Targeting voluntary organisations

The changes proposed in the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, voluntary organisations fear, are aimed to hound them.

THE Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance government's preoccupation with matters of national security is reaching new heights, judging by the changes now proposed in the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976 (FCRA). A draft Bill, titled the Foreign Contribution (Management and Control) Bill, has been circulated among Cabinet members but it remains a confidential document probably owing to caution caused by the flak the government has faced over the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO). However, it is clear that the Bill is primarily directed at voluntary organisations, in particular those run or funded by members of the minority community.

A brainchild of Union Home Minister L.K. Advani, the Bill is expected to be a more stringent version of the FCRA. That would prove to be a setback for voluntary organisations, which have in fact been fighting for the relaxation of the FCRA. A national campaign committee for the repeal of the FCRA exists already and its membership has grown in the last few years, especially after the perception grew that the government used the FCRA as a political tool against voluntary organisations that criticised the BJP and its allies during the last Lok Sabha elections. The FCRA had its origins in the Emergency years and was enacted in the wake of allegations that contributions from abroad were being used to destabilise the government.

It is apparently considered by the government to be too soft, and the new Bill is an attempt to consolidate the law relating to the acceptance and utilisation of foreign contributions or foreign hospitality by individuals, associations or companies and prohibit the acceptance of foreign contributions or foreign hospitality for anti-national activities.

Although the ostensible aim of the new Bill is to prevent the misuse of incoming foreign funds, there may be a political motive. Significantly, the government has involved the State governments, too, given the fact that many of the constituents of the NDA are major regional parties. Earlier, the States only had to give information about the recipients, but now they would also be responsible for registration. The Centre would monitor the implementation of the law and, therefore, would also issue guidelines to the States on implementation.

On the face of it, the government has seemingly decentralised the mechanism but in reality controls over voluntary organisations have been tightened. It is learnt that the Bill would give the government sweeping powers to prohibit the inflow of foreign contributions, assistance and hospitality if it suspects that the recipients have links with anti-national activities such as terrorism, insurgency, militancy and subversion.

In the government's perception, while these funds were used for religious conversions and proselytisation in some States, in others such as the northeastern States and Jammu and Kashmir they were used for subversive and terrorist activities. The Bill would in effect, "snap the source" of funding to militant organisations, madrassas and Christian missionaries. Madrassas have, of late, become the focus for the current government and it is well known that Muslims contribute to these educational institutions for either educational or welfare purposes.

For some years now voluntary organisations have been demanding a change in some of the FCRA provisions; they point to the fact that the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was replaced with the Foreign Exchange Management Act. In 1984-85 the provisions of the FCRA were tightened on the grounds that some voluntary organisations were using foreign contributions for undesirable and sometimes anti-national purposes. The scope of coverage and the degree of discretion granted by the government to the administering authority and to the enforcement mechanism got a fillip with the amendments.

Significantly, in the more than two decades since the enactment of the FCRA not one voluntary organisation has been prosecuted under it for anti-national or subversive activities. The allegations, said Anil Singh, executive secretary of the Voluntary Action Network of India (VANI), were thus proved wrong.

In 1994, at a meeting called by the Planning Commission, voluntary organisations made their first organised attempt to convince the government that the FCRA was being used to harass them. Government officials were also present at this meeting, and it was agreed, among other things, that the existing rules and regulations governing the voluntary sector, including the FCRA, were cumbersome and dilatory. However, last year the NDA government made it necessary to obtain a certificate of clearance from the local District Magistrate for organisations to get registration under the FCRA.

A gazette notification issued on January 24 last year laid down that either a District Collector or a State or Central government Ministry or department would have to certify that the antecedents of the organisation had been verified, that it had undertaken 'welfare activities in the area' and incurred expenditure during the preceding three years and that the "project would be beneficial to the people living in the area". Even organisations seeking the Central government's permission under the FCRA, to accept a foreign contribution by an association with a definite cultural, economic, educational, religious or social programme, would have to produce such a certificate.

