‘NGOs misused foreign funds to dictate development agenda’

BJP Rajya Sabha MP Rakesh Sinha tells DH’s Sagar Kulkarni that the FCRA amendments will protect the country against “foreign capital and foreign interest groups”.

Why were the FCRA amendments necessary?

The amendments were necessary for better monitoring of the funds that NGOs receive and their purposeful expenditure. Before the amendments, NGOs enjoyed immunity in the matter of expenditure, which led to the misuse of funds. In fact, these amendments protect the credibility of genuine NGOs whose credibility suffered due to the farcical activities of many others that masked themselves as NGOs but acted differently.

NGOs are known to reach where the government cannot. Will these amendments not hinder their work?

Proper accounting, auditing, linking with Aadhaar do not in any way create obstacles. Are they above the law of the land? Even a private organisation maintains a proper balance sheet and is accountable to the agencies of the government. In fact, the reason for their pain is different, which they cannot say openly. These amendments prevent them from pursuing their hidden agendas. For instance, Legal Right Observatory complained to the government that many NGOs, including Oxfam, are trying to upset the tea industry in Assam. For instance, there is a provision to fill form FC-3 to declare their religious denomination, but World Vision, which declares itself on its website as a “Christian humanitarian organisation” did not do so while filling the form. Is it fair?

Is there an apprehension that some NGOs use foreign funds to further political causes?

It is not a hidden fact that many NGOs work with a larger political agenda, guided by both domestic and international forces, which include the donor agencies and their think-tanks. They create communal and caste divides and use the facade of human rights and ecological issues to hamper the developmental agenda of the country. Traditionally, India is known for preserving ecology and our consciousness of the environment is not guided by the Western mind and agenda. But we cannot remain undeveloped forever. We cannot remain without infrastructure. NGO activists join protests and try to fracture consensus in society. Many of them have a single objective -- to demean an ideology that they dislike. They have the right to do so but they cannot misuse funds other than their own mandate. Their protest led to the closure of the Sterlite Copper plant in Thoothukudi, which turned India from copper exporter to copper importer. Another example is the opposition to oil-drilling in Manipur by Dutch-funded NGOs. Many of them act as agents of foreign companies and foreign political interest groups. No democratic country can allow such activities.

How will these amendments fix accountability in NGOs?

These amendments make it mandatory for the NGOs to act according to the mandate they have. They cannot transfer their funds to other entities. According to a study, they used to transfer 10-15% of their funds to other entities which would use them in different ways and with a different agenda. Moreover, public servants/officers cannot receive foreign contributions. The apprehension is that they were being used as a lobby inside the government and pressured to influence policies as desired by donors. Now, the amendments are a death knell to all these ills. NGOs have to spend money on the declared agenda and withdraw from their undeclared agendas. A huge amount of money has been misused for religious conversions, too, particularly in tribal regions. Who can justify this?

NGOs are concerned about the 20% cap on the use of foreign funds for administrative expenses.

Is it not a travesty to protest against the amendment which reduced their administrative expenditure from 50% to 20%? Suppose an organisation receives Rs 200 crore, then they enjoyed being able to incur an expenditure of Rs 100 crore in the name of administration! In fact, funds were misappropriated by vested interests and the real purpose suffered. The huge amounts (spent as administrative expenses) were used to create a lobby among intellectuals, journalists and government officials. The rationale behind the amendment is uncontestable.

When it comes to political parties, the rules for disclosure of funding are not stringent. Is it not dangerous?

You cannot compare NGOs with political parties, which are part of our democratic process. There can be debate on their disclosure but that does not give the same liberty to NGOs. NGOs are formed with their own declaration of activities and they receive funds for that purpose. Then why do they fear declaring their expenditure and avoid auditing and transparency? This is not the case with all of them. It (the aim of the amendments) is only for those who use the tag of NGOs and try to misappropriate foreign funds.

How will the FCRA amendments improve government oversight?

Many NGOs use their strength of money and lobby to create the developmental agenda of the nation. Now, the amendments will prevent them from disguising and manipulating foreign contributions. For instance, they have to open an account at a branch of the SBI in Delhi, and it would be linked with Aadhaar. How does it go against their interests? Their propaganda that the government is curbing and censoring them is ridiculous. When you create agitation and provoke people, which is against the mandate they have, no government can allow that. Many NGOs used unspent funds to accumulate money and then spend it according to their wishes.

There is a deliberate design behind unspent funds. Now, they have to declare their activities, and spend accordingly. These amendments safeguard the country from the agents of foreign capital and interest groups. They also protect people from the elements who use money to manipulate opinion.

Amendments are pro-NGOs and pro-people. It is opposed by those who habitually misappropriated funds and live luxury lives in the name of marginalised people and those who serve the agenda of their foreign masters.