The Crossbill News Desk
India has pushed back against criticism from a US lawmaker over proposed changes to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), asserting that decisions on the country's legislation fall within its domestic jurisdiction. New Delhi also noted that the United States, like several other countries, has regulations governing the movement of foreign funds.
Responding to questions on Friday (August 7), external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said Parliament would take the final decision on the proposed amendments.
“Legislative matters concerning India are our internal affairs on which decisions are taken by parliament,” external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said.
“I would also like to point out,” he added, “that there are several nations, including the United States, which regulate the flow of foreign funds”.
Jaiswal's remarks followed comments by Republican Congressman Riley M. Moore, representing West Virginia's second district, who had warned that the proposed legislation could affect India-US relations.
Three days earlier, Moore described the FCRA (Amendment) Bill as a “clear attack against Christians” and said its pursuit could become a “major concern in our bilateral relationship with India”.
Christianity has had a lengthy history in India but now the Bill will “permit government takeovers of churches and religious charities”, Moore wrote on X.
The comments come as the Narendra Modi government is expected to seek passage of the FCRA (Amendment) Bill during the ongoing monsoon session of Parliament. The legislation was first introduced during the budget session in March but was deferred following opposition from political parties and amid the assembly elections in Kerala, where Christians constitute a significant section of the population.
The proposed amendments have drawn particular opposition from Christian organisations and other voluntary groups.
A key provision seeks to establish a ‘designated authority’ empowered to take control of foreign-funded assets belonging to an organisation whose FCRA registration has been cancelled, surrendered or not renewed. The provision would also cover assets that have only been partly financed through foreign contributions.
If such assets are permanently vested, the authority would be required to use them for public purposes and could transfer them to the government or sell them. In the case of a place of worship, the proposed law says the authority must “ensure that the religious character of such place of worship is maintained”.
The proposed powers have raised concerns among civil society and religious organisations, particularly because the government can cancel an FCRA registration on grounds of “public interest”.
Under the existing law, registrations can also be cancelled where an organisation is prosecuted or convicted for “indulging in activities aimed at conversion through inducement or force, either directly or indirectly”, or for “creating communal tension or disharmony”.
The government has meanwhile tightened the regulatory framework through amendments to the FCRA Rules, including specifying activities that organisations receiving foreign funds can undertake and introducing separate fees for different categories and states of operation.
With the Bill again expected to come before Parliament, the government’s defence of the legislation as an internal matter is likely to keep the focus on the balance between regulation of foreign funding and the concerns raised by religious and civil society groups.
Responding to questions on Friday (August 7), external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said Parliament would take the final decision on the proposed amendments.
“Legislative matters concerning India are our internal affairs on which decisions are taken by parliament,” external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said.
“I would also like to point out,” he added, “that there are several nations, including the United States, which regulate the flow of foreign funds”.
Jaiswal's remarks followed comments by Republican Congressman Riley M. Moore, representing West Virginia's second district, who had warned that the proposed legislation could affect India-US relations.
Three days earlier, Moore described the FCRA (Amendment) Bill as a “clear attack against Christians” and said its pursuit could become a “major concern in our bilateral relationship with India”.
Christianity has had a lengthy history in India but now the Bill will “permit government takeovers of churches and religious charities”, Moore wrote on X.
Christians have been in India since St. Thomas the Apostle traveled to the Malabar Coast just decades after the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.
— Rep. Riley M. Moore (@RepRileyMoore) August 4, 2026
But despite this long Christian history, India’s Parliament is considering amending Foreign Contribution Regulation Amendment…
The comments come as the Narendra Modi government is expected to seek passage of the FCRA (Amendment) Bill during the ongoing monsoon session of Parliament. The legislation was first introduced during the budget session in March but was deferred following opposition from political parties and amid the assembly elections in Kerala, where Christians constitute a significant section of the population.
The proposed amendments have drawn particular opposition from Christian organisations and other voluntary groups.
A key provision seeks to establish a ‘designated authority’ empowered to take control of foreign-funded assets belonging to an organisation whose FCRA registration has been cancelled, surrendered or not renewed. The provision would also cover assets that have only been partly financed through foreign contributions.
If such assets are permanently vested, the authority would be required to use them for public purposes and could transfer them to the government or sell them. In the case of a place of worship, the proposed law says the authority must “ensure that the religious character of such place of worship is maintained”.
The proposed powers have raised concerns among civil society and religious organisations, particularly because the government can cancel an FCRA registration on grounds of “public interest”.
Under the existing law, registrations can also be cancelled where an organisation is prosecuted or convicted for “indulging in activities aimed at conversion through inducement or force, either directly or indirectly”, or for “creating communal tension or disharmony”.
The government has meanwhile tightened the regulatory framework through amendments to the FCRA Rules, including specifying activities that organisations receiving foreign funds can undertake and introducing separate fees for different categories and states of operation.
With the Bill again expected to come before Parliament, the government’s defence of the legislation as an internal matter is likely to keep the focus on the balance between regulation of foreign funding and the concerns raised by religious and civil society groups.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment