Event Summary
On 25 September 2025, India’s Ministry of Home Affairs cancelled the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) license of SECMOL, the NGO founded by renowned Ladakh-based climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, citing alleged financial violations and activities against the “national interest.” The ministry flagged transactions including improper deposit of locally generated funds in the FCRA account, foreign funds for research on migration and sovereignty, and incomplete declaration of multiple bank accounts. The action followed a period of unrest in Ladakh, where protests for statehood turned violent, resulting in casualties, and the government blamed Wangchuk for inciting demonstrators.
Since its separation from Jammu & Kashmir in 2019, Ladakh has seen growing unrest over demands for local autonomy, tribal rights, and constitutional safeguards, led by groups like the Leh Apex Body and Kargil Democratic Alliance. In September 2025, delayed government negotiations and worsening hunger strikes led to violent protests, deaths, and a crackdown, highlighting deep tensions between regional aspirations and central government control.
The CBI and tax authorities initiated further investigations into SECMOL and related organisations, scrutinizing fund transfers from Sweden and alleged mismanagement. Wangchuk and his colleagues argued that the funds were intended strictly for educational and food sovereignty programmes and characterized the government’s interpretation as a misreading. The move is part of a broader pattern, with thousands of NGO FCRA licenses cancelled under regulatory scrutiny in recent years.
The cancellation of SECMOL’s FCRA license stands out due to its direct connection with recent violent protests in Ladakh over statehood demands, escalating the political sensitivity around the organization. The cancellation not only restricts SECMOL’s ability to receive foreign funds but also symbolizes a broader attempt to curb civil society activism perceived as aligned with dissent. Unlike some other cancellations based purely on compliance technicalities, the government framed it as national security and public order concern linked to the protests and “provocative statements,” marking a more explicit political dimension and raising serious concerns about the deteriorating enabling environment in conflict-affected regions of India.