UPSC CSE 2026 Essay Paper Discussion
GS Paper 2 12.5 marks · 200w 14 min Hard

Examine critically the recent changes in the rules governing foreign funding of NGOs under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), 1976.

Subtopic: Governance · NGOs and FCRA regulation of foreign funding

Model answer outline

How to structure your answer

Introduction → Evolution from FCRA 1976 to FCRA 2010 → Key rule changes including the FCRA (Amendment) Act 2020 → Rationale: transparency and sovereignty → Concerns: shrinking civic space and compliance burden → Conclusion
Full model answer

Detailed model answer

236 words · target 200 words · 14 min

Foreign funding of NGOs, first regulated by the FCRA, 1976, is now governed by the FCRA, 2010 and its rules, which have been progressively tightened — most sharply by the FCRA (Amendment) Act, 2020.

Key changes

  • Registration is valid for five years and renewable, replacing the permanent registration of the 1976 regime; a prior-permission route continues for unregistered bodies.
  • The 2020 amendment mandates receipt of foreign contribution only in an FCRA account at the SBI New Delhi Main Branch.
  • Transfer or sub-granting of foreign contribution to any other person or NGO is prohibited, disrupting collaborative and grassroots delivery models.
  • The cap on administrative expenses was cut from 50% to 20%; Aadhaar became mandatory for office bearers; public servants were barred from receiving foreign funds; suspension of registration can extend to 360 days.

Critical evaluation

  • Rationale: transparency, curbing diversion of funds and preventing foreign interference in domestic affairs; the Supreme Court upheld the 2020 changes in Noel Harper v. Union of India (2022), holding there is no fundamental right to receive unregulated foreign contributions.
  • Concerns: thousands of licences have been cancelled or allowed to lapse, shrinking civic space; the compliance burden falls hardest on small NGOs; vague grounds such as public interest invite discretionary use; UN human rights bodies have flagged a chilling effect on civil society.

Regulating foreign money is legitimate, but enforcement must be rule-based, proportionate and time-bound so that genuine voluntary organisations — recognised as development partners by the National Policy on the Voluntary Sector, 2007 — are not throttled.

Key points

What an examiner expects to see

  • FCRA 2010 replaced the 1976 Act; registration is now valid for five years and renewable, with a prior-permission route for unregistered entities.
  • FCRA (Amendment) Act 2020: foreign contribution receivable only in a designated FCRA account at the SBI New Delhi Main Branch.
  • The 2020 amendment bars transfer or sub-granting of foreign funds to other NGOs, cutting off intermediary-to-grassroots funding chains.
  • Administrative expense cap reduced from 50% to 20%; Aadhaar mandatory for office bearers; public servants barred from receiving foreign contribution; suspension extendable to 360 days.
  • The Supreme Court upheld the 2020 amendments in Noel Harper v. Union of India (2022) — no fundamental right to receive unregulated foreign contributions.
  • Critique: large-scale cancellation and lapse of licences, vague public-interest grounds and heavy compliance burden have shrunk civic space, hitting small NGOs hardest.
  • Balanced view: regulation for transparency and sovereignty is legitimate, but enforcement must be proportionate, rule-based and time-bound.
Examples to use

Concrete cases, schemes and judgments

  • Noel Harper v. Union of India (2022) upholding the FCRA (Amendment) Act 2020
  • Cancellation of FCRA licences of prominent NGOs after 2015, including Greenpeace India
  • National Policy on the Voluntary Sector, 2007 recognising NGOs as development partners
  • MHA data showing thousands of NGO registrations cancelled or lapsed over the last decade
Keywords / terms

Terminology to weave into the answer

FCRA 2010foreign contributioncivic spacesub-granting prohibitionNoel Harper caseregulatory compliance

Share this answer