The FCRA (Amendment) Bill, 2026 has been referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee. Examine the constitutional and due-process concerns raised regarding automatic asset vesting and limited appeal rights.

Foreign funding of associations is regulated by the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010, administered by the Ministry of Home Affairs [2]. The 2026 Bill creates a "Designated Authority" in which an organisation's foreign contribution and assets vest once its certificate ceases [1]. The concern is not regulation itself, but its proportionality and procedural fairness.

Constitutional concerns

• Article 19(1)(c): vesting is triggered by mere cessation — cancellation, surrender or non-renewal — without any finding of wrongdoing [1]; a restriction on associational freedom must be reasonable, not automatic.
• Article 300A: assets created partly with foreign funds vest in full [1], compelling the body to separately reclaim its domestic share — deprivation wider than the mischief sought to be curbed.
• Article 14: the parent Act allows a hearing before cancellation but not before refusal of renewal [1] — comparable situations treated unequally.
• Article 26: the Bill carries special provisions for places of worship [1], making faith-based and minority-run charities directly affected stakeholders.

Due-process concerns

• No appellate remedy exists where the Centre declines to renew a certificate [1], though non-renewal produces the same consequence as cancellation.
• No pre-decisional hearing before renewal is denied [1], departing from audi alteram partem.
• Vesting stays provisional until a fresh certificate is granted and turns permanent otherwise [1], leaving organisations in prolonged uncertainty.

The regulatory rationale

• The stated object is to make use of foreign contributions more transparent and accountable [3], continuing the 2020 reforms that barred inter-organisational transfers and lowered the administrative-expenditure ceiling [2].

Accountability in foreign funding and the freedom to associate are complementary, not competing, goals. The JPC should build in a pre-decisional hearing, a statutory appeal against non-renewal, and vesting limited to the demonstrably foreign-funded share — reforms consistent with natural justice and with SDG-17's emphasis on civil-society partnerships.