & Forests, GoI
32.	Ravi Vira Gupta	IAS (Retd.)	Former Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank of India
33.	Siraj Hussain	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Department of Agriculture, GoI
34.	Naini Jeyaseelan	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Inter-State Council, GoI
35.	Sanjay Kaul	IAS (Retd.)	Former Principal Secretary, Govt. of Karnataka
36.	Ish Kumar	IPS (Retd.)	Former DGP (Vigilance & Enforcement), Govt. of Telangana and former Special Rapporteur, National Human Rights Commission
37.	Sudhir Kumar	IAS (Retd.)	Former Member, Central Administrative Tribunal
38.	Subodh Lal	IPoS (Resigned)	Former Deputy Director General, Ministry of Communications, GoI
39.	Amitabh Mathur	IPS (Retd.)	Former Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat, GoI
40.	Aditi Mehta	IAS (Retd.)	Former Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan
41.	Malay Mishra	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Hungary
42.	Noor Mohammad	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, National Disaster Management Authority, Govt. of India
43.	Satya Narayan Mohanty	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary General, National Human Rights Commission
44.	Jugal Mohapatra	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Department of Rural Development, GoI
45.	Deb Mukharji	IFS (Retd.)	Former High Commissioner to Bangladesh and former Ambassador to Nepal
46.	Shiv Shankar Mukherjee	IFS (Retd.)	Former High Commissioner to the United Kingdom
47.	Gautam Mukhopadhaya	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Myanmar
48.	Nagalsamy	IA&AS (Retd.)	Former Principal Accountant General, Tamil Nadu & Kerala
49.	Surendra Nath	IAS (Retd.)	Former Member, Finance Commission, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh
50.	P. Joy Oommen	IAS (Retd.)	Former Chief Secretary, Govt. of Chhattisgarh
51.	Amitabha Pande	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Inter-State Council, GoI
52.	Mira Pande	IAS (Retd.)	Former State Election Commissioner, West Bengal
53.	Maxwell Pereira	IPS (Retd.)	Former Joint Commissioner of Police, Delhi
54.	Alok Perti	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Ministry of Coal, GoI
55.	G.K. Pillai	IAS (Retd.)	Former Home Secretary, GoI
56.	R. Poornalingam	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Ministry of Textiles, GoI
57.	Rajesh Prasad	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to the Netherlands
58.	R.M. Premkumar	IAS (Retd.)	Former Chief Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra
59.	T.R. Raghunandan	IAS (Retd.)	Former Joint Secretary, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, GoI
60.	V.P. Raja	IAS (Retd.)	Former Chairman, Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission
61.	K. Sujatha Rao	IAS (Retd.)	Former Health Secretary, GoI
62.	Prasadranjan Ray	IAS (Retd.)	Former Chairperson, West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission
63.	Satwant Reddy	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Chemicals and Petrochemicals, GoI
64.	Vijaya Latha Reddy	IFS (Retd.)	Former Deputy National Security Adviser, GoI
65.	Julio Ribeiro	IPS (Retd.)	Former Adviser to Governor of Punjab & former Ambassador to Romania
66.	Aruna Roy	IAS (Resigned)
67.	Manabendra N. Roy	IAS (Retd.)	Former Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal
68.	A.K. Samanta	IPS (Retd.)	Former Director General of Police (Intelligence), Govt. of West Bengal
69.	Deepak Sanan	IAS (Retd.)	Former Principal Adviser (AR) to Chief Minister, Govt. of Himachal Pradesh
70.	S. Satyabhama	IAS (Retd.)	Former Chairperson, National Seeds Corporation, GoI
71.	N.C. Saxena	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Planning Commission, GoI
72.	Abhijit Sengupta	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, Ministry of Culture, GoI
73.	Aftab Seth	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Japan
74.	Ashok Kumar Sharma	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Finland and Estonia
75.	Navrekha Sharma	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Indonesia
76.	Pravesh Sharma	IAS (Retd.)	Former Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh
77.	Raju Sharma	IAS (Retd.)	Former Member, Board of Revenue, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh
78.	Rashmi Shukla Sharma	IAS (Retd.)	Former Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh
79.	Avay Shukla	IAS (Retd.)	Former Additional Chief Secretary (Forests & Technical Education), Govt. of Himachal Pradesh
80.	Sujatha Singh	IFS (Retd.)	Former Foreign Secretary, GoI
81.	Tirlochan Singh	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary, National Commission for Minorities, GoI
82.	Anup Thakur	IAS (Retd.)	Former Member, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
83.	P.S.S. Thomas	IAS (Retd.)	Former Secretary General, National Human Rights Commission
84.	Geetha Thoopal	IRAS (Retd.)	Former General Manager, Metro Railway, Kolkata
85.	Ramani Venkatesan	IAS (Retd.)	Former Director General, YASHADA, Govt. of Maharashtra
86.	Rudi Warjri	IFS (Retd.)	Former Ambassador to Colombia, Ecuador and Costa Rica

In Past Seven Months, Nearly 400 NGOs Lost Validity of FCRA Licenses: Report

According to the Economic Times, the Union home ministry’s website mentions that the number of organisations with active FCRA licences – necessary to receive foreign contributions – stood at 16,352 as on March 26, 2023, down from 16,727 on August 12, 2022.

New Delhi: The Foreign Contribution Regulations Act (FCRA) licenses of nearly 400 non-governmental organisations have been cancelled, suspended, denied renewal, or deemed to have expired over the last seven months, according to the Economic Times. Among these organisations are the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation and Rajiv Gandhi Charitable Trust, headed by Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, Oxfam India, and the Centre for Policy Research.

The newspaper reported that the Union home ministry’s portal on FCRA – which is mandatory to receive foreign funds – mentions that the number of organisations with active FCRA licences stood at 16,352 as on March 26, 2023, down from 16,727 on August 12, 2022.

The ministry on Saturday granted six months extension to NGOs of “certain categories” to renew their FCRA licence till September 30, 2023, ET reported. The NGOs whose FCRA renewal is “pending with MHA” and “those who have applied/will apply before expiry of 5 years validity period” stands extended until September 30, the notification said.

The minister of state for home affairs Nityanand Rai told the Rajya Sabha on March 15 that as of March 10, there are 16,383 organisations with FCRA active licenses. He also revealed that these NGOs received Rs 16,306.04 crore in foreign funds in 2019-20, Rs 17,058.64 crore in 2020-21 and Rs 22,085.10 crore in 2021-22.

The Union home ministry grants FCRA licences for a five-year period.

The Narendra Modi government amended the Act in 2020, tightening the rules. After the amendments, it is now mandatory to provide the Aadhaar number of all office-bearers, directors, or key functionaries of NGOs that receive foreign contributions. The funds can now only be deposited in the SBI’s New Delhi branches.

Since the BJP government came to power, the number of organisations with FCRA licenses has declined sharply. On January 1, 2022, the home ministry said that nearly 6,000 organisations had lost their FCRA licenses. Before that, in December 2016, the FCRA licences of about 20,000 NGOs – out of about 33,000 that had this license – were cancelled for alleged violations of the Act.