FOCUS-NOVEMBER 2021

FARM LAWS: ONE YEAR ON: MY WAY OR HIGHWAY- THE DISTURBING IMPASSE Out out brief candle! Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage. And then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.- Shakespeare in Macbeth. In a moment of deep introspection English playwright William Shakespeare had let out his disappointment calling life is ‘just sound and fury signifying nothing’. Come to think of it, it seem to increasingly appear sensible to interpret the hype in some of the events of modern days’ governance especially in India. Over an year ago, on 17th September 2020, Indian parliament passed 3 farm related bills, which were earlier promulgated as ordinance on 5th June 2020. On 27th September 2020, President accorded assent to these bills and gazette notification immediately followed making them as Laws. These laws are 1) The Farmers’ Produce, Trade & Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act 2020, 2) The Farmers (Empowerment & Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance & Farm Service Act 2020, 3)The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act 2020. According to the union government, these three legislations will unshackle farmers from regulation and usher them into free agricultural market economy in which they can easily double their income. It appears that the government of the day at the centre truly believes that it will indeed free the farmers from restrictions and that farmers will earn more to double their income. However, in its wisdom, the NDA government at the centre did not expose these bills for an informed debate while pushing them in the parliament. Its majority in the Loksabha carried it to the Rajya Sabha, where with the help of some friendly members the government got these 3 bills passed there as well. However there is a perception in public space that these three laws together may pave the way for corporate entry into production, marketing, storage and even pricing of agri products and farmers fear that powerful corporate entities may even acquire control of their lands. It is also feared that the present system of support price will get diluted and can become meaningless once these laws come into effect. It cannot be denied, as some think, that it conjures a vision of agriculture being held hostage by big food companies. They reckon, in this scenario, farmers are either dispossessed or cruelly exploited by giant corporations. However like most initiatives, if properly implemented these laws have great potential for good, but if abused can result in oppressive practices, is one more view. But the truth, it looks like, is somewhere in between these two different viewpoints. It is universally accepted that the purpose of law should be to give justice to those who are unjustly suffering. The purpose of law should be to provide avenues that can create opportunities of empowerment and development of those who are at the margins of socio-economic well being. This is the crucible at which these laws need to be tested. Reverting to the day these laws were passed and how things have unfolded since then, it certainly makes one wonder, how our largest democracy in the world really works. The day these bills were passed by the parliament, some ‘representative’ bodies of farmers called it as a BLACK DAY. Economist and Senior Fellow at Takshashila Institutions, Ajit Ranade writes “For laws which are described as far reaching reforms, surely some discussion should have been allowed”. He was generally commenting on the haste with which, these three enactments were rushed through the parliament without much interaction between treasury benches & opposition. According to him “Reforms by consensus are better than reforms by stealth or by brute force of majority. Especially in areas which affect half the population of the country directly. Besides agriculture is a state subject as per the constitution, so consensus building is imperative”. Has the government at the centre erred in pushing it, since they argue that the issues dealt therein have been in the public domain for long and had been discussed in parliament off & on? Therefore a time consuming debate, once again, was not necessary! But does not party politics keep every issue fresh from the opposition point of view and therefore-ipso facto- the ruling party cannot take it for granted, that the issues involved are settled, pending only an executable statute duly passed by both houses of parliament? Therefore primarily it looks like the ruling NDA did commit a faux pass in rushing through without adequate discussion or debate on the floor of the parliament. Be that as it may, the farmer’s lobby has been persistently opposing these enactments saying all three bills are anti-farmer and hence not acceptable. The protest that began in Punjab has spread to Haryana and UP. While farmers in Punjab started protesting against the ordinance in June 2020 itself, it was only after the bills became laws that farmers hit the streets, setting the stage for a long haul at sites on Delhi borders, Singhu, Tikri and Ghazipur. Farmers under United Kisan Morcha -consisting of some 40 farmer unions-are demanding repeal of all three laws which they say not only shall deprive them of the MSP fixed by the state government but also allows their land to be taken away by private players. On September 24, Punjab farmers began their 3 days rail roko agitation as a mark of protest. But on October 1, over 30 farmers unions join for an indefinite rail roko. After some 3 weeks, they stop the rail roko agitation and give a call for Delhi Chalo march to the national capital to demand repeal of laws. Meeting with Union Agricultural Minister fails and farmers proceed with Delhi Chalo plan. Clashes occur at the border to the capital with Police stopping them. Farmers camp at