agriculture Bills | SabrangIndia

Four states gear up to resist ‘anti-farmer’ bills

Sat, 26 Sep 2020 12:55:44 +0000

Image Courtesy:theprint.in

While the Centre remains adamant on its plan to go forward with the anti-farmer Bills that have received widespread Opposition parties for the cause of farmers, state governments have decided to act in favour of marginalised farmers. Three days ago Kerala started contemplating a legal challenge in the Supreme Court, and yesterday, Rajasthan, Punjab and Maharashtra spoke out.

On the morning of protests on Friday, Punjab followed the footsteps of Rajasthan in taking immediate steps to secure the state government’s control on procurement and pricing.

Shortly after the nationwide farmers protest on September 25, Maharashtra government said that it would not allow the three agriculture Bills – the Farmer’s Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill – to be implemented, said a Rediff report. On the day of the protest, Deputy Chief Minister and NCP leader Ajit Pawar said in Pune that the NCP and other parties are opposed to the new bills. He added that a dharna agitation will be held on October 2 in the state.

Days after Parliament passed the three agriculture-related ordinances to regulate out-of-mandi transactions and provide a framework for contract farming, and the amended Essential Commodities Act, some states have started guarding their turf, to limit revenue loss on account of off-mandi transactions.

Kerala: Planning Board asked to study impact

Kerala reacted first, soon after the undemocratic manner in which the Bills were passed in Parliament last week-end followed by the arbitrary suspension of eight Members of Parliament. Calling for concerted efforts to oppose the controversial farm Bills, days before the nationwide protest, Kerala’s Agriculture Minister V.S. Sunil Kumar said that the Kerala government had sought advice from it’s legal department on the feasibility of challenging them in the Supreme Court. Kerala government decision was taken at the September 23 cabinet meeting.

The state government has asked the Planning Board to study their impact on various sectors, such as agriculture, fisheries, labour, animal husbandry and dairy development, Sunil Kumar told the media. The Planning Board has been directed to submit its report by September 30. He also suggested that the Kerala government would seek the cooperation of like-minded States, such as Punjab, in opposing the Centre’s “unilateral decision”. Kerala goes to the polls soon. Though ‘Agriculture, including agricultural education and research, protection against pests and prevention of plant diseases’ falls in the State List as per the Seventh Schedule, the Centre neither discussed the Bills with the States nor heeded their concerns, he said. The legislation serve only the interests of corporates, Mr. Sunil Kumar added.

Meanwhile, Kerala is moving to introduce an alternative mechanism to strengthen the agriculture sector using the primary agriculture co-operative societies and with the support of the Departments of Cooperation and Industries, he said.

Such support for the farmers from the south is particularly significant because Kerala does not have an APMC system. Thus, Kerala’s official support to the farmers counters the pro-Bill argument that the opposition is only limited in APMC-states such as Punjab and Haryana.

Rajasthan, Punjab take control of Mandis

Last month, Rajasthan had acted. The state had passed an order late in August 2020 designating all warehouses of Food Corporation of India (FCI) and state warehousing corporation as mandis, thereby retaining its powers to charge mandi fees. The order was seen by many as a move to neutralise the impact of the Centre’s ordinance designating all out-of-mandi areas, including warehouses and godowns, as trade zones where taxes could not be levied. According to the latest report of the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP), Rajasthan charged 3.6 per cent as mandi fees and other charges — the third-highest among major wheat procurement states of India.

The Rajasthan government has explored this loophole in the legislation, and declared all FCI and state warehouses mandis, so all transactions taking place in these would be eligible for state taxes.

The Rajasthan government had earlier expressed apprehensions about the impact of these new laws on state policies. On September 21, Revenue Minister Harish Chaudhary and Transport Minister Pratap Singh Khachariawas had told the media that the “anti-farmer Bills,” brought in a hurry, deprive farmers of the bonus on MSP. Last month, Rajasthan had declared all warehouses of the Food Corporation of India (FCI), the Central Warehousing Corporation (CWC) and the Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation (RSWC) as procurement centres under the APMC Act.

Punjab

Further north, Punjab government said they were giving serious thought to amending the state’s APMC Act and declaring the whole of Punjab as a Principal Mandi Yard. According to reports, the government believes such an amendment will circumvent the changes in the Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill. Declaring ‘mandi yards’ would mean that any procurement outside government ambit would become illegal thus ensuring MSO to farmers and Mandi fees to the state. On September 25 reports suggest that Punjab, the largest contributor of wheat and rice to India’s central pool, might also be looking at amending its Mandi Act to declare the entire state a Principal Market Yard. This would nullify the central law prohibiting imposition of any tax or cess on out-of-mandi transactions.

The central legislation defines a ‘trade area’ as any area outside of mandis notified under the state Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) Act, including private market yards, private market sub-yards, direct marketing collection centres, private farmer-consumer market yards managed by persons holding any licence, as well as cold storage, silos and warehouses notified as marketplaces under the state APMC Acts. The central legislation clarifies that the definition of a ‘trade area’, where central provisions will apply, will be all areas other than the ones mentioned above. The Rajasthan government has explored this loophole in the legislation and declared all FCI and state warehouses mandis, so all transactions taking place in these would be eligible for state taxes.

Now, if the entire state is declared a Principal Market Yard, the central law would not apply anywhere in the state. And if FCI continues to procure from the state, it will continue to pay tax at a high 8.5 per cent rate on wheat and rice.

These taxes, according to some estimates, earn Punjab over Rs 5,000 crore annually, given the sheer amount of wheat and rice procured from the state every year.

Maharashtra

Pawar acknowledged farmers’ arguments that the laws were not beneficial to them and said that the state government will ensure that such laws are not implemented. He also said that his government had sought legal advice in case the matter went to the court.

Speaking about the Bills, the Deputy Chief Minister said that the new bills scrap the APMC system and hand over the marketing system to traders. He alleged that this would lead to scrapping of labour protection laws as farmers will not get the Minimum Support Price (MSP.)

The post Four states gear up to resist ‘anti-farmer’ bills appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Highlights of National Protest Day

Fri, 25 Sep 2020 14:52:15 +0000

Lakhs of Indians came to the streets on September 25, the Pratirodh Diwas called by the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee (AIKSCC) against the Anti-Farmer Bills passed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) -led Government.

“The massive response to the Pratirodh Diwas is a clear warning to the arrogant Narendra Modi led BJP Government and the message is loud and clear. Peasants and workers will build the broadest possible unity to resist with all its might the efforts of the BJP to facilitate corporate loot and profiteering at the expense of farmers,” said an All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) press release.

Haryana, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Rasjasthan witnessed widespread bandhs. According to AIKSCC, many leaders were arrested in these states. In Karnataka, farmers groups courted arrest after blocking the busy Tumkur road near Yeshwanthpur in Bengaluru. In Haryana, photos of farmers observing sit-ins on the road, forming human chains circulated on social media. Meanwhile, Punjab’s farmers erected temporary shades on railway tracks while they blocked the trains. On the roads, traffic police supported the farmers’ efforts by diverting traffic as the peasants continued their movement.

On the other hand, Bihar protesters had to fend off a group of armed men who attacked the demonsrators with chants of “Narendra Modi Zindabad!”

Similarly, thousands of farmers blocked the Mumbai Delhi Highway near Maharashtra’s Dahanu. President of the AIKS Ashok Dhawale participated in the protest. Over 50,000 pesants in 21 districts blocked national and state highways across the state. All over India, Central Trade Unions, workers organisations, students, women organisations, Dalits and Adivasis marched on the streets despite the threat of COVID-19, sweltering heat and heavy rains.

In West Bengal, the National Highway was blocked at 92 places while State Highways were blocked at 89 places. According to farmer organisations, more than six lakh people participated in West Bengal alone.

In the south, Tamil Nadu witnessed protests in hundreds of spots. As per reports, over 100 protesters were arrested during “rail roko” demonstrations at Villupuram. Similarly, AIKSCC TN Coordinator, K Balakrishnan, AIKS (CPM) State Secretary Shanmugam, AIKKMS All India Vice-President Dr Rengasamy arrested in the afternoon.

Kerala’s protesters observed Dharna and protests in front of 250 Central Government offices and many places across the State. The AIKS Vice President S. Ramachandran Pillai inaugurated the protest in Trivandrum.

The Northeast states also made their voices heard as massive protests in Tripura braved police repression and attacks while protesters in Assam burnt mock papers as a sign of dissent. In most States the Highways were blocked. Northern railways even had to cancel trains due to agitations.

In the evening, rural affairs journalist P. Sainath talked to human rights activist and journalist Teesta Setalvad talked about the farmer’s anger and the media’s treatment of the issue. As a testament to the peasant’s anger, hashtags such as #ScrapAntiFarmerActs even started trending on social media platforms like Twitter.

Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Odisha, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh witnessed spontaneous response from farmers and workers. Effigies of Narendra Modi and the Bills were burnt in numerous places.

In Delhi, members of various Central Trade Unions, national women’s organisations, civil society groups, student organisations and MPs who were suspended for speaking up against the Bills in Parliament were present in solidarity with the farmers.

The post Highlights of National Protest Day appeared first on SabrangIndia.

How the Constitution protects our farmers

Fri, 25 Sep 2020 14:08:08 +0000

Image Courtesy:thehindu.com

The country is presently engulfed in peaceful protests by farmers, a community that has largely known to be organised yet silent; a community that toils hard to drive the farming sector and to ensure food security for the countrymen. According to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (2018), a farmer is any person who engages or who seeks to engage alone, or in association with others or as a community, in small-scale agricultural production for subsistence and/or for the market, and who relies significantly, though not necessarily exclusively, on family or household labour and other non-monetized ways of organizing labour.

