Yet another foreign-funded NGO finds itself in trouble. Lawyers' Collective, an NGO headed by a former Additional Solicitor General in the UPA Government, Indira Jaising was last week barred from receiving foreign funds for six months following investigations which revealed a gross abuse of funds for extraneous purposes.
Also, its registration under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act was cancelled. Predictably, the response of Jaising was that the action against LC was mala-fide and an attempt to crush dissent. The left-liberal sections saw a pattern in the temporary ban on the LC under the FCRA, linking the ban to the larger campaign by the government against marginalized and oppressed sections, such as students, activists, academics, etc.
Instead of answering specific charges about the misuse of foreign funds and of pursuing political objectives, there was a clear effort to obfuscate the issue by blaming the government for wanting to neutralize all its critics. Such a response would have carried conviction neither had LC categorically stated that it had not strayed from its listed objectives nor had it misappropriated funds.
If the Union Home Ministry after a thoroughgoing investigation came to the conclusion that Jaising wrongly used funds for travelling abroad or foreign funds were used for purely political purposes, blaming the action against the LC on the government's alleged bias against left-liberal NGOs would convince no one. Yes, the government could have handled the case against Greenpeace, another foreign-funded NGO, more tactfully.
But its lack of public relations savvy did not negate the fact that it too was in violation of the FCRA. The problem with foreign-funded NGOs is that they have become a law unto themselves, claiming a monopoly over superior wisdom and truth and having pretentions of saving the ignorant and poor Indians from themselves. Such arrogance, fuelled, no doubt, by a free flow of foreign funds, looks askance at anyone who questions the conduct of the NGO entrepreneurs.
Professional defenders of civil liberties seem to believe that the society owes them a debt of gratitude. The truth is that they owe the society a lot for finding them well-paid vocations. Flow of foreign funds into various NGOs often raises valid questions about the legitimacy of donors' intentions and about the recipients' sincerity. It is no use complaining that the Government has acted against Greenpeace or against Teesta Setalvad's NGO.
Pursuing cases related to the 2002 Gujarat riots was a legitimate objective. Setalvad would have been worthy of praise had she refrained from misusing the funds received in her NGO. But she sullied her copybook by allegedly misappropriating funds for her own and her family members' personal use and on luxury items. Abuse of charity is a crime against the very society she claims to be defending against the communal marauders.
Jaising too would like one to believe that her NGO has been barred because she was out to pin down Amit Shah in the fake encounter death of Sohrabuddin and others. Inventing such delusory linkages in order to excuse one's own breach of FCRA does not show the former law officer of the UPA Government in good light. Lobbying MPs and misspending foreign funds for the purpose was a clear violation of the objectives for which these were allowed.
Also, LC could not justify payments for renta-crowd demonstrations. Jaising and her husband, Anand Grover, helped themselves to handsome fees from the LC account for professional work undertaken to further the LC's objectives. In other words, the two were hired hands, seemingly doing social work for the greater good of the people. Crying foul when caught with their hands in the till is common to all NGOwallas. From Setalvad to Jaising, everyone found misusing funds has sought to blame the Modi Government's illiberal agenda for their troubles.
While they claim to be fighting for the people, for their democratic rights and entitlements, Modi, it seems, was out to put out of business all social activists, civil libertywallas by seeking to push India into a one party authoritarian rule. Such self-serving arguments ill-serve those who fatten themselves on foreign donations and push what are essentially suspect foreign agendas.
