New Delhi: The Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on Thursday cancelled the FCRA license of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk’s NGO following violence in Leh where four people were killed in police firing.
The government said that Wangchuk, who had been on a hunger strike demanding statehood for Ladakh for more than a month, incited violence by his ‘provocative statements’, The Indian Express reported.
After his call for protest demanding statehood turned violent, Wangchuk called off his fast Wednesday.
The CBI had started an inquiry two months ago into Wangchuk’s NGO, Students Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh, over its alleged violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act.
Alongside accusing Wangchuk of inciting mobs with ‘provocative statements’, the government on Wednesday said that ‘certain politically motivated individuals were not happy with the progress’ happening in the talks between the government and Ladakh groups, adding that they ‘have been trying to sabotage the dialogue process’.
MHA Deputy Secretary Rajesh Kumar T signed a government order, cancelling the NGO’s FCRA registration certificate, said: ‘Considering the facts and position narrated by the organisation, the Competent Authority, hereby, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 14(1) of the Act, cancels with immediate effect the FCRA Certificate of Registration granted to the association – Students Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh’.
The order reportedly said that the NGO was given a show cause notice on August 20 asking why its FCRA registration certificate should not be cancelled.
The order said several violations were found after examining the outfit’s reply on September 20 .
MHA said that Wangchuk deposited Rs 3.5 lakh in NGO’s FCRA account in violation of Section 17 of the Act during the financial year 2021-22.
The NGO reportedly replied that Rs 3,35,000 deposited in the FCRA account was the sale proceeds of an old bus, which it procured from FCRA funds.
Calling the reply ‘untenable’ the MHA said: ‘It seems that the amount has been received in cash in violation of section 17 of the Act which is not properly disclosed by the association in its reply’.