Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice Khanwilkar is hearing plea(s) challenging the Ministry of Home Affair’s notification that extends the date for compliance of specific provisions of the Foreign Contribution Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2020.
Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta is arguing
Right to receive foreign contributions is not a Fundamental Right: SG Tushar Mehta
SG: Foreign contributions, if unregulated, can cause devastating consequences to the sovereignty of the nation…Please have my affidavit ...common preliminary affidavit for Petitioner No. 1 and 2… As a nation, we have been conscious of foreign contributions.
SG: The regulation is with an object and has been clear from the introduction of the legislation. [Referred to the Affidavit - predecessor Act referred to the statement of object]
Came to be amended in 1985, statement of objects of the ordinance pg 20.
Earlier if China contributed to an NGO then it was regulated.
Experience showed that various govt. in other countries infusing funds in India, the definition was enlarged to trace the utilization of foreign contribution down the line. How it is being used has to be traced.
SG: In one line I can say they were made to strengthen the original object.
A bill came on 2006 pg 21.
Bench - you are referring to the ordinance?
Mehta: Kindly see page 21, Statement of object of the bill, my mistake. It matured into an amending act. Now para 33 [ Reads on]
SG: The country has responded. Right from 76 this has happened. Now see the existing Act. I am reading the existing Act of 2010 [para 35 pg 23]. This was 2010, the policy has remained the same de hors. This is not that something new has been introduced in 2020.
Bench: Expression used in sovereignty. Much wider than security.
SG: The provisions under challenge. Let me take you to the statement of object of amendment. They travel beyond the scope and object of the original Act.
Bench - In writ only some provisions are challenged. So you say that they have to be within the scope of the Act.
Mehta - Whether in furtherance of the scope of Act or totally alien. Refer to pg 25 - what amounted to the amended. [it is submitted that thereunder ….efficiently…]. We have no means to examine on our own until they produce it.
Bench - Cancel of recipient organization - year-wise breakup available.
Mehta - Reads on. Then these amendments came into force. See 1st section. We have some data. Shall place in proper format...I have given a comparative chart of the provision and how it is amended at pg 4 to 9. Please come to first Section 11 which is not challenged.
