“POPULISTS in power tend to be harsh with nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) that criticise them. Again, harassing or even suppressing civil society is not a practice exclusive to populists. But for them opposition from within civil society creates a particular moral and symbolic problem: it potentially undermines their claim to exclusive moral representation of the people. Hence it becomes crucial to argue (and supposedly ‘prove’) that civil society isn’t civil society at all, and that what can seem like popular opposition has nothing to do with the proper people.”

Jan-Werner Müller’s insightful observation in his much acclaimed work, What is Populism, is very true. The populist demagogue needs enemies in order to polarise society and capture the state. He does so by seeking to stifle the voice of civil society, which NGOs tend to represent. They are independent not only of the state and political parties, but also of big business, which tends to support the ones in power. The populist claims that he alone represents the people.

No sooner than he became prime minister in 2014, Narendra Modi began hounding every NGO that he felt posed a threat to his legitimacy — especially those who pursued his record in the Gujarat pogrom, including the highly respected civil rights activist Teesta Setalvad.

The existence of NGOs is a hallmark of participatory democracy.

The NGOs representing minorities — Mus­lims, Christians and Dalits — attract particular attention. On Feb 8, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan body set up by statute, published a re­­port on India that censures attempts at intimidation. Forced re-conversions, and attacks on shrines and individuals have increased “following the victory of India’s right-wing BJP in May 2014”. It accused the government of a witch-hunt against NGOs that challenged Modi and his administration using the controversial Foreign Contributions (Regulation) Act (FCRA).

This is part of a deliberate plan. Vijaita Singh, a correspondent of The Hindu, recently reported: “Soon after the [Modi government] came to power in 2014, a massive clean-up exercise was taken up against NGOs registered under the FCRA. In 2015, the home ministry notified new rules, which required NGOs to give an undertaking that the acceptance of foreign funds is not likely to prejudicially affect the ‘security, strategic, scientific or economic interest, public interest, freedom or fairness of election to any legislature or harmony between religious, social, racial, linguistic group, caste or communities’.”

These words give the widest possible latitude to the government to cancel registrations of NGOs. In 2015, the registration of 10,000 NGOs was cancelled. Even Green­peace International lost its registration.

Besides minorities, the Modi regime also frowns on independent research. The prestigious Institute of Chinese Studies was asked to seek approval of funds from the Ministry of External Affairs on a ‘project by project’ basis instead of a fixed grant. The threat to the institute’s autonomy is obvious.

It is impossible to exaggerate the role and significance of the NGO in a democratic society. The press is rightly acknowledged as its fourth estate. The NGO now deserves recognition as the fifth estate given that it combines the duties of research and advocacy; NGOs collect the facts, study the law and embark on informed campaigns to arouse public opinion in support of the causes that they espouse. The very existence and freedom of NGOs are testaments of the vibrancy of a democracy.

NGOs operate not only in domestic matters but also perform a role in international society. Amnesty Inter­­national, Human Rights Watch, the Inter­national Com­mission of Jurists and Green­peace are all NGOs with wide international in­fluence and have recei­ved internatio­nal recognition. In Re­­solution 1296, dated May 23, 1968, the UN Economic and So­­cial Council lays down “the Prin­ciples to be applied in the establishment of Consultative Relations” and related matters in conferring on some of them “consultative status”.

Every year in Geneva, during the annual session of the UN Human Rights Council and during meetings of the Human Rights Committee — set up under the ICCPR —NGOs lobby the council’s and committee’s members and provide them with documented information on violations of human rights.

The role of the fourth estate in the political process is well established. The press influences public opinion. The fifth estate, the NGOs, also do so — directly — in what is a fine example of participatory democracy.

For all their persecution, the NGO has come to stay, not only in the West but also in the Third World. In fact, more so here — for it is in our part of the world that the greatest need for relentless advocacy, based on thorough documentation, exists. This is a role far removed from that performed by the publicity-hungry ‘human rights activists’ whose main objective is self-promotion.

The writer is an author and a lawyer based in Mumbai.

Published in Dawn, February 25th, 2017