New Delhi : The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, has begun formal consultations with various religious and social organizations. Sanjay Jaiswal, the BJP MP chairing the committee, stated on Tuesday that the proposed legislation contains provisions fundamentally similar to those established under the 2010 Act introduced by the UPA government.
Jaiswal’s remarks followed a committee session where members heard testimony from representatives of several groups, including the Syro Malabar Church, Ramakrishna Math, and ISKCON. The committee is currently reviewing the bill, which has faced significant pushback from opposition parties and various civil society sections since its introduction in the Lok Sabha on March 25.
A central point of Jaiswal’s defense focused on the mechanisms for handling irregularities in foreign funding. He noted that the 2010 legislation granted the home secretary and state principal secretaries the authority to confiscate the properties of NGOs found in violation of FCRA regulations. According to Jaiswal, the new bill seeks to transfer these oversight powers to a designated authority, rather than introducing an entirely new concept of asset seizure.
The JPC, which received the bill for review on August 12 following sustained pressure from the opposition, is now tasked with deliberating on the feedback provided by stakeholders. Jaiswal emphasized that the committee intends to review all testimony carefully before reaching a collective decision on the proposed amendments.
The legislative process has been marked by sharp disagreement between the government and opposition benches. Critics of the bill have alleged that the proposed changes are designed to disproportionately impact minority-run social welfare and educational institutions by restricting their access to legitimate foreign funding. These opponents have characterized the bill as a targeted measure that could undermine the operations of various non-governmental organizations.
In response, the government has consistently rejected claims of religious bias. Union Minister of State for Home Nityanand Rai has maintained that the legislation is not religion-specific and is intended solely to ensure the transparent and proper utilization of international funds. During the bill’s introduction, Rai countered allegations that the law was dangerous, asserting instead that the regulations are intended to curb activities such as forced religious conversions. The committee is expected to continue its deliberations as it weighs these conflicting viewpoints against the proposed regulatory framework.