The farmers and their representative organisations are currently agitating the three bills that have been passed by the Parliament in its monsoon session. Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill are three bills that are set to become laws as they have been passed by both houses of the Parliament where the ruling party, BJP, has a sizeable majority. Despite the massive uproar of the opposition, tearing rule books and creating a ruckus over passage of bills by a voice vote, the bills have been passed. Aside from the fact that this was an absolute mockery of democratic governance and legislation, lies the fact that these bills have led large scale farmers protests across the country while bringing in focus the question, do farmers have rights enshrined in our Constitution?

The answer to this question has to be, ‘Yes’. The Indian Constitution, the lengthiest written Constitution in the world, has embodied several principles of a democratic government with its basis in fundamental rights, which is the crux on which the Constitution stands. While the Constitution may not have enshrined specific rights for farmers, it is left to the interpretation of constitutional courts like the Supreme Court as well as the legislature while making laws so that the same must be realised. While the Parliament’s passage of the three bills, without any dialogue and consultation with stakeholders, is antithetical to the Constitution, let us have a look at which parts of the Constitution the government should have read and interpreted before passing those three laws.

Part III

The Part III of the Constitution is dedicated to Fundamental rights enshrined under Article 12 to Article 35.

In the beginning itself, under Article 13, the Constitution states that all laws that are inconsistent with or are in derogation of the fundamental rights will be void. The main object of Article 13 is to secure the paramountcy of the Constitution in regard to fundamental rights.

Article 14 bestows equality before the law. In one of the interpretations of the Article, is the concept of “mala fide” which states that any action taken by the State in undue haste may be held to be mala fide as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon v. State of Punjab.

The three bills are also being criticised for not giving a fair playing field to all farmers, small and big, while allowing farmers to sell produce in international markets and to private players directly stand to benefit big and wealthy farmers, the diminishing role of the Agriculture Produce Market Committees (APMCs) will lead to small farmers losing their voice as well as their market completely. These laws seem to benefit corporates and big farmers and hence the question of equality before law and equal protection of law under Article 14 arises here.

Further, Article 19, sub-clauses (a), (b) and (c) apply to farmers as much as they apply to any other citizen of India. The right to freedom of speech and expression, the right to assemble peaceably and right to form associations or unions are all important fundamental rights and germane to the current state of affairs where farmers are gathering on the streets to make their dissent against the government’s policy heard, with the support of representative Unions and Associations.

Article 21 enshrines right to life and personal liberty and it is one Article that has received the widest possible interpretation. One of its interpretations is the right to livelihood. The 3 farm bills in question are being criticised for severely affecting the livelihood of small farmers in the long run when they will not be eventually able to compete with wealthy farmers who will find their market in private players and will be forced to give up their choice of livelihood and their land, to bigger farmers.

Directive Principles of State Policy

Apart from the fundamental rights, the Constitution also includes Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) which are considered to be supplementary to fundamental rights and ones that embody the concept of a welfare state. They are not enforceable and neither can a law be declared ultra vires of the Constitution if it is in contravention to DPSP. But, a law enacted to give effect to any of the DPSP is to be upheld as far as possible. Some Directive Principles that can be applicable to farmers rights and the current state of affairs are mentioned hereunder:

38. (2) The State shall, in particular, strive to minimise the inequalities in income, and endeavour to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals but also amongst groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations.

39. The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing— (c) that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment;

43. The State shall endeavour to secure, by suitable legislation or economic organisation or in any other way, to all workers, agricultural, industrial or otherwise, work, a living wage, conditions of work ensuring a decent standard of life and full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities

Additionally, there is also Article 51(c) which states that the State shall endeavour to foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organized peoples with one another. International treaties and conventions do not automatically become part of national law but courts generally interpret statutes so as to maintain harmony with international laws and conventions. In this case, the 3 laws need to conform to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Area of 2018 which has been passed as a Resolution by the Human Rights Council of which India is a member too.

Thus, by way of interpretation of various provisions of the Constitution, farmers rights can be brought to the fore and be made a part of the narrative, if the legislature is willing to do so.

The post How the Constitution protects our farmers appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Farmer Protests: From streets to social media

Fri, 25 Sep 2020 10:56:56 +0000

By early afternoon of September 25, hashtags supporting farmers’ and workers’ defiance to the recent agriculture and labour laws were trending on Twitter.

Swaraj India leader Yogendra Yadav who attended protests in Haryana posted a screenshot that showed #BharatBandh #NoToFarmerBills and #ScrapAntiFarmerActs as the top three trending hashtags in India.

Top three trends on twitter are all against anti farmer laws. Let’s use these hashtags:#BharatBandh #NoToFarmsBill #AntiFarmerBills pic.twitter.com/fbMzKLbVmy

— Yogendra Yadav (@_YogendraYadav) September 25, 2020

The images from across the country shows what farmers want. @_YogendraYadav addressing farmers in huge numbers in Punjab.#AIKSCC #AntiFarmerBills pic.twitter.com/Bjii4LWxRC

— Avik Saha (@aviksahaindia) September 25, 2020

Similarly, the three-day long “rail roko” agitation of Punjab farmers was leading on Twitter news. However, the star of the Twitter trend show was its neighbouring state that sent in visuals of dissent from every nook and cranny of Haryana.

Nationwide Farmers’ Protest Today; Punjab, Haryana Likely To See Total Shutdown.#BharatBandh #FarmerProtest #FarmBills2020 #FarmerProtest https://t.co/T5JUqw4l3W

— Indianews (@newsnation24) September 25, 2020

State traffic police in their share of work to ensure farmers’ right to protest.

Haryana Traffic police did a fair job in managing the traffic at Sarsini. It diverted traffic to Chandigarh and Ambala city and not let people get stuck in the blockade.
Ensuring one’s right to protest along with one’s right to move ? @cmohry @anilvijminister pic.twitter.com/LquaYEGZkb

— Sakshi Joshi (@sakshijoshii) September 25, 2020

Protests against Anti-Farmer Bills in Haryana#NoToFarmBills. #CorporateBhagaoKisanBachao #AntiFarmerBills https://t.co/2i2AmIsrSZ

— AIKS (@KisanSabha) September 25, 2020

Indian farmers block roads, railways as protests mount over farm bills https://t.co/Q5dinxwHEK

— Shehzad Younis (@shehzadyounis) September 25, 2020

Members of the Students Federation of India (SFI) sang and posted in memory of the Tebhaga Andolan by the Kisan Sabha in 1946-47. The takeaway message – This country is not going to surrender! We are going to teach this government a lesson they are never going to forget!”

#NoToFarmBills
A song remembering the historic peasant revolt, Tebhaga Andolon. The farmers of this country fought the British with utmost resiliency, and this BJP’s time to feel the wrath! pic.twitter.com/Pe629begFO

— Dipsita (@DharDipsita) September 25, 2020

Young farmers rapped their rage on social media, making a case for the neglected farmers of the country.

#IStandWithFarmers #isupportfarmers #IAmAFarmer

?Plz save the farmers ? pic.twitter.com/NxrrAhQkkH

— Rapper Dule Rocker (@DuleRocker) September 25, 2020

Opposition parties like the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) used not-so-subtle visuals to portray the ruling party’s intentions.

#भाजपा_हटाओ_किसान_बचाओ

Action Reaction pic.twitter.com/a6AJqgTK7W

— AAP (@AamAadmiParty) September 25, 2020

Meanwhile, a Standing Committee member listed all that the BJP had accomplished during its rule – bad and mostly bad.

भाजपा हटाओ किसान बचाओ#BharatBandh #आज_भारत_बंद_है #ScrapAntiFarmerActs #भाजपा_हटाओ_किसान_बचाओ #NoToFarmBills #AntiFarmerBJP pic.twitter.com/L7SnYZghEg

— Shiv Charan Goel (@shivcharangoel) September 25, 2020

While thousands of farmers stepped out on the roads across the nation, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s twitter account posted a video of a bunch of nameless farmers – save one – talking about the benefits of the new agriculture laws.

देश को आजाद हुए तो 70 साल से ज्यादा हो गए, लेकिन किसानों को अपनी उपज अपने हिसाब से बेचने की आजादी अब मिल रही है।

सुनिए, कृषि सुधार विधेयकों के पारित होने पर किसान दे रहे हैं मोदी जी को धन्यवाद। pic.twitter.com/nJ8wO6khWa

— BJP (@BJP4India) September 24, 2020

However, netizens remain disillusioned of these assurances as well as they continue to show their solidarity at least in the virtual world, with the farmers.

Farmer lives matter. 70% of the rural Indian population depend primarily on agriculture for their livelihoods. Farmers are struggling for their lives. #IStandWithIndianFarmers #NoToFarmBills #ScrapAntiFarmerActs

— Apoorva Saxena (@apoorva_saxena3) September 25, 2020

The post Farmer Protests: From streets to social media appeared first on SabrangIndia.

India ratifies, but doesn’t adopt UN Resolution on farmers’ rights?

Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:10:04 +0000

Image Courtesy:allrights.co.in

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas was adopted in September 2018 by the UN Human Rights Council. India became a member of the Human Rights Council, a month later, in October 2018. When the Declaration was put for voting in the UN General Assembly in December 2018, India voted in favour thus ratifying it.

However, in the light of the three farm bills passed by the Parliament, it appears that India has acted in contravention to this Declaration whereby it had affirmed some important and pertinent farmers rights.

The Declaration (UNDRPOWRA) recognises the contributions of peasants to development and to conserving and improving biodiversity, and raises concerns that farmers suffer disproportionately from poverty, hunger and malnutrition. It also raises alarm over the increasing number of farmers forcibly evicted or displaced every year and the increase in farmers suicides across the world. The Declaration also recognises that several factors make it difficult for peasants to make their voices heard, to defend their human rights.

India is, at present, in the midst of an agrarian crisis within which the controversial passage of laws perceived to be anti-farmer have caused anger and protest.

