The proposed new foreign contributions Regulation Act (FCRA) Bill, introduced in Parliament during the last session, will have serious ramifications for educational institutions. For a variety of reasons, this Bill is deeply retrograde. It signals the reality that while India has considerably liberalised in many areas, it is still regressing in areas particularly relevant to education. Why is this Bill a retrograde step? First, it will be an institutional and administrative nightmare. Under its provisions, no permanent FCRA accounts will be approved; each institution will have to reapply every five years. As those who have run tax exempt non-profit institutions know, even under the best of circumstances, the process of getting government approvals is inordinately long. There seems to be no logic for subjecting institutions to a recurring approval process. Second, the Bill gives the government wide latitude over education and research institutions. For instance, there are clauses to the effect that no institution will be given approval if amongst other things, it might prove to be “detrimental to friendly relations with other states”. The implications are enormous. Suppose you are a research institution that for some reason criticised the Indo-US nuclear deal, or did research to show that Saudi Arabia has an unsavoury regime, it could be construed as detrimental to relations with foreign states. This is only an outlandish example. But each of the categories that could lead the government to abridge FCRA status, like “detrimental to public interest”, remain undefined. Consequently institutions will be at the mercy of any government that decides to target them. The potential threats to academic freedom contained in this Bill should not be taken lightly. Third, the Bill is patently discriminatory. Why is it that if you are a for-profit private sector company, you are not required to get government clearance every five years before you can do business with foreign companies? Why subject non-profits to the presumption that they are guilty until proven innocent? Similarly currently if a private sector company wishes to invite a foreign consultant, it is free to do so without prior permission. But if an Indian university wants to hold a conference or invite foreign academics, it is subject to tedious approval requirements from the Union home and external affairs ministries. Why the discrimination against not-for-profit institutions in general, many of whom are central to education? Fourth, the Bill will not achieve its stated objectives. Ostensibly the Bill is about security. The intent is to regulate FCRA contributions so they are not used for unsavoury purposes like disseminating hateful ideologies or for money laundering. But government is already armed with powers to deal with these two potential dangers. Like all entities, non-profits, have reporting requirements, so their accounts can be audited. And in case there is evidence of subversive activity, the State can always intervene. Indeed, there is a strange congruence of forces supporting this Bill: Hindu nationalists like it because they think it will target Christian missionaries, who are among the largest beneficiaries of official FCRA flows;…
