The Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended the implementation of 3 controversial farm laws that have brought on a huge and prolonged protest by farmers, largely from Punjab and Haryana, at the Delhi’s borders, by way of an ‘extraordinary order’, and set up a 4-member committee to break the deadlock in between the government and farmers, and facilitate resolution of the relevant problems.
“We are also of the view that a stay of implementation of all the three farm laws for the present, may assuage the hurt feelings of the farmers and encourage them to come to the negotiating table with confidence and good faith….The (three laws) shall be stayed until further notice,” a Bench led by Chief Justice SA Bobde stated, even though hoping that the choice will be taken in the ‘right spirit’ and observed as “an attempt to arrive at a fair, equitable and just solution to the problems”.
The court also ordered that the minimum help value technique, which is in existence just before the enactment of the farm laws, shall be maintained till additional orders (the government has repeatedly stated that the MSP technique will not be undermined). In addition, the court stated the farmers’ land holdings shall be protected. “No farmer shall be dispossessed or deprived of his title as a result of any action taken under the Farm Laws,” the court stated in the order.
“Be that as it may, the negotiations between the farmers’ bodies and the government have not yielded any result so far. Therefore, we are of the view that the constitution of a committee of experts in the field of agriculture to negotiate between the farmers’ bodies and the government of India may create a congenial atmosphere and improve the trust and confidence of the farmers,” the apex court stated.
The 4-member committee, comprising Bhupinder Singh Mann, national president, Bhartiya Kisan Union and All India Kisan Coordination Committee Dr Parmod Kumar Joshi, agricultural economist, director for South Asia, International Food Policy Research Institute Ashok Gulati, agricultural economist and former chairman, Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices and Anil Ghanwat, president, Shetkari Sanghatana, will “hear the grievances of the farmers on the farm laws and also the views of the government to make recommendations”.
The representatives of all the farmers’ bodies, irrespective of whether they are holding a protest or not and irrespective of whether they help or oppose the laws shall participate in the deliberations of the committee and place forth their view points, the order stated. The committee has also been directed to submit its report along with its suggestions inside two months from the date of its initial sitting, which will be held inside ten days.
The bench noted solicitor basic Tushar Mehta’s submissions that there have been inherent safeguards, in-constructed in the Farm Laws, for the protection of the land of the farmers and that it will be ensured that no farmer will drop his land. Mehta throughout the hearing had told the SC that farmers have fallen prey to the “basic misapprehension” that the laws would lead to loss of agricultural land. “The law is only for voluntary contract farming of crops. Agricultural land will remain immune,” he had reiterated.
However, the prime court rejected lawyer basic KK Venugopal’s submissions that no a single objecting to the farm laws have pointed out any single provision which is detrimental to the farmers and that the laws enacted by Parliament can’t be stayed by this court, in particular when there is a presumption in favour of the constitutionality of legislation. “… this court cannot be said to be completely powerless to grant stay of any executive action under a statutory enactment,” the CJI-led Bench stated in its order.
A group of lawyers representing the agitating farmers, who on Monday contested the AG’s view that there is a threat of disruption of Republic Day celebrations due to the ongoing protest, have been absent in the court on Tuesday.
Both Bhartiya Kisan Sangh senior V Chitambaresh and Consortium of Indian Farmers Association counsel Sridhar Potaraju submitted that they have been not aggrieved by the farm laws. Potaraju submitted that his client represented 15 farmers’ unions across 15 states and that they will be badly impacted if a keep of the implementation of the Farm Laws was ordered. “This is for the reason that the farmers whom he represents, cultivate fruits and vegetables and that about 21 million tonnes of fruits and vegetables will rot, if anything is done at this stage,” he added.
“If there is a victory at all, it is the victory of fair play,” the CJI told senior counsel Harish Salve throughout the hearing. The senior lawyer had apprehended that the keep on the implementation of the laws ought to not be misconstrued by some as a “political victory” of sorts. The apex court also asked the Centre to file an affidavit on presence of banned entities in the protests. This occurred just after Salve pointed out that an outlawed Canadian political outfit Sikhs For Justice is providing dollars to individuals for participating in protests.
The Bench also issued notice on an application by the Centre, by way of the Delhi Police, for an injunction order against farmers holding any tractor/trolley/automobile march that may well disrupt the Republic Day celebrations.
The apex court is hearing a batch of petitions connected to the protests by farmers. Some have sought directions to the government to get rid of protesters to clear the roads as the commuters have been facing hardships due to the road blockades and the gatherings may possibly enhance the coronavirus circumstances. Others want “conciliation” in between the government and farmers and scrapping of new laws.