The writing on the wall is clear. The government is using the law to implement its blocks on anything which might question its approach
News just in tells us that the FEJI has closed down. Well, you might wonder, who or what is the FEJI?
FEJI, or the Forum for Environmental Journalists in India, has been described as a trust and an association of journalists who work on environmental and development issues.
When it was operating, that is, till early April 2025, it provided training, conducted seminars, offered fellowships, and produced research and guidelines for environmental journalists. FEJI also described itself as having engaged with politicians and administrators and offered development journalism modules for higher education.
Then, what went wrong? The government pulled the plug on it. Keya Acharya, the Bengaluru-based journalist heading the group for some time now, wrote: “By now, most of you know that FEJI’s closure has been in the works since April 1st, 2024. But now that we have finally managed to surrender FEJI’s PAN card and 80G status, I can now officially write that FEJI has closed down.”
FEJI was begun by the late veteran journalist Darryl D’Monte, of Bombay. Darryl has been called an inspiring editor, a veteran journalist (which he undoubtedly was), and even a mentor to a generation of journalists. In the 1990s, though we barely knew each other, this East Indian journalist was more than encouraging during our own forays into writing about the environment.
The FEJI was launched in Mumbai in 1988 at the urging of UNESCAP, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. This UN regional commission promotes economic and social development in the Asia-Pacific region. But the Mumbai-based network was closed down in 2010–11, due to Darryl’s illness. Darryl then asked Keya to re-open a journalists’ network in whatever way possible.
Later, it operated out of Bangalore. Gopi Warrier, the Managing Editor of Mongabay India, and Atul Deulgaonkar, ran it as Trustees, on an unpaid basis, since 2012. FEJI takes credit for having “conducted seminars, workshops, fellowships and study tours”. It has had collaborations with institutions like ATREE (Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment), IIT-Mumbai, etc., and international institutions like UNIC, UN Women, UNICEF and others. FEJI Fellows won journalism awards during their fellowships. It collaborated with the Mumbai Press Club on two occasions, bringing in international figures for talks.
It supported fishing community radio with weather forecasts. On concluding, it donated its remaining monies, prior to shutting its bank accounts, to Citizen Matters, based in Bangalore. Citizen Matters describes itself as “a civic media platform with insightful reporting on critical urban issues, ideas and solutions for cities across India.” FEJI’s donors have been the UN, Nilekani Philanthropies and Tata Trusts.
But that’s not all. Another Bengaluru-based organisation, the Centre for Internet and Society [cis-india.org], also announced the “unfortunate news” that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA-India) had rejected its FCRA renewal application. It announced: “As a result of this decision, we are unable to access our foreign funds and have to halt all programmatic activities supported by these funds immediately.”
Another case of the plug being pulled!
The CIS has been active in researching issues related to the Internet in India. It promoted the ‘open knowledge movement’, and its contributions can be found through a quick online search.
The point here is something else though. In today’s day and age, we all know that the government of the day, in New Delhi, is rather suspicious about NGOs (especially those with activist inclinations). Earlier governments have been too, but maybe not so intensely.
Given this, it becomes rather easy for the authorities to disrupt the functioning of any NGO, by just blocking its foreign funding and bank operations. This is done mainly through the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) and its amendments.
Interestingly, the government is very liberal (except in some sectors) to foreign funding for businesses and multinationals. FDI (foreign direct investment) is encouraged, except where prior permission is required in defence, media, telecom, insurance and banking.
In the case of religious organisations, foreign funding to Christian groups, Islamic charities and some Buddhist institutions is highly scrutinised under the FCRA. Hindu religious trusts (especially those aligned with the State or mainstream culture) are usually treated with more leniency. Temples like Tirupati, Shirdi receive significant foreign donations (they operate under state-appointed boards).
Social clubs (Lions, Jaycees, Rotary, etc.) face a generally permissive approach. If funding goes for health camps or disaster relief, generally no questions are asked. Hindutva-aligned groups are reported to receive foreign donations via registered charities abroad. Indian diaspora support is welcome for business and cultural activities, but restricted for ‘activism’. So, there is a tight leash on NGOs, dissenting voices and some religious groups.
There have been hints of the serious actions hitting NGOs (with any dissent potential). But the seriousness and scale of the entire impact are yet to be adequately understood.
The writing on the wall is clear. The government is using the law to implement its blocks on anything which might question its approach. However remotely. In today’s day and age, even environmental journalism can be seen as a threat.
In such a context, it is time to build up greater local philanthropy, to support the right to ask questions and challenge. But, beyond that, depending on funding to do this can also create its own limitations.
For some time now, it has been known that foreign funding can lead to dependencies, and hinder the creation of capacity-building. Just because money can be easily got, an unhealthy dependency is created on it. Would it not be better to find shoestring ways of operation, where genuine volunteering and crowdsourcing can create the space needed to build the alternate space?
Time to give some serious thought to such questions. It would only make volunteering stronger and more meaningful, and less easy to block through some sinister move from officialdom.