FOR a voluntary organisation to get registration under FCRA stipulations is not easy considering the level of arbitrariness that prevails. Applications have sometimes remained pending for years and some organisations have been refused registration on the grounds that they were in existence for only a short period of time.

Section 10 of the FCRA states that the Central government may prohibit any association from accepting any foreign contribution that can affect prejudicially the sovereignty and integrity of India or the public interest or freedom or fairness of election to any legislature or friendly relations with any foreign state or harmony between religious, racial, linguistic or regional groups, castes or communities. Voluntary organisations say that the wording of the clauses of the FCRA have been left deliberately vague and that the Home Ministry has often used this factor to deny registration to organisations. They allege that the investigating personnel often harass them. At times even undue demands are made and distorted reports sent. That "speed money" is involved in the process of handling applications for registration is also well known, they say.

A geographical analysis done by R. Gopa Kumar from the Charities Aid Foundation India indicated that organisations in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Kerala, Karnataka and Delhi were the major recipients of foreign contributions. Of these States, those in Tamil Nadu received the largest amount of contributions between 1991 and 1997, according to the annual report of the Home Ministry. While Arunachal Pradesh and the Union Territory of Lakshadweep recorded very poor levels of foreign contributions, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Manipur, Mizoram, the Andaman and Nicobar islands, Chandigarh and Pondicherry recorded a decrease in the level between 1995 and 1997. The Bimaru States of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh have been traditionally very low recipients of foreign donations. The southern States received nearly 49 per cent of the total contributions, while the Bimaru States managed anywhere between 8.8 and 9.2 per cent. Delhi alone accounted for close to 13 per cent of the total contributions during the period. In the sensitive areas the level has gone up marginally, and in some of the northeastern States it has even decreased compared with the previous year.

In 1996-97, according to the annual report of the Home Ministry, Foster Parents International, based in the United States, was the biggest donor organisation to India, accounting for Rs.78 crores, followed by Missio of Germany with Rs.58.66 crores. Of the 25 major donor organisations, five are related mainly to religious activities, including the Maharishi Ayurvedic Trust of the United Kingdom. It accounts for more than 10.5 per cent of the contributions coming from the U.K. to India. Until at least 1997, there seemed to be no indication of a spurt in foreign contributions in the sensitive areas.

Among the top five recipient organisations are the Sri Satya Sai Central Trust, the Maharishi Ved Vigyan Viswa Vidya Peetham, Foster Parents Plan International Inc, World Vision of India, Gospel for Asia and Action Aid. Twenty-five organisations have been listed, of which three each are based in Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu, four in Karnataka, seven in Delhi, two in West Bengal and one each in Kerala, Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh. Figures show that 13.7 per cent of the money has been used for construction/repair of building; 11.1 per cent for health and family welfare activities; 10 per cent for religious activities, including education of priests and bringing out religious publications.

AN amended FCRA is perceived as the "financial wing of POTO", as John Dayal, secretary-general of the All India Christian Council, described it. Council president Joseph D'Souza and John Dayal in a statement circulated among members of Parliament on November 2 maintained that all Christian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and Church groups that received donations and assistance from foreign donors for development and social work submitted duly audited accounts to the government every year. As they worked in the public domain, their activities were also fully known to the local authorities as well as to the beneficiary populations, they said.

The FCRA, the statement said, had been repeatedly used as an instrument of harassment and coercion intended to restrict the work of certain organisations among the poor and in the fields of education and health. Recently, the Union Home Ministry issued notices to 66 organisations seeking details of their expenditure which, the Council said, had been furnished to the government time and again. Terming this as official harassment, it alleged that Christian institutions had been asked to give the details of the vehicles they owned and their employees. It feared that such information would be leaked to the "cadres of the Sangh Parivar", who would use to terrorise people in remote areas. The Council demanded a white paper on foreign donations received by all organisations.

That the FCRA could be used to serve the political interests of the government became evident during the earthquake in Gujarat. It is reliably learnt that FCRA norms were relaxed and organisations were allowed to receive funds even without FCRA registration. The only condition was that they open a separate account to receive foreign funds and inform the Union Home Ministry about it. Such lenience was missing during the Orissa floods and the severe drought in Rajasthan.