Singhu border. Several meeting take place but all inconclusive with every time farmer’s demanding the repeal of laws. Government offers amendments. Farmers propose four demands, 1) Modalities to repeal laws 2) A separate law to ensure minimum support price 3) No penalty for stubble burning and 4) Amendment to electricity bill 2020. Government agrees for No: 3 & No: 4, but refuses to repeal the law while hardening its stand not to repeal these laws, and asks farmers lobby to approach apex court if they want. So, do we go with what PN Vijay, an investment banker and political commentator says! He had stated “If the government needs bend on MSP, the farmers need to bend on the opening up of agriculture to one and all and allow farmers to sell directly to buyers without going through the mandi system”. On January 12, the Supreme Court stays the implementation of these three laws and proposes to form a farm committee to look into the details of laws and farmers concerns. But farmers unions refuse to meet apex court committee. Violence on 26th January at Red Fort has greatly hurt the cause of farmers. The story of Rajdeep Sardesai of India-Today news channel made it worst for the lies and fabrication of events leading to violence. The protest continues and makes life difficult for road using public in and around Delhi border. Days rolls into weeks and months. 17th September 2021 arrived signaling the completion of a year of life of protesting farmers on the road protesting Farm Bills. In the meanwhile both Union Government and farmers’ panchayat held 11 rounds of negotiation, but stalemate continued. No wonder Apex Court threw the ball into the farmers court asking “WHY PROTEST WHEN FARM LAWS ARE STAYED”. Apex Court had stayed these laws on January 12, 2021. So, where do we go from here! Probably wait for the report of Supreme Court Committee to be made public. The committee comprising Anil Ghanwat, Ashok Gulati and Pramod Joshi, all agricultural economists, had submitted their report on 31st March 2021. Bhupinder Singh as farmer’s representative, resigned before the report was submitted siting personal reasons. Its been over 6 months since these economists have submitted their report. The Supreme Court has not reacted, nor have they made the report public. This gives lot of room for speculation. The highest court of the land has suo moto acted to constitute the committee of experts. The committee has scrutinized all three enactment and held several rounds of meetings with a large number of farm organizations, regulated farm markets and food companies and their business. Reportedly it is believed to contain several recommendations on policies on agricultural economy that affects half of Indians. Farmers have reported to have claimed before the committee that these laws will hurt their livelihoods by eroding their bargaining power and leave them at the mercy of big corporations. It may be true, as Bhavdeep Kang, a senior journalist puts it, “Scope for abuse exists, where vast tracts of land are brought under contract farming by single entity for an extended period of time. Farmers become dependent on the entity, to the point that they have less room for price negotiation when fresh contract becomes due for renewal”. On the contrary, all four members of the committee have publicly endorsed the law with some amendments. And Ashok Gulati, a key figure in the committee has been arguing for decades for a market-led, enterprise driven agro economy, which has been a gripe among farmer unions. Under the circumstances, one of the members of the committee, Anil Ghanwat, has gone public with his views. “More than 6 months have passed. It is painful to see farmers still protesting, being a representative of farmers myself. The court has so far not taken any interest in the report. It should be made public”. Thus by hindsight, it can be said that there must be details which the apex court wants to go into, with all seriousness, so also the attitude of all stake holders including the Union Government, is not helping to resolve the differences. Thus an entirely avoidable impasse has sadly continued. Here the question is what is really sustaining the continuation of protest, which needs a huge amount of logistics with the concomitant cost of food, accommodation and arrangement for ablution for such a huge crowd. As a section of society pointing out, is it the money power of these middle men, who earn hundreds of crores of rupees for doing practically nothing, but still have the helpless farmers under their spell? How true is the allegation that this prolonged protest represents only the interest of the big farmers and the entrenched lobbies of middlemen in Punjab & Haryana! Of course the grapevine has it that the Union Government wants to break this monopoly of these middle men and other vested interest groups. But these middle men and their co-protesters are resisting to be cowed down. And the impasse continues. Coming to the repeal of these three legislations, prima facie, it may not be right for the parliament to withdraw it or to repeal it. Any withdrawal under pressure can be seen as a challenge to the very foundation of parliament as a legislative body, which can have cascading effect. So the amendments according to the acceptable demands can be the only solution. That brings the apex court into the unsettled picture. The Supreme Court is walking on a thin edge – is it correct for it to play the role of a mediator while its remit is to adjudicate within the framework of the constitution and laws? Hope all three, the union government, the farmer unions and the highest adjudicator of the land play their responsible role to come up with some solution to this impasse, in the interest of the country and the stake holders by keeping the paramountcy of national interest above all considerations.