The Indian Parliament, in one of its most controversial sessions of late (Monsoon Session, 2020), has passed three bills that affect farmers and their rights, without giving the Opposition an opportunity to debate and discuss on the same.

Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill, are three bills that are set to become laws as they have been passed by both houses of the Parliament where the ruling party, BJP, has a sizeable majority. Despite the massive uproar of the opposition, sustained attempts at dialogue and debate were turned away, democratic attempts to send the controversial laws to a Select Committee of Parliament, were denied. Flouting all rules and norms, the bills were pushed through. These actions have led to widespread farmers protests across the country while bringing in focus the question, do farmers have rights?

Farmers Rights Protected in the UNHRC Resolution

Article 2(3) of the Declaration (UNDRPOWRA) speaks about an inclusive process of decision making by engaging in a dialogues with farmers and their representative institutions to ensure informed participation and to ensure that the interests of farmers are better served. The Article 2(3) states as follows:

3. Without disregarding specific legislation on indigenous peoples, before adopting and implementing legislation and policies, international agreements and other decision-making processes that may affect the rights of peasants and other people working in rural areas, States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with peasants and other people working in rural areas through their own representative institutions, engaging with and seeking the support of peasants and other people working in rural areas who could be affected by decisions before those decisions are made, and responding to their contributions, taking into consideration existing power imbalances between different parties and ensuring active, free, effective, meaningful and informed participation of individuals and groups in associated decision-making processes.

Article 2(5) of the Declaration speaks about ensuring that private enterprises and corporates act in a manner that does not impede upon the interest of farmers and rather strengthen their rights. It reads as follows:

5. States shall take all necessary measures to ensure that non-State actors that they are in a position to regulate, such as private individuals and organizations, and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, respect and strengthen the rights of peasants and other people working in rural areas.

Article 3 stresses upon ensuring that farmers enjoy all human rights including fundamental freedoms recognised in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all other international human rights instruments, free from any kind of discrimination in the exercise of their rights.

Article 3(2) speaks about farmers’ right to development as well as their right to determine strategies on how to achieve their right to development. It reads as follows:

2. Peasants and other people working in rural areas have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies to exercise their right to development.

Article 6 seeks to protect farmers from arbitrary arrest or detention, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Article 8 stresses upon farmers’ right to assert their rights and express them through peaceful means.

Article 10 outlines the farmers’ right to actively participate in formulating policies and laws that may affect their lives, land and livelihoods. Article 10 (2) reads as follows:

2. States shall promote the participation, directly and/or through their representative organizations, of peasants and other people working in rural areas in decision-making processes that may affect their lives, land and livelihoods; this includes respecting the establishment and growth of strong and independent organizations of peasants and other people working in rural areas and promoting their participation in the preparation and implementation of food safety, labour and environmental standards that may affect them.

Article 12 (1) elaborates on the farmers’ right to effective and non-discriminatory access to justice and reads as follows:

1. Peasants and other people working in rural areas have the right to effective and non-discriminatory access to justice, including access to fair procedures for the resolution of disputes and to effective remedies for all infringements of their human rights. Such decisions shall give due consideration to their customs, traditions, rules and legal systems in conformity with relevant obligations under international human rights law.

Article 16 (2) of the Declaration states that the States are obliged to take measures to favour peasants for selling their products in markets. It reads as follows:

2. States shall take appropriate measures to favour the access of peasants and other people working in rural areas to the means of transportation, and processing, drying and storage facilities necessary for selling their products on local, national and regional markets at prices that guarantee them a decent income and livelihood.

3. States shall take appropriate measures to strengthen and support local, national and regional markets in ways that facilitate, and ensure that peasants and other people working in rural areas have full and equitable access and participation in these markets to sell their products at prices that allow them and their families to attain an adequate standard of living.

Apart from the above-mentioned provisions, the Declaration also specifies rights of farmers against displacement, their right to seeds, right to further traditional knowledge, right to standards of physical and mental health, right to adequate housing, right to social security, right to protect and conserve the environment and so on.

These are now among the enumerated Rights that have become the International Standards for the Protection of Farmers Rights, to which India is not a signatory. Notably, all the rights mentioned enumerated by UNDRPOWRA in detail, are the ones that stand to be violated with the passage of three bills that have been hastily passed by the Parliament. The passage of these Bills through Parliament were not preceded by any democratic dialogue with Farmers or Farmer Organisations, violating their right to be heard and be involved in the making of a policy that affects their sustenance and livelihood.

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Area may be read here.

The post India ratifies, but doesn’t adopt UN Resolution on farmers’ rights? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

MSP for farmers: Exposing the lies of the Modi government

Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:23:09 +0000

The Narendra Modi-led, NDA II government has resorted to a series of manipulations of figures and data, in an attempt to show that it actually stands for Indian farmers. Farmers have been reeling under the acute distress caused by the Covid-19 lockdown and the agrarian crisis.

