BJP MP Sujeet Kumar writes to US Congressman Riley Moore, rejects claims FCRA Bill enables government takeover of churches
New Delhi, August 10
BJP Rajya Sabha MP Sujeet Kumar has written to US Congressman Riley Moore over his statements on the proposed Foreign Contribution Amendment Bill, 2026, rejecting claims that the legislation would allow the government to take over churches and terming such assertions an "exaggerated and misguided version" of the proposed law.
Kumar said concerns over religious liberty were serious, but argued that Moore's interpretation of the legislation did not reflect its actual provisions.
"I carefully read your public statements on the proposed FCRA Bill, 2026. Concern for religious liberty is a serious thing, and I do not doubt that yours is sincerely held. As a Member of Parliament (MP) from India, I deem it my duty to address the concerns and apprehensions that you have highlighted in your statements, which, in my view, are an exaggerated and misguided version of the proposed bill," Kumar wrote.
"This kind of misconceived statement by a sitting Congressman serves neither of our countries, least of all the Indian Christians in whose name you claim to have raised the concerns," he added.
Kumar clarified that the Bill contains no provision permitting the government to take over churches. He said the legislation deals with foreign contributions and assets created from such contributions when an organisation's FCRA registration is cancelled, surrendered or otherwise ceases.
The proposed legislation creates a Designated Authority to oversee, manage and dispose of such assets. The framework applies irrespective of whether an organisation is a temple trust, madrasa, mission hospital, university, secular development agency or wildlife foundation.
Kumar further pointed out that the Bill specifically provides safeguards for places of worship. Where vested assets include a place of worship, the Designated Authority is required to ensure that its religious character is maintained.
"That safeguard was written in so that a church remains a church, a temple remains a temple and a mosque remains a mosque," Kumar said.
He also said the vesting of assets is provisional and can be reversed if an organisation obtains a fresh certificate or its registration is renewed or restored, in which case the assets and unutilised foreign contribution are returned.
On the status of Christianity in India, Kumar said the faith had deep historical roots in the country and pointed to constitutional protections guaranteeing freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practise and propagate religion. He also highlighted the rights of religious minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.
Kumar, however, acknowledged that the Bill could be subjected to criticism within India, saying opposition parties, the media, civil society and citizens had a legitimate right to scrutinise the legislation and offer constructive criticism.
"What I cannot accept is the leap from those concerns to the phrase 'a clear attack against Christians', as it transforms reasoned criticism into a biased and politically motivated diatribe," he wrote.
Moore, a Republican Congressman from West Virginia, had earlier raised concerns over the proposed amendments, claiming they could enable government control over churches and religious charities. He described the measure as a "clear attack against Christians" and warned that its passage could become a major concern in India-US relations.
The proposed FCRA amendments are aimed at establishing a framework for assets and foreign contributions when an organisation's FCRA registration ceases. The Bill also proposes reducing the maximum imprisonment for certain violations from five years to one year.
Kumar invited Moore to visit India and offered to facilitate meetings with Christian institutional leaders so that he could hear their views directly.
"Should you visit India, I would be happy to arrange meeting with Christian institutional leaders in India, so that you may hear their assessment directly rather than through intermediaries," Kumar wrote.
— ANI
Reader Comments
As an American following this story, I appreciate the MP's invitation for Congressman Moore to visit India and talk directly with Christian leaders there. That's a much better approach than making assumptions from thousands of miles away. I hope he takes up the offer.
The opposition should also note that the MP himself acknowledged that they have a legitimate right to scrutinize the bill. That's the beauty of our parliamentary system - debate and discussion are encouraged. But labeling everything as an "attack" is simply not fair. Let's have a proper discussion based on facts, not fear-mongering.
The bill seems reasonable - if an organization's FCRA registration is cancelled, the government needs a mechanism to handle the assets. And the safeguard about maintaining the religious character of places of worship is a good addition. We should trust our institutions and the constitutional protections for all religions. Jai Hind!
I understand the concerns about foreign interference in religious organizations, but transparency is key here. The Indian government should publish the full text of the bill in multiple languages so that all citizens and international observers can clearly see what's being proposed. Clear communication would prevent such misunderstandings.
I appreciate that the MP has clearly stated that all organizations - whether temple trusts, madrasas, or churches - will be treated under the same framework. That's secularism in action. The US Congressman should understand that India's laws apply equally to all, and that's something to be proud of, not attacked.
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.