Lok Sabha refers FCRA amendment bill to joint parliamentary committee, adjourns for the day

PTI, August 12, 2026, New Delhi : Amid a noisy stand-off between treasury and opposition benches, Lok Sabha on Wednesday referred the controversial FCRA amendment bill to a joint parliamentary committee and passed a bill to amend laws on mines and mineral development without any debate, before adjourning for the day on the penultimate day of the Monsoon Session.

At the start of the day, Speaker Om Birla told protesting Opposition members that even if their approach and thoughts differ from the ruling front, the country wants the House to function.

He also appealed to the Opposition to allow the House to function, stressing that it was not right for them to tarnish the image of the House by holding protests and shouting slogans.

After the Lok Sabha proceedings resumed at 2 pm, the government proposed to move the FCRA amendment bill to a joint parliamentary panel and the motion was passed by the House.

The Lok Sabha on Wednesday passed a motion to refer the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, to a 31-member joint committee of Parliament (JPC) for further scrutiny, amid strong Opposition protests and demands for its withdrawal.

The motion, moved by Minister of State for Home Nityanand Rai amid sloganeering by Opposition MPs demanding the presence of Home Minister Amit Shah in the House, provides for a committee, comprising 21 members from the Lok Sabha and 10 from the Rajya Sabha.

The members from the Lok Sabha will be nominated by Speaker Om Birla, while those from the Rajya Sabha will be nominated by Chairman C P Radhakrishnan.

The committee has been asked to submit its report to the Lok Sabha by the last day of the first week of the Winter Session of Parliament in 2026.

Before the motion was passed, Congress MP KC Venugopal said the Opposition had only just received information about sending the bill to a joint committee and alleged that the legislation was aimed at minorities and NGOs.

"This is clearly for targeting minorities and NGOs. We demand that the Bill be withdrawn," Venugopal said.

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju rejected the charge, saying the Congress and other Opposition parties had themselves been demanding that the bill be sent to a House committee.

"If they have any reservations about the Bill, they can speak in the JPC. This is not targeted at any minority community," Rijiju said.

BJP MP Jagdambika Pal, who was in the chair, said the government had agreed to the demand and therefore there would be a "threadbare discussion" in the joint parliamentary committee.

Samajwadi Party MP Akhilesh Yadav said the entire Opposition is against the FCRA Bill and took a dig at Shah for not being present in the House.

Referring to Rijiju's assertion that the proposed legislation was not against minorities, Akhilesh said:

"He should clarify which Bill they brought till date was not against minorities."

DMK MP T R Baalu also demanded that the Bill be withdrawn.

Responding to the Opposition's allegations, Rijiju said he was making the assertion with "responsibility" and challenged Yadav to point out any provision in the bill that was against minorities.

"I challenge Akhilesh ji to show one provision which is against minorities. Lies are being spread in the country. This country is not a banana republic. There should be rules," Rijiju said.

The Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on March 25 and proposes tighter government oversight over non-governmental organisations and foreign funding in the country.

It seeks to create a designated authority to manage and dispose of assets if an organisation loses its FCRA licence.

Opposition parties have alleged that certain provisions of the Bill could affect legitimate foreign funding for Christian NGOs and minority-run social welfare and educational institutions.

The government has maintained that the proposed legislation is not religion-specific and is aimed at regulating foreign contributions.

The Bill had drawn criticism from some US lawmakers, who expressed concerns over its potential impact on Christian organisations and civil society groups.

India had rejected the criticism, describing the proposed changes as an internal legislative matter.