For last week or so, media, both print as well as electronic, has been abuzz with how Indian NGOs are trying to sabotage the Indian economy by decelerating economic pace, as if they are the neo Jaichands in the new political order. Most of this coverage is based on a secret report of Intelligence Bureau (IB). (The report seems to be secret only from the NGO community and freely provided access to media.) Thus it is clear that the intention of this publicity blizz is not to seek a debate on the issues identified in the report but to build a negative environment against the NGOs. The report goes on to even predict how in coming years these NGOs will further decelerate the economy by targeting IT industry through e-waste, mining, among others. Thus painting these NGOs as anti-nationals working against the interests of the country (the campaign just fell short of calling them spies.) These NGOs have not been accused of breaking any law.
It may be worth summarizing how the legislation which regulates foreign donations, namely Foreign Contribution Regulation Act 2010 (FCRA for short) operates. No NGO can receive foreign funds without prior permission / registration from the central government. Getting such permission or registration from the government is no cakewalk. One needs to wait endlessly, often without any specific information why permission or registration is being delayed. Although the legislation requires that normally permission be granted within 90 days, but if one is lucky, it could come within 6 months to a year, but generally speaking there are no norms and one has to wait endlessly without any way of knowing what could be the reason for delay. More often than not permissions are not granted even after 2 years or more of applying. It may be worth mentioning that earlier version of FCRA Act made it obligatory on the Government to issue permission within 120 days, after which it would be deemed that the permission has been granted. Courts also upheld this provision (Sarvjivan Unnati Bodhini vs Secretary to GoI 2011). However this measure of accountability was removed in 2011 by the Government, leaving NGOs totally in dark. It may be mentioned that permission or registration are not granted just by a simple case of application, NGOs are subjected to a thorough field inspection by an IB officer, who validates all supporting records/information submitted by NGO, antecedents of the promoters and the NGO. In addition to above, these days the information is also sought from the concerned ministries about the proposal, thus further delaying the permission.
It may be mentioned, such delays often cause foreign donors to move to other NGOs who already have FCRA registration or even to other countries, thus country loosing foreign funds meant for social causes. It is well-known that foreign donors are finding India as one of the least attractive country for giving grants, because of the red-tapism involved. In last decade or so, innumerable donor agencies have closed shops in India or even moved away from Indian development sector. This is a direct loss to Indian social sector. Unknown to Ministry of Home mandarins, there is innumerable documented evidence on how Indian social sector has moved away from charity (giving direct benefits) to rights based support. These developments, while one does not give carte blanche credit to foreign development agencies, however their contribution in this aspect cannot be wished away. Many of such developments have been even accepted and adopted by the Government of India. That is why today we have Right to Information, Right to Education or Right to Food.
It is not that once permission is granted, NGOs are free to undertake work without any restrictions. They are regularly monitored, are required to file online, as well as, signed copy of return alongwith a large number of documents, including audited accounts, bank statements, etc.
S. 3 of the FCRA Act prohibits certain persons from receiving foreign funds, logic being that country’s decision-makers and policy-makers, such as legislature, political parties, judges, government servants, should not receive foreign funds, as this may compromise their decision-making. Not only this, even TV and newspapers (who are otherwise allowed to receive upto 26% of FDI under the automatic route and proposed to be enhanced to 49% by Arvind Mayaram Committee), under FCRA are not allowed to receive any foreign contribution. How the two laws reconcile themselves is anybody’s guess. Ministry of Home Affairs has never tried to enforce this prohibition against the news media, perhaps too afraid of a backlash. Even journalists, cartoonists, etc. are prohibited from receipt of any foreign funds, MoH fearing that media and journalists can influence the policies in the country through their TV channels and publications, although no evidence of this has ever been made available.
Recent IB report seems to have taken this fear-mongering to a new level, the Government now even seems to fear debates and protests. FCRA came into being wayback in 70s, in the backdrop of coup in Chile in 1970 allegedly through CIA’s shenanigans, raising ripples through a number of countries, including India. At the time a number of MPs raised the concern and even the then Deputy Home Minister made reference to it while discussing FCRA in the parliament. However 2014 is not late 60s or early 70s, when India was still a fledgling democracy. The strength of our democracy and robustness of our media is envy of the world and it certainly can withstand any outside pressures. Maturity of a democracy can be gauged only when the country allows open discussion on all issues, even opinions with which it may be uncomfortable with. India has had history of diverse opinions, that is why it is credited with first major elected communist government anywhere in the world, when US was using McCarthyism against left-wing sentiments.
To say that an argument is bad simply because it is supported by some foreign organisations is no argument. From what seems to appear in the press, IB authorities feel that the right based approach is the culprit for slow down in the economy and they feel it is the NGOs who are the culprits to start it all. For example, the argument that NGOs who filed petition in the supreme court for Right to Food were acting against national interest, simply because they have received foreign funds. Dare I say, such an argument is heresy, considering judges and government of the day ultimately also agreed with the argument and the enacted legislation will help millions of poor who cannot afford food.
