?International funding of voluntary organisations plays a small, but significant part in supporting such organisations and their work in the country. An organisation seeking foreign funding must be registered under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act. This law prescribes stringent screening norms that often restrict the ability of (NGOs) to avail foreign funds. When approved, there are problems, like funds must be held in a single bank account, thus presenting enormous difficulties to (NGOs) working at different locations. The government will review the FCRA and simplify its provisions? ?National policy on the voluntary sector?2007, Planning Commission website
?When Indira Gandhi returned to power in 1980, she wrote a note that Gandhian organisations were misusing funds given to them for public purpose?The Kudal Commission set up in 1982 was asked to inquire into sources and misuse of funds of several Gandhian organisations, including Gandhi Peace Foundation?
?Civil Disobedience by LC Jain
The Government of India has for long had an on-off relationship with non-governmental organisations. From punitive measures like the Kudal Commission in the post-Emergency years of the ?80s to the efforts by the Planning Commission under Manmohan Singh?s government to provide a sustained support to the groups, the state response has oscillated.
When Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said this week he suspected US-based support groups were fanning the anti-nuclear agitation against the Kudankulam power plant, it was unexpected because it came from him, but was not surprising for Indian polity.
Instead, as Pratap Bhanu Mehta, president, Centre for Policy Research puts it, as a nation what should worry us is not the threat that NGOs might pose, but the ease with which the government can go after them. ?Every protest has to be organised in some way or the other. But just because a protest is being organised, should the government be so paranoid and suspicious about it?? he tells FE.
Of course, the government can feel the heat at times. A first-time nationwide enumeration effort made by the Planning Commission shows there are 41,616 NGOs across India. And, for almost every issue one can imagine.
So when allegations and counter-allegations fly in all directions like the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KNPP), separating the grain from the chaff becomes difficult.
Despite the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), under which finance from abroad has to be routed to all NGOs, the numbers are often difficult to tabulate. That?s because funding for NGOs come both marked to individuals and the group.
So when the government freezes the accounts of four NGOs, the affected organisations under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) on charges of fanning the protests, all of them?Rural Uplift Centre (RUC), Tuticorin Diocesan Association (TDA), Tuticorin Multi-Purpose Social Service Society (TMSSS) and Good Vision?vehemently deny the links.
Those leading the agitation, too, deny any links with these NGOs. ?We have never received any funds from any political party, religious institution or even an Indian NGO, let alone foreign NGOs,? M Pushparayan, convenor of the Coastal People?s Federation and People?s Movement Against Nuclear Energy (PMANE) leader, tells FE. In fact, the Prime Minister?s comments, published in American magazine Science last week, led to PMANE coordinator SP Udayakumar, who is the face of the agitation, sending a legal notice to the PM. The PM had commented, ?What?s happening in Kudankulam?the atomic energy programme has got into difficulties because these NGOs, mostly, I think, based in the US, don?t appreciate the need for our country to increase the energy supply.?
Foreign funding, according to Udayakumar, is just not there. ?Look at what are we providing the protesters with. It?s just drinking water that we offer and the venue is itself provided to us by the local church free of cost. And since we are organising fasts, it simply can?t cost us much,? he says, adding that the whole agitation has had a paltry budget of just R10-15 lakh, collected as donations from ordinary people in the region and other parts of the state.
But beyond the plant in a corner of Tamil Nadu, the issue has become bigger, with ramifications about the way the NGO sector performs.
Mehta says the government is incapable of accepting dissent and being ?technocratic and weak?. The government doesn?t seem to have the capacity to deal with protest, he says. ?After the PM?s comments, the insinuation is that anyone against a nuclear plant has vested interests and is anti-national and anti-development.?
Rajesh Tandon, founder-president, society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), expresses anguish over aspersions being cast over the funding of NGOs in the country. He says, ?The most unfortunate implication of the PM?s observations is that the contributions of a lifetime of work and building of globally credible non-governmental development institutions are now going to be dismissed, delegitimised and devalued. The central government?s attitude has cast doubts in the minds of the people that anyone who has received funds from abroad has acted against national interest. I can firmly say that systematic diversion of funds is not a reality and it has certainly not happened in the past two-three years. There can be individual aberrations here and there, but there is no scale to it and it is certainly not a trend?.
Tandon points out that according to the latest available annual report of the FCRA, which is for 2009-10, nine out of 10 not-for-profit organisations that received the maximum foreign funds are religious organisations, implying that development NGOs? foreign funding has dried up to a large extent in India in the past two-three years. According to the annual report, 21,508 organisations received a total of R10,337.59 crore in FY 2009-10. In fact, Tandon says the ball is actually in the government?s court, given that they have complete access to records, as well as all the resources of state policy at their command. ?The home ministry must create a transparent system wherein stratified information regarding organisations receiving foreign funds should be put into public domain. As of now, no stratified data is available. The timing of this action by the government is suspect. They have all the machinery and legal tools available, then why wait for so many months if they have clear evidence of diversion of funds meant for other purposes?? he asks.
Mehta takes the argument further by saying that the foreign label is used as a selective bogie by the government. ?We don?t seem to be minding foreign lobbying, foreign corporations and their investments, foreign technology in sensitive areas, but suddenly when it comes to an NGO allegedly opposing the government in the space of ideas and arguments, the state singles it out and goes after it. This is absurd for a country that takes pride in the fact that it’s the world’s largest functioning democracy,? he says.
On the issue of FCRA, Mehta argues that the new FCRA regime that came in after 2010, and even the proposed changes in the Direct Tax Code for not-for-profit organisations ?are symptoms of the desire to control? within the government. Another point that is being highlighted by this latest controversy is the lack of authoritative information on key areas by the government. ?The government in a democracy has to be magnanimous and has to proactively take up the mission to educate and inform people. But we seem to function in secrecy. If the government feels that people are being misinformed by a selective few, then why can?t the government engage in dialogue directly with the people? But no, they will go after anyone who speaks against them,? says Tandon.
Mehta’s views are no different on this issue. ?Government?s secrecy and lack of engagement have diminished its capacity to produce credible knowledge. This opens up the need for different sites of knowledge. This is a governance failure, and the easiest way out for the technocratic mind seems to be to go for impugning dissent,? he says.
So what are the concerns going forward? According to Tandon, government paranoia might get worse. ?I fear that a witch-hunt against NGOs has already begun. It has been on in the tribal belt and now with the anti-nuclear protests. The problem with the government is that it?s very good at making sweeping and generalised statements, painting everyone with the same brush. This will just be counter productive for its own objectives and also for the future of the country and our democracy. These are extremely disturbing developments and course correction is now required,? he says.