During the emergency period, the government of India had apprehension that foreign powers were interfering in the internal affairs of India by pumping through independent organizations like the NGO’s.
In 1969, those concerns were expressed in the parliament, and in 1976, the original FCRA was enacted to regulate foreign donations to associations so that they could work in a manner consistent with the values of a sovereign democratic republic.
The UPA government passed a new Foreign Contribution Regulation Act in 2010, designed to regulate the utilisation of foreign contributions for activities detrimental to the national interest.
Major developments were seen in September 2020, as mentioned below:
- The NGOs must be registered under the FCRA (which operates under the Ministry of Home Affairs), which, after comprehensive background research, will provide the licence to the said NGO for five years.
- It was made mandatory for the NGOs to provide their Adhaar numbers.
It also gave the government the power to suspend the licence for six months for any suspicious activities. - To keep a close watch on the funding, it was made mandatory to open an SBI account for the receipt of foreign funds in some branches, which were designated in Delhi. The funds are to be utilised only after mentioning the purpose of the received amount.
- Annual returns are to be filed, and they must not transfer funds to any other NGO.
- The applicant for the NGO must not be prosecuted for creating any communal tensions or disharmony.
If any terms and conditions are violated, the NGO will be suspended for 6 months; once proved guilty, the licence will be cancelled.
In a recent development, the Home Ministry of India cancelled the licence of CPR (Centre for Policy Research), a think tank, on grounds of “violations.”
What is CPR?
CPR is a non-profit, non-partisan, independent institution dedicated to conducting research that contributes to high-quality scholarship, better policies, and stronger discussions about the issues that impact the people of India. The think tank has been one of India’s leading public policy think tanks for the past 50 years.
Think tanks are the organisations that possess enough knowledge to conduct in-depth research on a wide range of policy-relevant issues with a focus on the issues in the country.
Funded by Dr. Pai Panindiker, Dr. Manmohan Singh, Justice Y. V. Chandrachud, and B. G. Verghese, they have also been active members of the think tank. Currently, the CPR is headed by chairperson Minakshi Gopinath and president and chief executive Yamini Ayer; earlier, it was headed by General Pratab Banu Mehta.
Why did the Home Ministry cancel the Centre for Policy Research’s FCRA registration?
Earlier, in September 2022, a survey was conducted by the Income Tax Department to inspect the operations of foreign funding on CPR, Oxfam India, and the Independent and Public-Spirited Media Foundation (IPSMF).
The registration was previously halted in February 2023. At the time, the policy think tank claimed to be fully compliant with all legal requirements and to be collaborating with the authorities to find a solution for the license issue. But according to reports, on January 10, FCRA registration was terminated.
According to the IT department, CPR paid those who hadn’t submitted their personal income tax returns. Concerns over the books released by CPR’s commercial nature were also voiced by them. The Delhi High Court has been consulted in this matter by the think tank, which has denied these accusations.
It was listed that the funds, to the tune of Rs 10.19 crore, were used to file litigations and complaints instead of carrying out any research or promoting education welfare. The think tank was involved in the Hadeo movement and had transferred 87% of its donations to Jan Abhivyakti Samajik Vikas Sanstha (JASVS). The movement was launched by JASVS against coal mining in the Hasdeo forests of Chhattisgarh.
Where does CPR stand on this case?
On January 10, 2024, CPR received the FCRA cancellation order, described by Yamini Aiyar as “not a detailed order.” The lack of specificity raises concerns about the transparency of the decision and the grounds on which CPR’s FCRA registration was revoked.” Aiyar emphasised that the institution remains perplexed by the incomprehensibility that the case possesses. Aiyar specifically pointed to the equating of the publication of policy reports on CPR’s website with current affairs programming as an example of the questionable rationale behind the decision.
Both the documents and contracts have been recovered as evidence by both the FCRA and IT authorities during the survey. Other “evidence” contents from WhatsApp chats between CPR consultants and employees related to the case have also been used.
“CPR firmly reiterates that it is in complete compliance with the law and has been cooperating fully and exhaustively at every step of the process. We remain steadfast in our belief that this matter will be resolved in line with constitutional values and guarantees,” Ayer added.
As the controversy surrounding CPR’s FCRA cancellation and the allegations made by IT authorities continues to unfold, the spotlight is on the need for transparency and a fair resolution.