On an overdrive to justify the hasty passage of the three bills[1] that threaten the autonomy, livelihood and dignity of India’s Farmers, the Modi 2.0 government is on a propaganda drive, set to deceive the urban middle class (and the farmer) on the issue of Minimum Support Price (MSP) of farmers paid out.

Has there been a hike in the MSP for the Rabi Season (2020-21)?

Fact Check

The government claims that under its watch, there has been a substantial hike in MSP the for Rabi Marketing Season 2021-22 in line with the recommendations of Swaminathan Commission (following the principle of fixing the MSPs at a level of at least 1.5 times of the All-India weighted average Cost of Production).

So, is the MSP being offered by this government actually being calculated on the basis of C2 Costs?

Has the ‘benevolent’ government accepted the longstanding demand of the farmers to fix MSP as per C2+50% recommended by the Swaminathan Commission?

Let’s have a look.

A close look at the Rabi Price Policy Report 2021-22 of the Commission on Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) reveals that that what has been actually used as the base cost to calculate MSP are the A2+FL prices alone.

The table below gives an idea about the huge difference between C2 Costs and A2+FL Costs.

Crops	A2+FL Cost of Production 2021-22 (Rs/quintal)	C2 Cost of Production 2021-22 (Rs/quintal)	MSP for RMS 2021-22 (Rs/quintal)	C2+50% 2021-22	Difference Between C2+505 and MSP for RMS 2021-22 (Rs/quintal)
Wheat	960	1467	1975	2195.5	220.5
Barley	971	1404	1600	2016	506
Gram	2866	4012	5100	6018	918
Lentil (Masur)	2864	4204	5100	6306	1206
Rapeseed & Mustard	2415	3470	4650	5205	600
Safflower	3551	4908	5327	7362	2035

The huge difference between C2+50% and the MSP announced, now becomes clear.

Difference Between C2 and A2+FL

WHEAT

Lets take wheat which is the main Rabi crop,

The C2 cost calculated by the main wheat growing States of Punjab and Haryana was Rs.1864/ quintal and Rs.1705/ quintal, respectively.

However, the Centrally controlled CACP figures show the C2 cost for Punjab only as Rs.1287/quintal which is Rs.577/quintal lower for the Punjab. For Haryana, CACP (fudged) figures show the C2 cost at Rs.1500/quintal or Rs.205/quintal below the State Government calculations.

It is the states who calculate the C2 costs. But the Modi government is using depressed costs, decided by the CACP and a weighted average of costs of all States has arrived at a figure (A2 + FL, as shown in the Table) which are far below the C2 costs.

Result: As the A2+FL figures in the table show, these are at base level far below the C2 costs so arrived; in the case of wheat it is Rs.507/Qtl lower than C2 costs.

The Ffarmer who cultivates wheat is being duped by this ingenuous (or cynical) manipulation of pricing figures)

BARLEY, GRAM, LENTILS, RAPESEED, MUSTARD AND SAFFLOWER SEED:

In Barley the difference between the two methods of calculation amounts to Rs.433/quintal, Rs.1,146/quintal for Gram Rs.1,340/quintal for Lentils, Rs.1055/quintal for Rapeseed and Mustard; and Rs.1357/quintal for Sunflower.

Difference Between C2+50% and Rabi MSP 2021-22

If the MSP had been actually been guaranteed as per C2+50% even taking CACP calculations the farmer would have got Rs.220.5/quintal more for wheat, Rs.506/ quintal more for Barley, Rs.918/ quintal more for Gram, Rs. 1206/ quintal more for Lentil, Rs.600/ quintal more for Rapeseed and Mustard and Rs.2035/ quintal more for Safflower.

Indian farmers are already incurring huge losses due to the obstinate refusal of the Narendra Modi led BJP Government to fix MSP as per C2+50%. The reality is that crops are not even procured at the rates mentioned here. Only about 30 per cent of total wheat production is actually procured at MSP. In most other crops MSP remains notional as there is no procurement by government.

Harsimrat Kaur Badal’s resignation, a public warning from Punjab farmers?

Over 42,000 workers from informal sector allegedly die by suicide

AIKS congratulates farmers on protests against anti-farmer ordinances issued by Centre

[1] The three Bills in question are the Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill which had received widespread condemnation from farmer’s Unions for their pro-corporate policies.

The post MSP for farmers: Exposing the lies of the Modi government appeared first on SabrangIndia.

False narratives cannot fill a farmer’s empty stomach

Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:18:02 +0000

Image Courtesy:myfarminfo.com

Raining heavy criticism on the three agriculture Bills forcefully passed by the Centre, members of Opposition and Trade Unions chalked out all the flaws in the Bills with a special focus on the system of Minimum Support Price (MSP.)

Punjab’s Chief Minister Amarinder Singh said in an Indian Express Op-Ed that MSP is one nomenclature in farming laws that farmers have always understood. He called it the lifeline of poor farmers and the key to their and the nation’s agricultural sector’s survival. He also mentioned that this system has not been mentioned anywhere in the new Bills.

