The Supreme Court of India has ordered Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government to suspend three controversial farm laws that stirred up nationwide protests by farmers.
The top court on Jan. 12 ordered the formation of a committee of experts to hold talks with the federal government and farmers to end the stalemate as the main protest on New Delhi’s outskirts entered its 48th day.
“The Supreme Court order gives some hope to the farmers who are protesting in very adverse conditions,” said Bishop Alex Vadakumthala, chairman of the Indian bishops’ office of labour.
“The government should find an amicable solution and end the protest as it is not good for any country to let their farmers struggle in the open for their genuine demands,” the prelate told.
Thousands of farmers from Punjab and Haryana states marched to New Delhi on Nov. 29 demanding the government repeal laws that they say work against their interests. When authorities blocked their entry to the capital, they sat on the highways to block major entry and exit points to New Delhi.
They want the Modi government to withdraw three laws passed last September — the Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020, and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020. The government, led by the pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), disregarded opposition to pass the bills, saying they are necessary to reform the farm sector and help farmers have the freedom to sell their products in an open competitive market and gain maximum profit.
Farmers’ unions say the laws take away the minimum support price (MSP) or the government guarantee for their products besides giving private businesses unrestricted opportunities to purchase and store produce.
Critics say the laws were designed to help multinational companies and would lead to the collapse of government-controlled markets and leave farmers at the mercy of big business houses. Government lawyers told the court that the new laws were drafted and implemented based on two decades of studies and disagreed with the farmers’ demand for their repeal.