The Narendra Modi government on Thursday suspended the registration of non-governmental organisation, Greenpeace under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act. In its order, the government claimed that Greenpeace had “prejudicially affected the economic interest of the state”.
This means that the organisation would be barred from receiving foreign funds. The order has also frozen seven of Greenpeace’s bank accounts. The Home Ministry’s charges against Greenpeace are based on financial technicalities relating to incorrect reporting of the foreign contributions it has received. The “most glaring example”, says the Home Ministry’s notice, involves a sum of Rs 6.6 crore. Another charge involved Greenpeace shifting its office from Chennai to Bengaluru without informing the Union government.
This comes in the wake of continued efforts by the Modi government to muzzle foreign-funded non-governmental organisations. In June, the Intelligence Bureau claimed, in a report to the Prime Minster’s office that foreign-funded non-governmental organisations were “stalling development projects” and “negatively impacting economic development”. In response to that, the government has cancelled more than 2,300 NGO registrations in its nine months in power, citing violations of the FCRA. Narendra Modi even made this a public issue, calling out people he termed as “five star activists” on Sunday.
Greenpeace vs the government
Greenpeace was also targeted in this drive. In September, the government had attempted to freeze the organisation’s foreign donations. In January 2015, however, the Delhi High court overruled the government on this, citing the fact that it had failed to cite any specific FCRA norm that had been violated. This time, of course, the government has made sure to highlight alleged FCRA violations in its freeze order.
The environmental NGO has had a number of run-ins with the Indian government since Modi took office. The government did not permit Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai from boarding a flight to London in order to testify to British legislators about her work in the Mahan forest in Madhya Pradesh. Greenpeace had been opposing to open cast coal mining in the forest and one of the companies involved in this venture, Essar was listed in London. Pillai therefore claimed that this made the British legislators a stakeholder in the mining and environmental destruction.
Greenpeace has also targeted the Adani Group’s $16 billion investment in an Australian coal mine while also training its guns on Tata for a port the conglomerate is building in Orissa, which the NGO claims would kill endangered Olive Ridley turtles and other marine life.
Since Indira Gandhi
This muzzling of foreign-funded NGOs is not something that Modi began, though; they have been targeted since the time of Indira Gandhi. The Foreign Contribution Regulation Act was in fact first enacted by Gandhi, who was given to blaming the proverbial “foreign hand” to explain her government’s failures. For a law that has often been called “draconian”, it was fittingly enacted during the Emergency in 1976. In 2010, the Manmohan Singh government reenacted the law, making it even stricter. The new law bars foreign funding for any organisation that is is involved in “political action”, a definition so wide that legal experts think practically any organisation can now be booked under it.
The Manmohan Singh government used this law much like Modi is doing, wielding it to muzzle dissent: in just the two months of July and August in 2012, the government had cancelled more than 4,000 FCRA registrations. About 20% of those cancellations were for NGOs based in Tamil Nadu, where protests against the Kudankulam atomic power plant had taken place.
While the United Progressive alliance faced some backlash for its moves, given Greenpeace’s international profile, this clampdown is sure to lead to a far bigger public relations fallout for the Modi government. Greenpeace describes itself as the "largest independent direct-action environmental organisation in the world" and tackling it would be rather different from, say, a local NGO in Tamil Nadu battling the setting up of a nuclear plant. Besides, Modi is already battling the perception in the West that he is an authoritarian leader, an impression this move does little to dispel. Within hours of the decision being announced, it had already received coverage on sites of major Western news sources, including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and The Washington Post. Greenpeace has said that it is seeking legal advice on how to counter the government’s actions.
We welcome your comments at
letters@scroll.in.
This means that the organisation would be barred from receiving foreign funds. The order has also frozen seven of Greenpeace’s bank accounts. The Home Ministry’s charges against Greenpeace are based on financial technicalities relating to incorrect reporting of the foreign contributions it has received. The “most glaring example”, says the Home Ministry’s notice, involves a sum of Rs 6.6 crore. Another charge involved Greenpeace shifting its office from Chennai to Bengaluru without informing the Union government.
This comes in the wake of continued efforts by the Modi government to muzzle foreign-funded non-governmental organisations. In June, the Intelligence Bureau claimed, in a report to the Prime Minster’s office that foreign-funded non-governmental organisations were “stalling development projects” and “negatively impacting economic development”. In response to that, the government has cancelled more than 2,300 NGO registrations in its nine months in power, citing violations of the FCRA. Narendra Modi even made this a public issue, calling out people he termed as “five star activists” on Sunday.
Greenpeace vs the government
Greenpeace was also targeted in this drive. In September, the government had attempted to freeze the organisation’s foreign donations. In January 2015, however, the Delhi High court overruled the government on this, citing the fact that it had failed to cite any specific FCRA norm that had been violated. This time, of course, the government has made sure to highlight alleged FCRA violations in its freeze order.
The environmental NGO has had a number of run-ins with the Indian government since Modi took office. The government did not permit Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai from boarding a flight to London in order to testify to British legislators about her work in the Mahan forest in Madhya Pradesh. Greenpeace had been opposing to open cast coal mining in the forest and one of the companies involved in this venture, Essar was listed in London. Pillai therefore claimed that this made the British legislators a stakeholder in the mining and environmental destruction.
Greenpeace has also targeted the Adani Group’s $16 billion investment in an Australian coal mine while also training its guns on Tata for a port the conglomerate is building in Orissa, which the NGO claims would kill endangered Olive Ridley turtles and other marine life.
Since Indira Gandhi
This muzzling of foreign-funded NGOs is not something that Modi began, though; they have been targeted since the time of Indira Gandhi. The Foreign Contribution Regulation Act was in fact first enacted by Gandhi, who was given to blaming the proverbial “foreign hand” to explain her government’s failures. For a law that has often been called “draconian”, it was fittingly enacted during the Emergency in 1976. In 2010, the Manmohan Singh government reenacted the law, making it even stricter. The new law bars foreign funding for any organisation that is is involved in “political action”, a definition so wide that legal experts think practically any organisation can now be booked under it.
The Manmohan Singh government used this law much like Modi is doing, wielding it to muzzle dissent: in just the two months of July and August in 2012, the government had cancelled more than 4,000 FCRA registrations. About 20% of those cancellations were for NGOs based in Tamil Nadu, where protests against the Kudankulam atomic power plant had taken place.
While the United Progressive alliance faced some backlash for its moves, given Greenpeace’s international profile, this clampdown is sure to lead to a far bigger public relations fallout for the Modi government. Greenpeace describes itself as the "largest independent direct-action environmental organisation in the world" and tackling it would be rather different from, say, a local NGO in Tamil Nadu battling the setting up of a nuclear plant. Besides, Modi is already battling the perception in the West that he is an authoritarian leader, an impression this move does little to dispel. Within hours of the decision being announced, it had already received coverage on sites of major Western news sources, including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and The Washington Post. Greenpeace has said that it is seeking legal advice on how to counter the government’s actions.