- The central government denied the Centre for Financial Accountability’s parent organisation the right to continue receiving foreign funds under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act.
- A number of notable organisations working on environmental and social issues have faced scrutiny by India’s investigative agencies for hurting the country’s “economic interests” or “stalling” development projects.
- The crackdown on civil society organisations comes as public participation in environmental clearance norms is facing a setback.
Earlier this month, the central government denied the Centre for Financial Accountability’s parent organisation the right to continue receiving foreign funds under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, citing discrepancies in its income tax return filings. The action against the organisation is the latest one against civil society and non-governmental organisations perceived to be critical of the government and its development projects, many of which could have detrimental impacts on the environment.
The Centre for Financial Accountability (CENFA) describes itself as an organisation that “engages in critical analysis, monitoring and critique of the role of financial institutions…and their impact on development, human rights and the environment,” It is a project under the India Institute for Critical Action Centre in Movement, an initiative which focuses on activism, research, and publication in relation to social and political movements.
CENFA’s areas of focus include the energy and infrastructure development sectors, keeping a close eye on whether project developers follow environment clearance norms. A recent report analysing the impacts of a PVC plant in the Adani-operated Mundra Special Economic Zone in Kutch, for example, found that environment clearance was granted without considering the cumulative impacts of the project, in the context of existing projects operating in the area.
In the years since it was founded in 2005, CENFA never experienced opposition to its work or an obstruction in accessing funds, Joe Athialy, executive director of CENFA told Mongabay India. According to the Ministry of Home Affairs, the application for renewal of funds under the FCRA was cancelled because of an error in tax filings from the year 2018-2019.
The sudden action against the organisation, which began with an inquiry into its administrative operations in May, is an attempt to “intimidate and silence” organisations critical of the government’s development agenda, according to Athialy. “This is part of a larger design to silence dissent. If there is an error in filings, why aren’t we allowed the space to make a correction, the way corporations are? This is a political action that deserves a political response,” said Athialy.
‘Hurting economic interests’
A number of notable organisations working on environmental and social issues have faced scrutiny by India’s investigative agencies for hurting the country’s “economic interests” or “stalling” development projects.
In January this year, the FCRA licence of one of India’s oldest think tanks, the Centre for Policy Research, was cancelled following a year of suspension and raids from the Income Tax Department. Government officials told the press the think tank’s licence was cancelled because it diverted funds to protests and engaged in activity that could hurt the country’s economic interests, including producing documents analysing policy on air pollution.
In a statement, CPR called the decision “incomprehensible and disproportionate, and some of the reasons given challenge the very basis of the functioning of a research institution.”
Environics Trust, a community development nonprofit founded by late geoscientist R. Sreedhar, was also served notices by the Income Tax department and its FCRA licence suspended for allegedly funding protests against steel and coal plants. The IT Department told the Supreme Court the Trust as “is funded by the foreign entities for stalling public projects in India.” On its website, the stated objectives of Environics Trust include conducting research, assisting governments in developmental efforts, as well as to “provide assistance to communities to redress injustices and uphold their rights,” among others.
“It’s very clear that this is an attack on organisations working on the environmental and social impacts of development interventions. This attack will clearly lead to less critical scrutiny of what the government and other entities, including large private corporations, are doing with our natural resources,” said Shripad Dharmadhikary, coordinator at Manthan Adhyayan Kendra, a research organisation focussing on energy and water issues. “It can only be to the detriment of the environment and communities bearing the brunt of these development projects,” he added.
In 2010, the Congress led United Progressive Alliance government amended the FCRA law to shift focus away from funding political parties to those of a “political nature.” In 2014, the Delhi High Court had found that both the Congress and BJP violated the FCRA 2010 by accepting donations from British mining giant Vedanta. In 2020, the law was further amended by the BJP led National Democratic Alliance to introduce more caps on administrative expenses by organisations, while other provisions were made for political parties.
Legal experts say supporting public dissent and activism is not necessarily violative of the FCRA. In a 2020 judgement, the Supreme Court said that “support to public causes by resorting to legitimate means of dissent like bandh, hartal etc. cannot deprive an organisation of its legitimate right of receiving foreign contribution.” It added, “Any organisation which supports the cause of a group of citizens agitating for their rights without a political goal or objective cannot be penalised by being declared as an organisation of a political nature.”
In a separate judgement earlier this year, the Supreme Court said citizens have the right against the adverse effects of climate change. The government was a defendant in the case, arguing that fossil fuel based energy needed to give way to renewable sources. “There is a judicial recognition, based on the government’s submission, that coal and thermal power is problematic. Then why take action against civil society groups which are also raising their voice against it?” Ritwick Dutta, founder of the award winning law group Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, had told Mongabay India at the time.
LIFE was also booked by the Central Bureau of Investigation for allegedly using foreign funds to “target and stall coal projects.” Other organisations working closely on environmental, tribal, and social issues like Greenpeace, Oxfam, and Citizens of Justice and Peace have similarly been cut off from FCRA provisions.
In total, 20,707 NGOs have been struck off from FCRA provisions, according to the government’s FCRA dashboard. “Where foreign contributions are absent, Indian sources of funding should ideally open up. But when investigative agencies are sent after organisations which are critical of the government, who will want to fund them? The crackdown is also sharply reducing the support from Indian funders,” said Dharmadhikary.
Shrinking public participation
The crackdown on civil society organisations comes as public participation in environmental clearance norms is facing a setback. Legal researchers Meenakshi Kapoor and Krithika Dinesh found that in recent years, “a trend of making major policy changes through office memorandums, without any public notice or consultation,” had emerged, including allowing post facto clearances for projects that had started operation without the requisite clearances.
Public consultations are a necessary component of the environmental clearance process for large infrastructure development projects. Projects perceived as being of national importance or for national security – such as roads – have been made exempt from certain compliance regulations.
Athialy said CENFA would continue its research and advocacy work. “Financially and operationally, we are crippled. After the end of this month, we don’t have salaries to pay. But everyone in the team is determined to continue working, even if at great personal cost. There are options that the law makes available to us, and we may take them in the due course of time,” he said.
Banner image: Women protesting human rights violations in Chhattisgarh. Image by Women against Sexual Violence and State Repression via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0).
Credits
