JPC Scrutinises FCRA Amendment Bill; Opposition Flags Asset Takeover Powers

Parliament's Joint Committee examining the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, held its first meeting, where members pressed the government on several of the proposed changes. The questions ranged from how foreign contributions are utilised to what happens to an organisation's assets once its FCRA registration ends.

Ruling-party members concentrated their queries on the utilisation of foreign contributions, while Opposition members trained their attention on the clauses dealing with assets after a licence is cancelled.

The provision drawing the sharpest objection concerns a "designated authority". Under the proposed framework, if an organisation's FCRA certificate is cancelled, surrendered, or lapses automatically, its foreign contributions and all assets created from them would vest in a government-appointed authority — without a prior hearing or a judicial determination.

Opposition members, including the DMK's P. Wilson and the Trinamool Congress' Menaka Guruswamy, contended that property cannot be taken away without a prior hearing, citing Article 300A of the Constitution.

The Ministry of Home Affairs, in its submission, said the amendments are intended to make the use of foreign contributions more transparent and accountable. Ministry representatives argued that the concept of a designated authority is not new. The existing law provides for a "prescribed authority", which a notification issued on November 5, 2018, identified as the Additional Chief Secretary or Principal Secretary (Home) of the concerned State or Union Territory.

The Ministry pointed to gaps in the current arrangement. There is no deadline for such custodianship, leaving the prescribed authority a "passive custodian" that cannot take substantive decisions on assets. There is also no standard procedure for taking possession of assets, maintaining inventories, or separating foreign-contribution assets from domestically funded ones. Officials further noted that prolonged custodianship could strain State budgets and manpower when institutions such as schools, hospitals and orphanages are involved. The law is silent, they said, on the final disposal of assets and on the treatment of places of worship.

The Ministry's presentation also came under criticism for cataloguing foreign contributions received by different religious groups and highlighting that a majority of the funds went to Christian organisations. Members questioned the rationale for segregating contributions under religious heads.

The Ministry described the amendment as, at its core, a national security legislation. The FCRA was enacted in 1976 during the Cold War, amid deep mistrust of Western influence and heightened sensitivity to threats to India's sovereignty and democratic institutions. Before 1976, NGOs receiving foreign funds operated under general laws such as the Societies Registration Act, the Trusts Act and the Companies Act, with no centralised mechanism to monitor foreign contributions. Oversight was largely confined to tax and foreign-exchange compliance, which did not address national security concerns.