Farmers Movement Archive

SC to form panel to resolve Centre-farmers deadlock

NEW DELHI: In a bid to safeguard the interests of farmers and to also uphold the right to citizens to free movement, the Supreme Court on Wednesday stepped in to find away out of deadlocked negotiations on the contentious farm laws between the Centre and the agitating farm unions and said it would form a committee with representatives from all stakeholders. “We will form a committee to resolve this dispute. It will include representatives of Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU), other agitating farmer bodies, Union government and even representatives from other farmers’ unions from across the country. If not resolved early, it will soon become a national issue,” said a bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian. After its surprise intervention, the bench asked solicitor general Tushar Mehta to prepare a tentative list of possible representatives of government, farm unions and other stakeholders and place it before the court on Thursday. “We will have to hear this matter tomorrow as the court is closing for winter break from Saturday,” the bench said. Mehta said the Centre was always ready for meaningful talks with farmers and would do nothing to harm their interests. But the CJI said, “What is the point in saying something which only sounds good. Your negotiations are not working. The farmers are adamant on scrapping the laws. So, the negotiations are bound to fail.” Mehta said both sides needed to be ready for meaningful talks. The bench was dealing with three PILs filed by Rishabh Jain, Reepak Kansal and GS Mani. While Jain’s counsel Dushyant Tiwari cited the SC’s Shaheen Bagh judgment which disapproved of protesters blocking roads and sought removal of blockades caused by the farmers’ stir, the other two petitioners wanted farmers to be allowed to come into Delhi and be provided with a proper place to protest. The SC asked the petitioners to join the farm unions as parties. Mehta said, “It appears that those advocating interests other than that of farmers have clearly taken over the protests. Meaningful dialogue needs both sides. But the farmers’ unions appear to have taken an adamant stand over repeal of the farm laws and are not ready to settle for anything less. When they come for negotiations and flash ‘yes or no’ placards and sit on chairs showing their backs to the ministers engaged in negotiations, a constructive dialogue becomes an impossibility. “The government offered to discuss the farm laws clause by clause, but they did not agree. It is still open for a constructive dialogue.” When petitioner’s counsel Dushyant Tiwari cited the Shaheen Bagh judgment in which the SC frowned upon the long blockade of Kalindi Kunj-Noida road by anti-CAA protesters, the CJI wanted to know how many people were blocking the road at Shaheen Bagh and how many were there at Singhu border? “Will it not depend on the number of people who block the road?” the CJI asked. When the petitioner countered with “will it (farmers blocking the road) be not construed as violation of the SC judgement”, the CJI said, “There cannot be any precedent about a law and order situation.” Thus clearly indicated the court’s reluctance to apply the yardstick it had applied for the Shaheen Bagh protests.

The Times of India

2020-12-17

India