Opinion | Can the government act against the NGOs financed by USAID accused of anti-india activities?

Last update:February 24, 2025, 16:40 ist

This process is full of challenges, particularly when they prove such accusations in a court of justice and ensure convictions. It will require a rigorously conducted investigation, a careful frame of the positions and strong legal arguments

The current debate also deals with the political activities of financing of the USAID in India through NGOs. (Representation photo/AP)

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is located in the center of the controversy over its financing of various activities in other countries, including India, supposedly to promote the political agenda of the United States and achieve strategic objectives. The problem won prominence after the administration of President Donald Trump created a new agency, the Government Efficiency Department (Doge), headed by Elon Musk, which subsequently canceled subsidies to several projects, including those of India.

The controversy, which initially exploded on social networks, has now extended to the main media. Former main economic advisor of India and current member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, Sanjeev Sanyal, accused USAID of being “the biggest scam in human history.” He also demanded details about how Usaid spent US $ 21 million in India, which was sanctioned to improve voters participation.

This strong condemnation follows a series of exhibitions of several independent facts and researchers in social networks. These facts of facts and researchers have published extensive information on how Usaid supposedly worked to subvert democracies and undermine the sovereignty of nations, including India. Many of these statements are backed by reporting screenshots, filtered documents and wikileaks letters.

However, at the same time, the Internet is flooded with de facto verification efforts and verification of these statements. In this scenario, a rigorous investigation by the government and its agencies, together with a new audition of accounts by independent auditors designated by the Government, could help clarify the situation and take the facts to the public domain.

Section 3 (1) of the Foreign Contribution Law (Regulation), 2010 categorically establishes that the following categories of individuals and organizations cannot accept foreign contributions:

1. Candidates for elections
2. Correspondents, columnists, cartoonists, editors, owners, printers or editors of a registered newspaper
3. Public servants, judges, governmental employees or employees of any corporation or other controlled body or government owned
4. Members of any legislature
5. Political parties and/or their officers
6. Organizations of political nature as specified by the central government
7. Ventures of digital media dedicated to the production or transmission of audio or audiovisual news or current affairs programs, and/or their correspondents, columnists, artists, editors and owners

The current debate also deals with the political activities of financing of the USAID in India through NGOs. The FCRA is very clear that the central government has the authority to designate any NGO or other entity as an organization of a political nature, according to point (f) above.

The intention of legislators, Parliament, in this case, is clear: Indian citizens are free to participate in political activities, but these must be financed locally and not backed by foreign sources. The justification behind this restriction is the government’s objection to foreign powers, both governmental and non -governmental, which influence the policy and formulation of Indian policies. To avoid such interference, the government considered it necessary to prohibit foreign financing in political activism within India.

This position is a direct consequence of the colonial past of India, which saw more than two centuries of foreign domination. In addition, history has shown how Western powers have orchestrated regime changes to install compatible governments, often replacing democratic systems with autocratic dictatorships or regimes. Many of these changes in the regime were facilitated through the so -called public movements, such as students’ protests. The color revolutions in Western Asia and the protests of Euromaidan in Ukraine serve as prominent examples of such political activities externally influenced, carried out under the appearance of popular movements without directly involving any political party or entity.

The underlying intention of this provision in the FCRA was repeated and backed by the Supreme Court in a sentence of March 2020 delivered by Judge L. Nageswara Rao and Judge Deepak Gupta in the case of Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF) vs. India Union. The scholarly judges observed that this law “was promulgated to regulate the acceptance and use of foreign contribution or foreign hospitality by certain persons or associations, in order to guarantee that parliamentary institutions, political associations, academic voluntary organizations and other other organizations and other Organizations, as well as other people who work in important areas of national life can work consistently with the values ​​of a sovereign democratic republic. “

The judges also pointed out that, in the light of subversive activities sponsored by foreign powers to destabilize the nation, this law was legislated to isolate sensitive areas of national interest, such as journalism and the judiciary. They also unequivocally declared: “It had been noted that some foreign countries were financing individuals, associations, political parties, candidates for elections, correspondents, columnists, editors, owners, printers or newspaper editors.”

Beyond the FCRA law, the rules were notified by the government of India. Rule 3 categorically prohibits any organization of farmers, workers, students or young people, or any group based on caste, community, religion or language, to obtain foreign funds if they work for the progress of political interests. Similarly, organizations organized Bandh, Hartal, Rasta Roko, Rockoeither bharo of jail In support of public causes, they are also forbidden to receive foreign help.

At the same time, the scholarly judges stressed that NGOs without connection with the policy cannot be prohibited from accessing foreign funds. According to the Supreme Court, NGOs that work for the social and economic well -being of the company cannot occur within the scope of the FCRA Law by expanding the scope of the term “political interests.” This is precisely where ambiguity may arise.

The declared objectives of USAID include economic growth, humanitarian assistance, establishment of responsible democracies that promote freedom and development, conflict prevention, global health and socio -economic development. It would be extremely difficult to identify any of these objectives or activities carried out by NGOs and link them directly to “political activities.”

Not long ago, during the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government led by Congress, the Ministry of Interior Affairs, under which the FCRA division operates, launched the three NGO FCRA licenses directly linked to the protests against the energy project Kudankulam nuclear. This was possible when the FCRA division and the investigating agencies, including the compliance address, meticulously examined numerous transactions and projects, deepened in each activity and directly tracked the final use of funds for political purposes.

Many of these projects, which involve propaganda and public opinion training through extreme subtle methods such as discussions, debates, writing of books, articles and research work, public participation with “civil society”, etc., would be extremely difficult to try. Be deviated from its purpose declared to other activities masking payments under different account chiefs or project categories.

In summary, investigating whether the NGOs financed by USAID participate in anti-india activities will require highly professional and meticulously administered research. This will involve auditing financial records, analyzing the activities carried out and analyzing its impact within the broader political context to achieve a conclusive determination.

However, this process is full of challenges, particularly when proven such accusations in a court of justice and ensure convictions, potentially to the Supreme Court. It will require a rigorously conducted investigation, a careful frame of the positions and strong legal arguments.

Many activities funded by USAID can easily evade censorship and punishment, thus helping NGOs financed by USAID to be acquitted because the interpretation of the terminology surrounding these activities can produce multiple meanings and perceived intentions. It will be a difficult time for the government to obtain the NGOs financed by USAID that have supposedly worked closely with the United States government and its agencies to subvert democracy and Indian sovereignty.

The author is a public accountant and author of “GST diagnosis for doctors” published by CNBC Books18. He tweet from @sumeetnmehta. The opinions expressed in the previous piece are personal and only those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of News18.