oppn parties Supreme Court: Purpose Must Be Defined For Receiving Foreign Funds Under FCRA

News Snippets

  • NCLT initiates bankruptcy proceedings against former Videocon chairman Venugopal Dhoot for defaulting on loans of Rs 6158cr as personal guarantor in two group companies
  • LIC approves 1:1 bonus share issue
  • Gold and silver futures also go down by 0.7% and 2.2% respectively
  • Stocks tumbled again on Monday as crude prices rose: Sensex went down by 703 points and Nifty by 207 points
  • Supreme Court refuses to cancel the land-for-jobs FIR against Lalu Prasad
  • The spectre of El Nino haunts India: IMD predicts 'below normal ' monsoon this year
  • Labour protest over increase in wages by 35% (as per Haryana example) turns violent in Noida, nearly 200 were detained by the police
  • Congress leader Sonia Gandhi said that the delimitation exercise must be carried out after the Census is complete
  • PM Modi says Parliament is on the verge of creating history as the Houses get ready to take up the women's reservation bills
  • Tata Sons chairman N Chandrasekaran said that TCS COO Aarthi Subramanian is conducting a thorough inquiry to establish facts and identify individuals involved in the sexual harassment allegations at the company's Nashik office
  • Asha Bhonsle laid to rest with full state honours on Monday in Mumbai
  • AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal once again approached the Delhi HC to request the recusal of a judge from his case
  • Candidates Chess: R Vaishali on the verge of creating history, but needs two wins - one with black pieces - against formidable opponents to emerge as the challenger
  • Rohit Sharma, who retired hurt in the match versus RCB, underwent scans for possible hamstring injury
  • IPL: Abhishek Sharma fails for SRH but Ishan Kishan (91) shines. Then, Vaibhav Sooryavanshi fails for RR and SRH bolwers, especially unheralded Praful Hinge (4 for 24) and Sakib Hussain (4 for 24) win it for SRH. This was the first loss for table-toppers RR
Supreme Court questions Election Commission about SIR SOP and why logical discrepancy was introduced only in Bengal
oppn parties
Supreme Court: Purpose Must Be Defined For Receiving Foreign Funds Under FCRA

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2021-11-10 06:36:34

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack

The Supreme Court came down heavily on NGOs receiving funds from abroad without the donor specifying the purpose for the funds are to be used, as prescribed under Section 8 of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA). It also took the Centre to task for what it said was a dilution of the intent of the FCRA as it did not insist on such a disclosure from the donors before allowing flow of funds to the NGO. The court ordered that henceforth entities will not be allowed to receive foreign funds if the purpose for which they were to be used was not clearly specified.

While on a plain reading of the above section it is not clear whether the intent of the legislature was to make the donor specify the exact purpose for which the funds were to be used as the Act says that the NGO "shall utilise such contribution for the purposes for which the contribution has been received". The main intent of the legislature in codifying the provisions of Section 8 were mainly to prevent unscrupulous NGOs from using foreign funds for administrative purposes, which included paying hefty honorariums to committee members. This has already been restricted in the sub-sections of Section 8.

To understand this in detail, one has to accept that NGOs broadly receive two kinds of donations - project-based and general. When the donation is based on a particular project, the purpose is well-defined and the use of the funds is restricted to that particular project. But when donors provide funds in general after looking at the work of the NGO, which might be working in several fields, it should be upon the NGO to use these funds as it thinks fit. Solicitor general Tushar Mehta made this point before the bench.

But the bench was not impressed with the argument. It said that under Section 8 of the FCRA, the donor must specify the purpose for which the funds were being given and the receiving entity must use the funds only for that purpose. It should also maintain separate accounts for the said funds.

Since the apex court has read the section in a particular way, it is now upon the NGOs to ask donors to clearly specify how the funds are to be used and upon the Centre to satisfy itself that the provisions of Section 8 of the FCRA are met before allowing the funds to flow in the accounts of the NGO. The NGOs must also comply with the direction of the court and maintain separate accounts for different activities they carry out, which many are already doing.

As for the Centre, it has been after several NGOs and has cancelled the FCRA licences of many NGOs in the recent past. It has also amended the Act to streamline it and also make it difficult for many entities to get foreign funding. But on this particular issue, it has shown laxity because political parties also receive foreign donations and it will be difficult for them to get donors to specify the purpose for which the funds will be used, as also to maintain separate accounts. But now that the Supreme Court has ruled thus, the political parties will also have to fall in line.