What is MSP?

According to a press release by the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) Minimum Support Prices are supposed to be the minimum level of prices at which any farmer should have to sell the crop. The government announces MSP for 23 crops. Moreover, the government also buys the produce and provides support if a farmer is not getting the MSP at the market. However, MSP at 1.5 times the cost of production has never been a legal right of farmers despite repeated demands and recommendations of the Swaminathan Commission. As a result, the implementation process proves to be grossly inadequate.

Moreover, as Singh points out, the new legislations make no mention of MSPs. The new laws do not assure retention of original MSP laws either. Singh pointed out that the farming community might have reacted better to the new laws if the government had made MSPs applicable to the private players. Additionally, farmers should have been assured MSP on crops other than wheat and rice as an encouragement to diversify in current times.

Incidentally, there is no system of procurement for a large number of crops. Even the limited quantity of rice and wheat bought by the government is procured in areas that enjoy State-level procurement agencies.

“These State-level agencies were established much before the NDA government came to power. It is because of the statutory framework that provides the rights to these State-level procurement agencies to procure grain on behalf of the Central government that rice and wheat get procured from States such as Punjab, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Little or no procurement takes place in States that do not have such agencies and depend on Central government agencies such as the Food Corporation of India for the procurement,” said the AIKS.

As per AIKS data, about one-third of rice and wheat are procured by the government in any year. Similarly, miniscule quantities of a few pulse and oilseed crops are procured.

Rajya Sabha on MSP payment:

On September 18, the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution said that the number of wheat farmers who benefitted from MSPs doubled in the last four years while paddy farmer beneficiaries increased by roughly 70 percent.

To these optimistic numbers, the AIKS said, “The total procurement in the kharif and rabi marketing seasons increased by only about 15 percent each. This entire increase was on account of increased procurement by State-level agencies and that too in just one or two States. In the rabi season, procurement by FCI, the Central Government agency actually fell by 4 percent. The Government is resorting to misleading data in the Parliament.”

The organisation went on to say that recent open market prices of many crops have been significantly lower than the MSP. However, the government has offered no support by way of procurement to farmers. Drawing from Agmarknet data, they said that average market prices of chana were 25 percent lower than the MSP in the last week of April. Similarly, prices of Mustard were 15 percent lower, wheat prices were 6 percent lower, safflower prices were 30 percent lower, and masur prices were 1.3 percent lower in the last week of April. Moreover, average prices of summer paddy in the same week were 17 percent lower than the MSP. A regionally disaggregated picture showed that States where the government does not procure crops saw an even greater fall in prices.

“Farmers who are suffering from increasing input costs, crop losses and low market prices, are not going to fall for such false propaganda. It is foolhardy if the government thinks that it can satisfy farmers and rural workers facing distress and hunger with false statistics. False statistics cannot feed empty stomachs,” said the AIKS.

The three anti-farmer Bills

Ever since their introduction in early June, the three agriculture Bills – the Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill – have been vehemently condemned by farmers, trade Unions and MPs alike.

In narrating the proceedings of the Upper Parliament on September 20, the Punjab Chief said the Bills were “virtually railroaded through Parliament.”

He said that if these laws come to fruition, market forces will henceforth control pricing, procurement and marketing mechanisms. Farmers will be forced to relay between traders, desperate to sell their little produce with no bargaining power to demand deserved prices. He also criticised the fact that farmers were not consulted at any stage of these legislations.

Even members of the BJP-led coalition such as the Shiromani Akali Dal and the Jannayak Janta Party do not seem to believe in these laws.

“It is a travesty that, at a time of such a deep agrarian crisis, this government is only interested in bulldozing these anti-farmer Bills in the parliament to appease its corporate masters. Government needs to realise that the food security of this country rests on the shoulders of its kisans and not on the shoulder of big agri-business corporations,” said the AIKS.

The post False narratives cannot fill a farmer’s empty stomach appeared first on SabrangIndia.

No Hitler-shahi in India: Rights organisations protest in Delhi

Tue, 22 Sep 2020 13:14:25 +0000

Women’s groups, LGBTQIA communities, human rights organisations, trade unions and farmers’ Unions organised a protest “Speak That Your Words are Free/ Speak the Words of Freedom (बोल के लब आज़ाद हैं तेरे)”outside the Constitution Club, New Delhi at on September 22.

Under the banner of If We Do Not Rise (हम अगर उट्ठे नहीं तो…) the representatives displayed placards that detailed their demands. Their Charter of Demands covered 13 thematic areas such as democratic rights, transparency and accountability, institutional autonomy and integrity and access to natural resources, technology and surveillance.

The bilingual placards also listed the Right to Life and Safety, Food Security, Right to Education, Right to Work, Right to Political Participation, Right to Health, Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Media in Hindi and English. It contained 110 demands in all.

Earlier, these demands were submitted to several MPs and political leaders including DMK’s Kanimozhi Karunanidhi, CPI’s General Secretary D. Raj, AAP’s Sanjay Singh (AAP), Congress’ Shaktisinh Gohil among others.

