The Supreme Court of India constituted a panel of experts to study the three farm acts. The panel found that 86% of the organizations that represented more than 3 crore farmers supported the laws repealed by the central government last year after months of protests. The high-powered panel recommended retaining the three acts and allowing the states to have the flexibility to implement and design them with the approval of the central government.
It stated that repealing or suspending the controversial farm acts would be unfair to the silent majority that supported them. In January 2020, the Supreme Court set up the panel while staying the implementation of the three laws. Initially, the panel consisted of Ashok Gulati, Anil Ghanwat, Pramod Kumar Joshi, of the International Food Policy Research Institute, and Bhupinder Singh Mann, of the Bhartiya Kisan Union. Later, Mann resigned from the panel.
The panel’s report said that some alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, such as farmer courts and civil courts, may be available to stakeholders. Reports are expected shortly. In addition to cooperatives and Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs), the panel recommended the formation of an agriculture marketing council comprising all states and UTs.
Farmers protests
On June 20, 2020, protests broke out in several parts of Punjab, Haryana, and western Uttar Pradesh, which are grain-growing regions in the country. Over time, the agitation that began in some villages of Punjab grew and spread to Haryana, western Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan. Farmer agitators have sought the repeal of the three acts and a legal guarantee of the Minimum Support Price (MSP). Thousands of farmers from Punjab and elsewhere marched to Delhi in 2020 and blocked the main entry points after being denied entry.
Despite the protestors’ majority demand for repeal of the acts, the Centre held 11 rounds of discussions with them and even offered to amend some provisions without much success. While January 26th, 2021, when scores of agitating farmers diverted from a fixed tractor rally route and forced entry into main thoroughfares, led to violent battles with the police, was a major setback for the stir, the forced eviction of Bhartiya Kisan Union leader Rakesh Tikait and his emotional outburst revived the sagging morale of the agitators.
The protests shifted from Punjab and Haryana to western Uttar Pradesh within days. A high-powered panel of experts was formed between the three laws to study them and suggest a way forward. Farmers rejected the panel since it contained people known to have supported the laws in some forum or another. After almost a year of protests, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced in a televised address on Guru Nanak Jayanti that all three laws will be repealed.
The panel’s recommendations
Recommendation regarding the Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act 2020*
- Development of a price information system and market intelligence system to strengthen farmers’ bargaining power and facilitate efficient ‘price discovery’.
- Its terms of reference include analyzing and disseminating price data.
- Make existing APMCs revenue-generating entities by turning them into agribusiness hubs.
Recommendations related to Farmers (empowerment and protection) Agreement on price assurance and farm services Act, 2020*
- A model contract agreement should be developed and published online to eliminate potential snags during implementation.
- Communication is essential to dispel apprehensions that the land of farmers would be usurped by this act.
- To ensure the agreement is secure for both parties, both the farmer and contractor should sign the contract.
- Provisions should be made in the farm agreement if market prices rise above the contracted prices.
Recommendations related to the Essential commodities (amendment) Act (ECA), 2020*
- Abolish the ECA Act, 1995, completely.
- The price triggers, at 100% for perishables and 50% non-perishables in the Act, may be reviewed and enhanced to 200% and 75% respectively.
- Stock limits, if applicable, should be reviewed every two weeks.
- Price rises may be subtracted from the last three years.
- Export bans need to be rationalized and imposed objectively based on similar trigger prices to those in this Act.
Recommendations related to agricultural price policies*
The open-ended procurement policy should be discontinued since it is distorting the composition of agricultural output in certain states, with attendant consequences for the environment as well.
Supports NFAED’s approach to the procurement of pulses and oilseeds under the Price Support Scheme.
States may purchase crops at a declared MSP based on their specific agricultural policy priorities. Such states can provide legal backing at their own expense, such as the Punjab Amendment Act.
Post Your Comments