New Delhi, Sep 25: The Union Home Ministry announced the cancellation of the FCRA licence for the Students’ Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh (SECMOL), founded by renowned climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, effective immediately. This decision stems from alleged discrepancies in the organisation’s financial accounts.
The ministry’s order highlights a controversial fund transfer from Sweden, which officials found conflicting with national interests. SECMOL initially received approval to accept foreign contributions for cultural and educational programmes.
In addition to SECMOL, Wangchuk also established the Himalayan Institute of Alternatives Ladakh (HIAL), currently under a CBI inquiry concerning potential violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA).
Previously, the home ministry issued a show-cause notice to SECMOL requesting clarification on several irregularities. Reports indicate that Wangchuk deposited Rs 3.5 lakh into SECMOL’s FCRA account during the financial year 2021-22, a move considered illegal under Section 17 of the FCRA.
SECMOL claimed that this amount derived from the sale of an old bus purchased with FCRA funds, stating that it should be deposited into the FCRA account according to guidelines. However, the ministry contended that the funds were received in cash, a fact that SECMOL did not disclose adequately in its response.
The ministry also flagged a foreign contribution of approximately Rs 4.93 lakh from Sweden aimed at creating awareness among youth on critical issues like climate change, food security, and migration. Officials criticized the use of these funds for educational purposes tied to national sovereignty.
In its order, the ministry cited multiple discrepancies and invoked Section 14 of the FCRA to revoke SECMOL’s licence promptly. This action has stirred debate about the role of foreign funding in educational initiatives and indigenous rights.
Reacting to the cancellation, Sonam Wangchuk expressed grave concerns about his safety and legal standing. He accused the government of constructing a case to incarcerate him. Wangchuk, who advocates for statehood and constitutional protections for Ladakh, stated, “I see they are building up a case to bring me under the Public Safety Act and throw me in jail for two years.”
Wangchuk expressed his readiness to defend his actions, warning the government that imprisoning him may provoke more substantial resistance. He remarked, “Sonam Wangchuk in jail may cause them more problems than free Sonam Wangchuk.” The activist emphasized his commitment to the welfare of Ladakh, highlighting the ongoing struggle for its political rights amidst allegations of mismanagement.
This recent development has raised broader questions about the implications of cancelling organisations’ FCRA licences and the activism movement’s sustainability in India. As this story continues to unfold, both supporters and critics of Wangchuk will undoubtedly watch closely to see how this case develops.