Similarly Right to Information was enacted only after a long struggle and has been acclaimed as one of the strongest law that the country has ushered to contain the endemic corruption. Similarly banning NGOs or stopping their resources for raising agitations against mining or even nuclear energy are simply wrong. After all, it is the NGOs who started campaign against plastics in the rivers, much before it was adopted by the Government. Sunderlal Bhauguna, a national icon, started campaign against the big dams, long before it became fashionable to talk against the same.
Government often argues that there is no problem if Indian funds are used for such agitations, fully knowing that no one will fund the agitations against the government. Major donors in India are either the Government or the corporates. Which government or corporate would fund agitations which are against them only? Hence if Indian NGOs are able to raise resources from outside India, why stop them, if the government believes that these organisations are wrong, fight such agitations using democratic means and not the reprisals and witch-hunt that MoH seems to have adopted.
One also needs to question the relevance of FCRA Act, which currently has become an instrument to stifle the civil society voices which are different from those of establishment. India during 2012-13 receive around USD 125 billion including remittances from NRIs, compared to that under FCRA total funds received by around 17000 organisations comes to less than USD 2 billion, which works out to around an average contribution of around Rs 60 lakh only. Can India really be destablized using such kind of funds or is FCRA just an instrument to coerce the dissenting voices into submission. The Government is plainly wrong in running such a coercive campaign against foreign funded NGOs and NGOs must fight this.
As always every negative has a positive side, perhaps this campaign has brought a larger message for the NGO community, that there are no easy solutions to the communities financial vulnerabilities. The government headed by a master strategist knows that it is easy to win this battle against NGOs simply because of negative connotations of foreign funding perceptions amongst the public at large. Perhaps the NGO community has to start introspecting and innovate in finding resources locally, more so from the communities that they serve. CSR (Corporate Social responsibility) funds would never be an answer, since no corporate would like to associate with any campaign which is critical of the government of the day. It may be a long and hard struggle, but could provide the lasting solution to the NGOs financial struggles. After all as Mathew Cherian documents in his very lucid and informative book ‘A Million Missions’ that over 1.2 million voluntary organisations spread all over the country are a force to reckon with.
– Subhash Mittal is a Chartered Accountant and Secretary, Socio Research Reform Foundation, New Delhi. These are his personal views only.
Dear All,
I think this a great essay which all connected with Governance or ‘Good Governance’ as it is called today must read. By this I mean Modi must read as the rest are just watchers-so it is portrayed.
Keep up the Great work Mr Mittal.
Regards
Surat
Let us thank IB report and for leaking report:
By the default IB has done an immense service to voluntary organizations, in the context of drastically changed Indian scenarios of Modi coming to power with thumping majority that was not even expected by BJP.
We plead to know the hard facts but think of actions in the mode of positivism rather than negativism. Let us not waste time in thinking on the side of negativism.
We will think and plan positively with introspection on how to counter-balance the Gobbels in the Corporate, corporate led political parties and even some in our sector went on telling untruth that people eventually started believing as truth.
MODI the PM
Naturally Modi the CM of the Gujarat is expected to be transformed in all respects to become Modi the PM of India.
Broadly, we are going such signals from the face language and humility in words from Modi. We admire his magnanimity in seeking forgivance from the opposition leaders whom he hurt in the past, especially doing in the elections.
He was great in the seeking their cooperation asserting that the PM belongs to all the political parties and all Indians that includes the minorities.
These are good signs from the new Modi and his government for many of us, who were critical of him in the past and now apprehensive of his possible non-secular future actions. Let us think ONLY with these positive signals we see.
WAKEUP CALL- LET US PUT OUR FOOT BACK TO THE GROUND
In this context the IB report is a “wake up call” for all of us in the Voluntary sector. This open write up is a plea for us in the sector to wake up. In the process, I came across an interesting write up by caption “Why I Gave Up On ‘Social Activism’ By Yoginder Sikand dated: 19 April, 2012 in Countercurrents.org. This is very long one that I have enclosed and I have highlighted the portions, which in my opinion has “some” TRUTH in it that we all must introspect to counter-balance. Attachment No:1.
I think, we got misled by the concept of Professionalism and employing well paid Professionals so that we can do good work. Professionalism is compatible to Volunteerism and we need that kind of professionalism that helps to do the chosen job or task “efficiently”. But, we got misled to believe in professionalism that is compatible to World Bank and Funding Agencies. This is the trap we are in that Volunteerism is given a Good Bye and we are calling ourselves as NGOs. And we use our professional intelligence to coin more and more fancy words, which confuses all to know what we are. For those interested, I am enclosing a very long but elaborate study of Work Bank. (Attachment No: 2)
I believe that Rajiv Malhotra is a mentor and mouthpiece of BJP ideology. We have two positive aspects that we also believe, in my opinion, to positively build our activities around it. But, let us believe, that we need to redefine Secularism in broader and acceptable by all perspective. Even, BJP is in a dilemma on these since they are equally swept by our new millennium Gobbels.
