AA Edit: Referring FCRA Bill to JPC Is a Sensible Move

The decision to send the controversial Foreign Contributions (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, to a joint parliamentary committee for scrutiny is a welcome gesture on the part of the Union government. A proper and closer assessment of the bill in the background of the objections raised against it could help Parliament turn it into a version that is acceptable to all.

There can be no objection to the basic premise of the amendment that the existing law does not have the tools to keep a close watch on the foreign funds that come into the country. It is important that the government keeps a tab on whether the recipients operate in the industrial or social sector. It is the duty of the government to ensure that the funds are used in a transparent way for legally mandated purposes. At the same time, it must also be ensured that bona fide users of such funds with a proper track record aren’t harassed or put under siege by the State.

Some provisions of the bill have been drafted in such a manner that institutions will have to operate in permanent fear of being taken over by the state. For example, the bill allows the government to take over a facility or assets if the parent organisation loses its registration under the FCRA in the normal course through expiration without renewal, voluntary surrender or becoming inactive or defunct for two consecutive years and there is an element of foreign funding in its creation. This is unfair. What makes matters worse is the absence of a judicial element in the process to decide whether an organisation or institution loses its registration. This is not the stipulated format where the executive alone gets to decide a case as complainant, judge and jury. A governmental mechanism adversarial to an institution can easily take it over leaving very little option to the affected people. This provision inspires little confidence in stakeholders as they will have the mighty State looking over their shoulders. The committee absolutely must come up with a solution to this vexed issue.  

Union home minister Amit Shah has assured a delegation of the Christian community that the bill will have no retrospective effect. This must be reassuring for the institutions whose FCRA registrations have lapsed. The JPC must look into this provision in the bill and come out with a logical solution which does not affect the functioning of the institutions which may have stopped receiving foreign funding. The provision for taking over the property even if the renewal of the license of the organisation is under process is a draconian one, too, and hence must go.

The formation of a JPC to scrutinise such an important bill is a win for all. The Opposition can legitimately claim that the government has been forced to take a relook at it while the government can claim that it bowed before a genuine demand. It is now up to the committee to look carefully into the bill and make it a better piece of legislation which allows the government to monitor foreign funding and the recipient institutions to continue their good work unhindered.