In a recent blow sometime back, the government froze the accounts of the renowned human rights NGO, Amnesty International. The government has given a hard hit to the NGO this time, by amending the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, and making the rules stricter than before. The amendments took place in the month of February this year. The decision was probably prompted by the report it published on the February Delhi riots, contradicting the police’s one-sided account of a conspiracy.
A big blow came to the Amnesty International when its accounts were seized by the government. The blow to Amnesty has been so severe that it has shut shop in India. As a result, it has sidelined several NGOs, thus, grassrooting and marginalizing them. The action of government is not even considered as real, or if we say in the formal tone, we can say that it is not as per the legislative or constitutional procedures. The government didn’t even bother to consult even once with the NGOs, before implementing the amendments. This act of government of sidelining the consultation and mutual decision making process (for the welfare of the concerned authority) is what makes the people think that the government is turning from a democratic path to an authoritarian regime.
The official reason given by the government for these latest amendments is that they will ensure foreign money is not used against national interests or for anti-national activities. However, from what the situation seems right in front of the eyes of all, being anti-national in the government’s vocabulary seems to mean any criticism of it, so it’s not surprising that the government froze Amnesty’s accounts.
But, if we look into the other side of the story, we can see that Amnesty International is not exactly right at its place. It would have been better for India, and for Indians, if the Amnesty report had been studied to deepen an understanding of what happened. The government would then be in a stronger position to prevent riots taking place again. It could have avoided the damage to India’s international reputation that closing Amnesty’s accounts have inflicted.
The major suspections right now are that the main target of the amendments made in the FCRA is the NGOs. The irony is that this amendment came just right after the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, came with this thought and appreciation that the NGOs are giving their best efforts at this time of pandemic. So, is this how the government is going to reward them, by sidelining them?
The suffering is great for the NGOs. Many will not be able to access foreign funds because the scheme under which they receive these funds from donor agencies and larger NGOs, known as “regranting”, has been banned. The amount NGOs can spend on administration has been cut from 50% to 20%. This will mean many smaller NGOs will not be able to employ enough staff to remain stable or hire experts and implement strategies they require to grow. If they are to receive foreign funds, NGOs will have to open an account with a Delhi branch of the State Bank of India. The difficulties of dealing with a bank which may be many thousand kilometres away is only one of many bureaucratic obstacles that the new amendments will create for NGOs.
NGOs act as a guardian of the government by hiding the inadequacies. Not just it takes up the role of spreading awareness, it helps in effective implementation of several schemes and policies and helps the government to achieve its target. But, the question now is, that is government doing the right thing by cutting the wings of its guardian?