I am quoting them In the words of Malhotra…(Entire long interview Attachment 3)
1. We have a much better system than secularism where lots of traditions and faiths can co-exist in harmony and mutual respect; secularism has been turned into an anti-majority kind of system in India.
2. Moderator Que#12: What is the merit of a dharmic economic and political model? Is there any relevance of such a model in the future?
Rajiv : It is a decentralized model. It is a model governed by small enterprises which are the backbone of India. India should create more grass root level decentralized organisations, small scale economies.
It will be appropriate now to respond to the questions raised by the National Apex Body of Voluntary Organisations- VANI, in response to the leaked IB report.
Few questions from VANI and our responses:
We (VANI) do have some questions to ask, not only to the government but also our media colleagues.
Question: Don’t you think we need to create a mechanism to regulate and promote NGOs in professional way? There is need to have centralised Law for registration of NGOs. This will solve the problem of mushrooming of un-accountable NGOs.
Our Response: Are we missing the wood for trees? Forming an Association – a Public Society is a Fundamental Right. Neither we nor government can curtail this right. It is not good either. We all believe in Federal Nature of our country and we desire decentralisation to the grass root panchayath. In fact, It will be good if we all “in addition” register our registered public societies with Panchayaths and municipalities informing our intention to work in their area, serve their communities and report to them.
Why mushrooming of organisation is a problem? How can I or you or VANI judge they are unaccountable? Is it fair? All are governed by the same law.
The issue is that we are not united, while Funding Agencies are well united. It is true and good that there is a broad spectrum of Public Societies. We should identify our bandwidth do not want to categorise ourselves and declare our nature and we are genuine.Do these need Government certification? Unity at present is nebulous. We have not only class structure in our Voluntary sector but also caste affinity and alliances, too. THIS IS SAD BUT HARD REALITY.
Conversely, we will be inviting problem if we seek Central Single legislation for our Voluntary Sector.
Question: Is there not a need to have separate ministry or even a department like Ministry of Corporate Affairs? Such department/ ministry can have much professional regulatory oversight over NGOs.
Our Response: Is VANI for a regulatory authority over Voluntary organisations and we surrender over sovereign nature? Is VANI of the opinion that Professionals are great like Brahmins in the community? That somebody should oversee our organisations makes us uncomfortable. Do not mix up corporate profit making companies and Non profit making Voluntary Organisations.
Question: NGOs also have a legitimate right to see such reports. Why are they supposed to be confidential but are often leaked?
Our Response: Opposition leaders are harassed by ruling government, Jagan was arrested more because he the Chief Minister after the death of his father. These are occupational hazards and we have a right to see the IB and such reports. We have to play the game wisely. But, lack of unity is dampening our game.
Question: Don’t you think we should also demand some accountability from MHA and ask for follow-up reports on the cases which are not solved till date with the fate of some genuine organisations under perennial suspension?
Our Response: Yes, of course MHA is responsible. Who should bell the cat? How it should be belled? Are we as Voluntary Organisations prepared for this responsibilitising MHA?
Question: Is it the source of funds for NGO’s or their utilization the issue for the government?
Our response: It is both. The issue of wrong utilisation become grave if it involves Foreign Fund. It is natural for any Nation to feel concerned that their internal affairs get disturbed because of outside monetary intervention.
Question: Don’t you think there is need to have taxation reform which can promote domestic giving and domestic foundations?
Our Response: It is needed and it will be good. But, the present indications are that most of the organisations receiving foreign funds are not interested or inclined to mobilise local funds. HelpAge India and few others are exceptions. So, the question becomes hypothetical.
Question: Why has The National policy on Voluntary Sector, which was brainchild of former Prime Minister, Sri. AtalBihari Vajpayee, never been implemented since the last decade?
Our Response: Least Governance is well governed. Why invite trouble by asking Government to implement a Policy on our sector. The only space and great policy is that our natural human right is recognised as FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT in the constitution.
WHAT IS CRUCIAL IS THAT WE VOLUNTARY ORGANISATIONS FRAME OUR POICY TOWARDS NOT ONLY GOVERNMENT BUT ALSO FUNDING AGENCIES AND MUTUALLY RELATIONSHIP AMONG US. VANI SHOULD TAKE LEAD. WE CAN BE MULTIPLES IN INDIA WITH DIFFERENT POLICIES TOWARDS GOVERNMENT,
it is another important lobbying we should and can do is to support our fund raising efforts by Government’s matching or similar contribution. The Sub-contracting jobs should be promoted to be taken up by Cooperatives and Non Profit companies that we may promote.
