Onerous rules: On the amended FCRA Rules, the fallout.
The newly amended FCRA Rules point to a renewed attempt to stifle NGOs.
Civil society organisations play a vital role in areas such as health, education, disaster relief, and civil liberties and rights, stepping in where the state falls short. Yet, the Indian state has treated NGOs with suspicion, using the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), 2010, to impose stringent restrictions on their functioning. Earlier this week, the FCRA Amendment Rules, 2026 were notified, which require all NGOs registered under the FCRA, 2010, to confine their work to activities specified for their category and to the States and Union Territories named in their registration. They must also disclose their social media handles, websites and publications and are barred from carrying “political content”. The new rules impose stringent penalties for using funds for unapproved purposes and require NGOs to pay separate fees for each category of work and to each State or Union Territory in which they operate, replacing the earlier system of a single registration fee. These increase compliance costs and paperwork. While the government argues that such measures promote transparency, even-handedness and national security, the rules are clearly meant to stifle the work of NGOs. The operation of the FCRA regime has been far from transparent. As CPI(M) MP John Brittas recently complained, parliamentary questions on FCRA cancellations and non-renewals have been disallowed as “secret”, even though more than 20,000 registrations have reportedly been revoked over the past decade on opaque grounds. Far from improving transparency, the new rules burden NGOs with greater barriers and commitments, raising concerns that the Centre intends to create a chilling effect.
In Noel Harper (2022), the Supreme Court upheld the stringent 2020 FCRA amendments, accepting the state’s invocation of sovereignty and national security. Yet, in in 2020, the Court had read down rules that would have classified the rights activism of civil society bodies, including protests and demonstrations as work “of a political nature”, drawing a distinction between party politics and the everyday work of social and economic betterment. The new Rules seek to treat advocacy and “political content” as grounds for disqualification. In March 2026, the Centre had proposed amendments allowing a government-appointed authority to take over the assets of NGOs whose registrations were cancelled, surrendered, or not renewed. Following strong protests, particularly from minority institutions, it put the proposal on hold. Now, the newly notified rules seem another way of throttling NGOs that utilise foreign funding for civil society work. The Centre should withdraw the punitive provisions, particularly those on multiple fees and political content, and adopt fairer rules.