The government – and the Supreme Court case vis-à-vis foreign funds of NBA – has raised an important issue. What are the implications of foreign funds and how does the Indian State see this?

In the past, I have written extensive regarding funding of non-profit organizations – the virtual swamp of processes and the implications of foreign funds that can change the personality of organizations, the direction of development, their accountability , etc. I continue to stand by these notes – that foreign funds can change the way NGOs operate, especially given that they have no accountability to the people they work with in ways that can be legally or organizationally enforced. (The accountability, when it exists, is only based on good intentions.)

Within this context, the issue of foreign funds to Narmada Bachao Andolan needs must be analyzed. For one, this is not to argue in any fashion that NBA has received foreign funds. Not having worked directly with NBA, I can hardly make that claim.

Having followed NBA for about 10 years now, I can definitely argue – and surely various agencies of the government will certainly concede with respect – that neither NBA nor Medha Patkar or weak willed people. Programs they run are thought out and are run by NBA – neither the government nor any other external agency (WB, etc) has had much success bending their programs to these external interests. Clearly, it is quite unlikely that any foreign influence is running NBA programs.

Perhaps all the courts are concerned is that funds are not being provided to an organization that does not have necessary permits vis-à-vis the Foreign Currency Regulations Act. In that case, it can hardly admit evidence that a collaborator who has not been a part of NBA may have received funds from a foreign funding agency.

I am hardly competent to make any case for NBA; NBA and its counsel are well capable and intend to do the same themselves. However, I would like to present a comment on the State’s willingness to question foreign funds.

I continue to argue that foreign funds affect the character of NGOs and the nature of developmental activities. However, NGOs must realize that and make appropriate choices. In fact, the government is hardly in a position to make that choice without seriously contradicting its policies.

In the 70s and 80s when the state was running an anti-foreign fund operation, when companies were not allowed to operate with foreign funds and foreign investment in India was limited with a constant suspicion that all foreign investment was a ploy of CIA or some foreign agency to undermine India, this attitude of the government at least seemed consistent.

Today, when every agency of the government is falling over itself to invite foreign funds, when the PM and every CM go on foreign trips to encourage investment, even in the social sector, when charitable agencies are going out looking for funds, it seems quite anachronistic to ask questions vis-à-vis foreign funds off a select set of organizations that raise questions that are inconvenient to the government.

On what basis is the government questioning NBA? Of course, one assumes that this is not a strategy to distract a group from its efforts at highlighting the complete fraud the government at the center and state have implemented under the guise of rehabilitation. And once it has enforced the foreign funding restriction, will it then enforce the same restrictions on other agencies – other social sector agencies, other government agencies and in the corporate sector?

Policies based on convenience are not the basis of justice – they are of hegemony. And surely, the Supreme Court should know this.

- Sanat Mohanty

Related Articles:
NBA Responds to Allegations of Foreign Funds
The Ridiculousness of Self Auditing Industries
Thinking about Bhopal in the Era of Globalization
Adivasis in Hoshangabad Just Keep Getting Displaced