New Delhi: The center on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that the right to accept foreign contributions is not fundamental rights and if not regulated, it can lead to “awesome consequences”.
Defending the amendments made in ACT’s foreign contribution (Regulation), 2010, the government told the bench headed by justice a M Khanwilkar that the object of change was to streamline the compliance mechanism and increased transparency and accountability.
“There is no doubt that the right to accept foreign contributions is not a fundamental rights and must be regulated,” said attorney Tushar Mehta to the bench, which also consisted of Judge Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar.
Mehta told the bench, which has asked for his assessment to a collection of applications including those who have caused problems regarding the Regulatory Law on foreign contributions (amendments), 2020, that there has been input input from the intelligence agency (IB), which some foreign contributions are accepted to fund Naxals training.
“Overseas contributions, if not regulated, can lead to awesome consequences for the sovereignty of the nation.
We need to regulate foreign contributions,” the law official said.
He said India as a nation was always very aware of foreign contributions and consistent policies were to maintain the possibility of misuse of these funds.
Mehta said that every foreign contribution would only be accepted in the account designated as a FCRA account to be opened at the Main Branch of the Bank of Nate India (SBI) in New Delhi.
He said the bank was under the obligation to tell the government that certain NGOs, had a FCRA account, had received so many contributions from foreign countries.
He also referred to a written statement, submitted in the top field by the center in this matter, which said that based on the procedure of more than 19,000 accounts was opened in SBI, the main branch of New Delhi.
During hearing, the bench asked Mehta about problems related to foreign contributions handled by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).
He said since the beginning of this law, MHA deals with these problems because there may be possible contributions that come from foreign countries or offshore organizations that are misused with the aim of disrupting the nation’s internal security.
The bench observed that the government must consider all the possibilities while dealing with regulatory steps on this issue.
While ordering judgment, The Apex Court said that the submission was written by the center and the applicant was submitted within a week.
In a written statement submitted in court before, the center said there were no fundamental rights to receive “uncontrolled foreign contributions” without any regulations.
The government has said that the action is the “legislation of sovereignty and integrity” where the main goal is to ensure that foreign money does not dominate public life and political and social discourse in India.
“It becomes more important considering the fact that some foreign powers and foreign and non-state actors continue to take interference activities in the country’s internal government with hidden designs.
Transfer restrictions aim to prevent and fight motive actions such as that,” he said .
This affidavit also said that the object of action was to regulate the acceptance and utilization of foreign contributions or foreign hospitions by individuals or associations or certain companies and also to prohibit the acceptance of the contribution to each activity that “caused national interests”.
.
The Apex Court heard three separate petitions that have caused problems regarding the Regulatory Law on foreign contributions (amendments), 2020.
While two of these petitions have challenged certain amendments carried out in action, other requests have been looking for directions for the government to give further extensions to NGOs to comply with certain legal provisions.