08 August,2026 01:12 PM IST | New Delhi | mid-day online correspondent
Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Anand Dubey. Pic/X
Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Anand Dubey on Friday called for a "constructive discussion" on the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) Bill, saying the opposition's demand for transparency and parliamentary debate should not be interpreted as hostility towards the government.
Dubey said the opposition wanted the draft legislation to be made available for discussion and maintained that raising questions about the proposed changes was part of the democratic process.
Speaking to ANI, Dubey said, "The opposition wants the draft of the FCRA law to be presented and discussed. There should be a constructive discussion. We are not enemies of the government."
His remarks came amid a wider debate over the proposed amendments to the FCRA and concerns raised by some lawmakers in the United States about their possible implications for religious and charitable organisations in India.
Dubey also referred to comments made by US lawmaker Riley Moore, who had raised objections to the proposed changes to India's FCRA. Moore claimed that the provisions could enable government control over churches and philanthropic institutions and could affect bilateral ties between India and the United States.
Responding to the issue, Dubey noted that the Ministry of External Affairs had already rejected the concerns raised in the US Parliament.
"The Ministry of External Affairs has already dismissed the matter concerning the US Parliament," Dubey said.
Earlier, Moore, a Republican Congressman from West Virginia, had raised his concerns in a social media post. He alleged that the proposed amendments could allow government takeovers of churches and religious charities and described the move as a concern for Christians.
"But despite this long Christian history, India's Parliament is considering amending the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act to permit government takeovers of churches and religious charities. This is a clear attack against Christians. If this bill proceeds in this way, it would be a point of major concern in our bilateral relationship with India," Moore said.
The comments triggered a response from the Ministry of External Affairs, which maintained that decisions relating to Indian legislation fall within the country's domestic constitutional and parliamentary framework.
Addressing a bi-weekly media briefing on Friday, MEA Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said legislative matters concerning India are decided by Parliament. He also pointed out that several countries, including the United States, have regulations governing foreign funds and financing.
"Regarding the issue you are referring to, we have seen it, and several comments have been made on it. As far as legislative matters are concerned, and particularly matters relating to India's own legislation, this is an internal matter for us, on which our Parliament takes the decision. I would also like to tell you that there are several countries in the world, including the United States, that regulate foreign funds and foreign financing," Jaiswal said.
The government has maintained that the proposed changes are part of the regulatory framework governing foreign contributions and the assets associated with such funds.
The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, proposes the creation of a Designated Authority to oversee foreign contributions and assets acquired using such funds in cases where an entity's FCRA registration has been cancelled, surrendered or has lapsed.
The proposed legislation provides for specific action concerning assets held by organisations whose FCRA registration is no longer valid. The provisions are aimed at determining how such assets would be managed following the cancellation, surrender or lapse of registration.
The Bill also contains a specific provision concerning places of worship.
Under the proposed legislation, if the assets covered by the provisions include a place of worship, the Designated Authority would be required to ensure that its religious character remains intact.
The proposed amendment also seeks to reduce the maximum imprisonment prescribed for certain statutory violations. The maximum penalty would be reduced from five years' imprisonment to one year.
The proposed changes have led to political discussion over the scope of government powers under the FCRA and the safeguards that would apply to religious, charitable and other organisations receiving foreign contributions.
Dubey's comments focused on the opposition's demand that the draft legislation be discussed in detail, while the government's position, as conveyed by the MEA, has been that regulation of foreign funding is a matter for Parliament and that similar regulatory mechanisms exist in several countries.
The debate over the FCRA Bill is expected to continue as political parties examine its proposed provisions and their implications for organisations receiving foreign contributions.
(With inputs from ANI)
