In India, the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (FCRA) is a law that regulates the acceptance and utilisation of foreign contributions by certain persons (Individual/Hindu Undivided Family/Association/Section 8 Company) and prohibits such contributions for “activities detrimental to the national interest”. While the term “national interest” is extremely broad and ambiguous, according to a public notice issued in November 2024 by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), “anti-developmental activities”, “inciting malicious protests”, and “forceful religious conversions” have been listed as some of the reasons for denial of registration/renewal of associations, primarily NGOs.  The proposed 2026 Amendment to FCRA has far-reaching consequences for NGOs in India, as it moves to provide indiscriminate powers to the Central Government to regulate public space and civil society by effectively immobilising their functioning through financial and asset incapacitation.

Over the last decade or so, FCRA has increasingly been used by the Government to tighten its hold over NGOs, CSOs and other voluntary organisations, by cancelling registrations, denying renewals and confiscating their property. As of April 2026, the FCRA Dashboard hosted by the MHA indicates that 22,273 registrations were cancelled, and 15,182 expired registrations were not renewed.

In March 2026, the Central Government introduced a bill (Amendment) to amend various provisions of FCRA. While the Amendment portrays itself as a routine legislative exercise to bridge legal gaps through a “comprehensive statutory framework”, its potential impact disastrously worsens things for NGOs. It proposes the establishment of a “Designated Authority” as specified by the Central Government. As per Section 16A, the foreign contribution and assets shall “provisionally vest” in such Designated Authority on cancellation or surrender of registration or if the registration ceases to exist as per the provisions of FCRA or its rules. The Designated Authority can also take over the management of the person whose assets are provisionally vested in it in “public interest”. Further, if such a person fails to obtain fresh registration/renewal/restoration, the foreign contribution and assets “stand permanently vested” in the Designated Authority. Consequently, the Designated Authority is authorised to, “for public purposes”, transfer the assets to any Ministry, Department, authority or Agency of the Central or State Government or any local authority or dispose of such assets through sale or other means and credit the sale process together with any unutilised foreign contribution to the Consolidated Fund of India.

Sections 16B and 16C of the 2026 Amendment also provide for retrospective application. Section 16B provides that all foreign contributions and assets vested under Section 15 as omitted by FCRA or its rules, immediately before the commencement of the Amendment, shall, from the date of its commencement provisionally vest with the Designated Authority.  Section 16C provides that if any person who was permitted to accept foreign contribution under FCRA “ceases to exist or is rendered inoperative or defunct”, the foreign contribution and assets of such person shall permanently vest in the Designated Authority.

As per the aforementioned data, around 37,455 registrations have been cancelled or not renewed. Funding and asset-building through such contributions are absolutely fundamental to the survival of NGOs, especially grassroots-level organisations engaged in crucial areas of health, education, sustainable development, and upliftment of marginal communities. FCRA already ensures deep control and regulation of NGOs that do not align with the Government. This Amendment provides further sweeping and arbitrary powers to completely paralyse NGOs and effectively ensure that NGOs that are struggling or have succumbed to this law lose all scope of revival.

The Amendment is in furtherance of the gradual tightening of deep control, sweeping confiscation and unjust expropriation initiated by the Government. In Noel Harper v Union of India, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the 2020 Amendment to FCRA, observing that there is no fundamental right to receive foreign contributions and the right to freedom of association under Article 19 of the Constitution of India is not violated if the Government regulates such contributions to protect national interests.

Thus, although the fundamental right to freedom of association is enshrined in the Constitution and Article 22 of the ICCPR, the courts have failed to recognise that increasing control and subjection of NGOs to such laws not only creates a chilling effect but also reduces the already shrinking public space for dissent and criticism. As Habermas profoundly posited, civil society ensures that discussions in the public sphere percolate through the channels of the democratic setup to form part of the institutionalised decision-making. Seen this way, NGOs and civil society embody the public spirit, much like the government. The way forward should be to enable them to thrive, not to stifle them.