Sonam Wangchuk responded to the “immediate cancellation” of the FCRA licence of his NGO, the Students’ Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh (SECMOL), describing the move as a “witch-hunt”.
The cancellation was announced a day after protests in Ladakh turned violent, leaving four people dead. Wangchuk claimed that he has been singled out because his voice has been the “loudest” in calling for statehood. The climate activist, who had been on a hunger strike for more than a month, ended his fast following the outbreak of violence.
‘Blamed everything on me’: Wangchuk
“A day later (after Leh protests), the Home Ministry of India issued a press release naming Sonam Wangchuk many times in it and blaming him for everything,” he told ANI.
He further added that people in Ladakh have been protesting over unfulfilled promises of the last election, which was to bring it into the Sixth Schedule. “So now people are demanding that, without fulfilling this promise, we will not let you go.”
“I was told 1.5 months back that I have an FIR against me of treason. Following this, I received a notice that my school’s land will be taken away. Then came the CBI and Income Tax inquiry,” he went on to say.
‘It was a knowledge fee’
Wangchuk added, “I had received a notice about a CBI inquiry stating that your organisation received foreign funding in 2022-2024, even when it did not have FCRA. We did not get FCRA because we don’t want funds from abroad.”
When the reporter said that he received foreign funding, he explained, “The United Nations team wanted to take our Passive Solar Heated Building to Afghanistan, and for this, they gave us a fee. We also got fees with tax from Swiss and Italian organisations for supplying knowledge to them about our artificial glaciers. This is not foreign funding; this is a fee for knowledge sharing. We are getting I-T summons.”
“In the series of witch-hunting, yesterday’s events were the last, and all blame was put on Sonam Wangchuk,” he expressed.
FCRA license cancelled
A letter signed by MHA Deputy Secretary Rajesh Kumar T informed Wangchuk that his NGO’s FCRA license is cancelled with “immediate effect”.
“Considering the facts and position narrated by the organisation, the Competent Authority, hereby, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 14(1) of the Act, cancels with immediate effect the FCRA Certificate of Registration granted to the association – Students Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh.”
The organisation, per the order, was first issued a show-cause notice on August 20, followed by a letter on September 10, asking why its FCRA licence should not be revoked. After reviewing the organisation’s reply, submitted on September 20, the authorities said they found multiple violations.
The MHA said that Wangchuk deposited Rs 3.5 lakh into SECMOL’s FCRA account during the FY 2021-22, which it said violated Section 17 of the Act. The organisation argued that it had deposited the said amount into the FCRA account because the amount came from selling an old bus that had originally been purchased with FCRA funds.
“Further, an amount of Rs 3,35,000 has been intimated by the association… as FC donation from Sonam Wangchuk. However, this transaction is not reflected in the FCRA account in violation of section 18 of the Act,” the order said.
The order said that during 2020-21, local funds amounting to Rs 54,600 were deposited in the FCRA account of the association by three individuals (Rs 18,200 each), again in violation of Section 17.
SECMOL explained that the money had been given by volunteers to cover food and lodging, but was mistakenly transferred into the FCRA account instead of the local one.
The MHA added that in 2021-22, the organisation received Rs 4.9 lakh from overseas donors in breach of Section 12(4) of the Act. “As per annual returns… for 2020-21, it has received a foreign contribution of Rs 79,200. However, the same has not been credited in the FCRA bank account. It is suspected that such funds have been received in local bank accounts in contravention of section 17 of the Act,” the MHA order said.
The NGO, in its defence, stated that the amount of Rs 79,200 was directly deducted from staff salaries and fellows’ stipends, and therefore no separate transaction took place. “Since it was deducted at source as food fees, it was recorded in the books of accounts as food fee receipts, and the same amount was utilised towards food,” it said.
The MHA, however, rejected this explanation, stating that the amount was never disbursed to the staff and hence “treatment of this amount as other receipts from projects/activities is incorrect”.