The Supreme Court on Thursday acknowledged the farmers’ right to protest, saying it’ll not interfere in the agitation against the Centre’s three contentious farm laws at the borders of Delhi and mooted the thought of putting on hold the implementation of the laws. Meanwhile, Union Agriculture Minister Narendra Singh Tomar reached bent the protesters, once more stating that the govt would provides a written assurance that the MSP system will continue.
In an letter , Tomar urged farmers to not fall prey to the “lies”.
Tomar’s letter came after a gathering with Union Home Minister Amit Shah, minister of finance Nirmala Sitharaman, Piyush Goyal and top BJP functionaries at the party headquarters in New Delhi . The BJP has upped its campaign to get support among the general public towards the contentious farm laws.
Meanwhile, the Delhi Assembly passed a resolution to repeal the Acts during a special one-day session, which also saw Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and AAP MLA Mahendra Goyal, among others, tearing copies of the reforms.
In Maharashtra, a sub-committee of the state Cabinet, which was formed to review the contentious farm reforms of the Centre, met for the primary time in Mumbai. After the meet, the NCP has demanded a session of the Parliament to deal with the concerns of the farmers, stating that the Central Government didn’t seem to be sympathetic towards the protesting peasants.
What was the hurry to urge Farm Laws passed in Parliament during pandemic? it’s happened for 1st time that 3 laws were passed without voting in Rajya Sabha…I hereby tear 3 Farm laws during this assembly & appeal Centre to not become worst than Britishers: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal https://t.co/zvc2Dx1w3E pic.twitter.com/rUOACIQwp3
At the protest sites near the capital , a farmer from Punjab was found dead near the Tikri approach Thursday morning while the key routes on the borders were closed on the 22nd day of the farmers agitation. On Wednesday, a Sikh priest had killed himself over the farm laws.
Thousands of farmers are currently staying put at Delhi’s borders with Haryana and Uttar Pradesh demanding the rollback of the Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020 and therefore the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020. Farmers also are against the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2020, which could increase the burden of farmers.
The new laws are projected by the govt as major reforms within the agriculture sector which will remove middlemen and permit farmers to sell anywhere within the country. However, protesting farmers have expressed apprehension that the laws will pave way for eliminating the security cushion of minimum support price (MSP) and do away with the mandis, leaving them at the mercy of massive corporates.
The Supreme Court, while hearing a clutch of petitions seeking removal of farmers protesting at several roads along Delhi’s borders, acknowledged the proper of farmers to non-violent protests but said it shouldn’t infringe the elemental rights of others to maneuver freely and in getting essential food and other supplies.
The court also made it clear that the difficulty of farmers’ protest and therefore the right of others to maneuver freely of others would be dealt on priority, and not the validity of laws at the instant .
A bench headed by judge SA Bobde said that during a democracy, police and authorities need to tend power to stop the protestors from infringing the rights of others.
“We acknowledge the proper of farmers to protest but it’s to be non-violent,” it said. the highest court said the aim of staging protest are often achieved if the farmers and therefore the government hold talks, and “we wish to facilitate that”.
The top court told Bharatiya Kisan Union (Bhanu) group, which was the sole farmer organisation present before the court through lawyer AP Singh, that they can’t keep it up protesting without lecture the govt .
The top court also said it had been thinking of fixing an “impartial and independent” panel of agriculture experts and farmer unions to resolve the impasse and in an order released later within the day, sought suggestions on the committee’s constitution by subsequent hearing, which can come about after the winter vacation.
The bench said it might pass order on constituting a committee only after hearing all the parties, including the protesting farmer unions and suggested putting on hold the implementation of recent agri laws, saying this is able to enable negotiations with farmers.
However, Attorney General KK Venugopal opposed the suggestion and said if the implementation of the farm laws was put on hold, then farmers wouldn’t come forward for negotiation.