Supreme Court stays implementation of contentious farm laws

Supreme Court stays implementation of contentious farm laws

The apex court forms a four-member committee to hold discussion with agitating farmers and report to it on possible solutions

A Supreme Court bench, headed by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde Tuesday stayed implementation of three contentious farms law passed by Parliament in September last year.

Thousands of farmers have been on a sit-in protest on outskirts of the national capital New Delhi since 26 November demanding rollback of the law.

"We are staying three farm laws until further orders," CJI Bobde said.

The apex court also announced the constitution of a four-member committee to look into demands of the farmers and report to it. The members nominated to the committee are Bhupender Singh Mann of the agitating Bharatiya Kisan Union, Anil Ghanwant of Shetkari Sanghatana, agricultural scientist Ashok Gulati and Pramod K Joshi of International Food Policy Research Institute.

"We're concerned about the validity of the farm laws and also about protecting life and property of citizens affected by protests. We're trying to solve the problem in accordance with the powers we have. One of the powers we've is to suspend the legislation and make a committee," CJI Bobde said.

"This committee will be for us. All of you people who are expected to solve the issue will go before this committee. It will not pass an order or punish you, it will only submit a report to us," he added while explaining the purpose behind setting up of the committee.

Responding to Advocate M.L. Sharma, who had filed a plea challenging the farm laws, who informed the court that the farmers will not appear before any committee, the Chief Justice said, "We're forming a committee so that we've a clearer picture. We don't want to hear arguments that farmers will not go to the committee. We're looking to solve the problem. If you (farmers) want to agitate indefinitely, you can do so."

The court was informed by the central government that the farm laws were not hurriedly made and were a result of deliberations that were held over the past two decades.

So far eight rounds of talks were held between leaders of the farmers and representatives of the Government of India, but the impasse continued since the farmer leaders were not willing to settle for anything lesser than the complete rollback of the three farm laws. The government, on the other hand, asked them for suggestions so that the laws could be amended while refusing to withdraw the laws that have led to one of the biggest farmers protests in the country of the recent history. The farmers have been sitting on the border of Delhi on roads leading into the national capital from neighbouring states Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.

The Supreme Court was categorical in saying that they were willing to suspend the laws but not indefinitely and not without some purpose.

The apex court also issued notice to farmers' unions on a Delhi Police plea to stop the proposed tractor rally during the 26 January Republic Day parade. The Delhi Police plea against the tractor rally would be heard by the court on 18 January.

The apex court bench also asked the Attorney General to confirm with the intelligence agencies if allegations of banned organizations with terrorist links have infiltrated the farmers' protest are confirmed or false. "There is an application before us which says that there is a banned organization which is helping this protest. Can the Attorney-General accept or deny it?" the bench asked when AG K.K. Venugopal informed the court that Khalistanis (those behind the demand for a separate Sikh nation) had infiltrated into the protests.

The Supreme Court had started hearing on a bunch of pleas challenging the farm laws, besides those related to the issue of citizens' right to free movement. Traffic between Delhi and its neighbouring states have remained badly paralysed with the agitating farmers putting up tents on the national highways.

Senior Advocate Harish Salve, appearing for one of the petitioners, said that staying implementation of the farm laws should not be seen as a political victory. "It should be seen as a serious examination of concerns expressed over the legislation," Salve said.