The protesters strongly condemned the anti-farmer Agriculture Bills that were passed in the Parliament on September 20. They strongly criticised the denial of division of vote in Rajya Sabha and called it a black day for parliamentary democracy in India.

The If We Don’t Rise campaign extended solidarity to the protesting farmers. They said the government under Modi has become totally authoritarian and is using draconian laws like UAPA and sedition to curb the voices of dissent.

Members of the National Federation of Indian Women Annie Raja and Dipti Bharti, All India Democratic Women’s Association’s Mariam Dhavle, Maimoona Mollah and Asha Sharma, All India Dalit Adhikar Manch’s Abirami Jothee, Unity of Christ’s Minakshi Singh, Mazdoor Ekta Committee’s Birju Naik and many others participated in the event.

The post No Hitler-shahi in India: Rights organisations protest in Delhi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Freedom Park: Where the marginalised unite

Mon, 21 Sep 2020 14:08:31 +0000

Image Courtesy:indianexpress.com

Nearly 2,000 farmers assembled at the Freedom Park in Bengaluru, Karnataka on September 21 to protest the recent government changes made in agrarian policies both at the Central and state level.

Farmer protests against the three agriculture Bills that were originally thought to be limited to Haryana and Punjab, have now taken place in Southern cities of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu as well.

On Monday, farmers from all over Karnataka arrived at the Bengaluru city railway station and then rallied towards the city park roughly half a kilometre away.

https://www.facebook.com/pratiba.raman/posts/3880244295326151

The three Bills refer to the Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill. On September 20, these legislations had been passed in the Upper House of the Parliament without the required number of votes.

Leaders such as Yogendra Yadav from Swaraj India, and Ashok Dhavale from the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) also attended the Bengaluru event and spoke about the three Bills along with the Weaving Community Forces Land Acquisition Act that dealt specifically with Karnataka.

Member of Swaraj India, Zia Nomani told SabrangIndia that the city saw a wonderful combination of Green (Farmers’ colour) Blue (Dalits’ colour) and Red (Workers’ colour) as people from across Karnataka came to show solidarity with farmers. Women walked barefoot while some men chanted slogans bare-chested.

Nomani said that along with Yadav and Dhavale, 103-year-old freedom fighter H. S. Doreswamy also attended the event and spoke about how these policies threaten to kill farmers’ rights.

On Sunday, huge protests had taken place in Haryana wherein roads had been blocked. Members of the ruling-party’s coalition had joined these protests in solidarity.

A similar protest also took place in Uttar Pradesh. Meanwhile, Rajasthan prepared for the nation-wide protests planned for September 25 to demonstrate farmers’ continuing agitation against the agriculture policies.

The post Freedom Park: Where the marginalised unite appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The end of Parliament Democracy: Farmers’ Unions decry passage of Agri Bills in RS

Mon, 21 Sep 2020 06:58:52 +0000

Image Courtesy:news18.com

Objecting to how the Rajya Sabha proceeded to pass three key agriculture bills on Sunday, the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) dubbed the proceedings in the Upper House in the Parliament a “naked violation of the Constitution.”

The organisation’s anger was aimed at the three agriculture Bills, namely the Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill that were allegedly undemocratically passed by the Centre on Sunday without required votes in the Rajya Sabha.

“This is nothing but the end of Parliamentary Democracy. Though the members in the opposition demanded division they were not allowed to vote by the Deputy Chairman. This kind of manipulation is shameful and such authoritarian fascist behavior under the guidance of the RSS-BJP led Modi Government in order to aid the corporate interests cannot be allowed in a democracy,” said the AIKS press release.

The statement added that by negating voting rights, the Centre’s passing of the Bill becomes null and void and called for a nation-wide protest on September 25.

Moreover, the MPs in opposition gave a no confidence motion against the Vice Chairman. MPs from the ruling alliance like the Telangana Rashtra Samithy, All India Dravida Munnetta Kazhakam also spoke strongly against the agriculture Bills.

“The government was not morally enjoying the majority support in the upper house. This is the indication of the political polarisation taking place at the state and national level based on the awakening among the peasantry against the anti-farmer policies of the Modi Government,” said AIKS.

The repercussions of the Bills were witnessed even before what transpired in the Rajya Sabha, when a 70-year-old farmer died by suicide on September 18 while protesting against the Bills in Punjab.

Farmers organisations in Punjab declared the man as the first martyr of the “Anti-Agriculture Bills movement,” said a Gauri Lankesh News report. The aged farmer had been participating in protests organised by the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU Ekta Ugrahan) since September 15 at Badal village.

While the police do not know the cause behind the aged farmer’s extreme step, the BKU’s (Ekta Ugrahan) General Secretary Sukhdev Singh claimed that he was under debt and demanded the administration give compensation to the family of the deceased.

The post The end of Parliament Democracy: Farmers’ Unions decry passage of Agri Bills in RS appeared first on SabrangIndia.