Question: Why is it that we have more than 10 business channels, and even minimal space is not accorded to NGOs to talk about their work and challenges?
Our Response IT IS SAD. But, how the channels that promote corporate will support US? But, we should fight it out with media. It is a struggle. Let us not fight.
We believe that we should recast our agenda that will build around as a movement of Volunteers.
Our main option is Gandhian SARVODAYA way, where we live lives and models that others can emulate. It is a struggle. Contrary to the dream of Village Republic we are witnessing the rural communities that have lost Independence and Community Initiatives. Participating in Self Governance is made complicated that for a common Citizen, it is comfortable to pledge their Peace, Prosperity, Progress and Justice to centralised governance taking care.
At this juncture, as one who was “COG IN THE WHEEL” based on our experience, can we ponder a request response for the following agenda towards restoring Independence, regain Self Esteem and depend upon Community Initiatives.
WE SHOULD GO GRASS ROOT AND BECOME PART OF PEOPLE. We should mix with the communities like Milk and Water and not remain as oil drop on the water.
1. We need to redefine a framework of Volunteerism, Trusteeship and how to sustain core volunteers?
Most of us started as Voluntary Organisations with ideas ranging from Gandhian to the extreme Marxian. To live with the communities, eat with them, stay night in their villages during a visit, simple life and all were our values. We were inspired by what people like Lala Lajpat Roy, founder of Servants of People Society said about a Volunteer who lives just above the poverty line of the communities. We believed in community life like in any religion. But, today, we get an impression that the professionalism has hijacked our noble path.
2. We need to assert and frame our Policy towards Government, Funding agencies and our Ethos of Inter-organisational relationship.
We are partners of the People- the Communities and naturally we cannot partner with the Government, at least directly.
Funding Agencies- both Foreign and Indian play a crucial role and we must be able to set certain norms that shall be binding on all.
The auto-rickshaw and hamali labourers working in an area are united but such unity is evading our sector. We should strive towards this unity without meaning that we have common agenda.
3. Linkage and Platforms with Political Parties- especially the left and groups. Emphasis with Gandhians, Sarva Seva Sangh, Servants of People Society, Servants of India Society and such groups.
4. Linkage and platforms with Religious Organisations and Groups.
5. Self regulated probity in VOs public life- concepts of Accreditation, RTI and LOK PAL.
6. VOs not to take up the job of sub-contractors. Local Self Governing bodies should be implementing these activities, if needed taking cooperation from cooperatives and Non Profit companies that are promoted by Local Bodies for this cause and VOs catalise this process
7. Withdrawal- meaning change of role of Small Voluntary Organisations and also Big Organisations- Restructuring, Amalgamation, Confederation, absorption in the local bodies and such ideas.
8. GLOBAL HORIZONTAL AGENDA. International VO/NGO action- Differentiate between commercial and humanistic interests, space for pluralism instead of marketing one brand of solutions.
9. Transparent, Decentralized and Democratic FundRaising, We are Public Societies and must be accountable to the Public. FundRaising is also FriendsRaising that makes us accountable to the Public and gives us public credibility.
10. Decentralization of our activities based on the people centered constituencies along geo-political and thematic contours.
CONCLUSION: We have not dealt with many of the above agenda points to draw more new ideas from all, especially Nodal Organisation like VANI, COVA and major players along with the smallest players. Let us just ignore the reports first and start looking inwards to strengthen us that will take care of these onslaughts.
All said and done, it is good to have Global Funding but to depend upon only foreign funding only is not healthy status of our sector. Not just the threat from the Government but many organisations suddenly crumbling with stoppage of foreign funding needs to be introspected in the context of our credibility. We need to drive and raise resources from Indian rich who are in great numbers. The tax regime is not negative to such contributions though it may not be encouraging.
Tail Piece: It is TRUE that Indian well off and rich are not receptive to contribute. How do bring them and the Youth out of their perceived comfort ZONE?
V.B.Chandrasekaran,
Chatti Mahatma Gandhi Aashramam,
Chatti Post, Chinthur Mandal, Khammam District,
Andhra Pradesh, Pin Code: 507129.
Email: verivaan2049@yahoo.com antarbharatid2010@gmail.com;
Dear Mr Mittal,
I totally agree with you. No country can progress if the Third Sector is weak. So it is in the country’s interest to strengthen the sector and not the other way round.
One of the main functions of the Sector is to be a ‘watch dog’ and when this is done obviously the sector treads on some toes. Just becoz of this so called ‘secret report’ we should not stop doing our work. If the government views this positively the sector is probably doing them a favour.
If there is no dissent-no debate-no discussion and there will be no progress
Surat