The Supreme Court-created committee, which faces opposition attacks by protesters to publicly express its pro-government views on the three agrarian laws at the Center, said differently on Tuesday when discussing with various stakeholders
Committee members who set up the Supreme Court to resolve the case, however, suggested that repealing these laws altogether would not be appropriate for the necessary agricultural reform in the long run. Anil Ghanwat, a prominent member of the committee and president of the Shetkari Organization, which is active in Maharashtra, said there was a need for reform in agriculture and that if these laws were withdrawn, no political party would try in the next 50 years.
However, Ghanwat said the committee would listen to the words of all farmers, including those who oppose and support the law, and submit a report to the Supreme Court accordingly. He said that the laws enacted for the last 70 years are not in the best interest of the farmers and that around 4.5 lakh farmers have committed suicide.
He said farmers are getting poorer and drowning in debt. Some changes need to be made. Those changes are happening but protests have begun. After the committee’s first meeting here, the first meeting with farmers and other stakeholders was proposed on Thursday, Ghanwat said.
He said the committee’s biggest challenge was to prepare the protesting farmers to negotiate with us. Despite this, the committee wants to end protests that have been going on for a long time, Ghanwat said. Agricultural economists Ashok Gulati and Pramod Kumar Joshi were the other two members of the committee who attended the first meeting.
It is noteworthy that the Supreme Court set up a four-member committee on January 11, but protesting farmers questioned the opinion of hired members on farming laws in the past. After this, one member, Bhupinder Singh Mann, has shied away from it.
Nine rounds of talks were held separately between the central government and representatives of protesting farmers’ organizations, but the problem-solving initiative remains indefinite and the 10th round of talks is now being proposed on Wednesday. Explain that thousands of farmers have been protesting against the new farming laws for about two months at the Delhi border, which went into effect in September.
The lawsuits put an end to the knee-jerk and purchasing system at the minimum support price (MSP) and farmers protesting that farmers should be ‘at the mercy of big industrial firms’. However, the government has overcome these fears. Speaking to the media after the committee’s first meeting, Ghanwat said, “At our meeting today, we have decided to hold a meeting with the farmers and all stakeholders at 11 am on January 21. We make this meeting face-to-face and digital for the benefit of the farmers.
He informed the committee that apart from the farmers, central and state governments, the committee will get their views on these agricultural laws from farmer organizations and other stakeholders such as agro product exporters, traders, mill owners, dairy and poultry industries. The website will be launched soon to invite suggestions, Ghanwat said.
Talking Ghanwat, persuading the protesting farmers to come and talk to us is a big challenge. We do everything possible to talk to them. It is not yet clear whether the protesting farmers will not come to us for negotiations.
This is Ghanwat, who is accused of being a pro-government member of protesting peasant organizations and opposition parties. Whatever our ideology is, but now we are members of a committee formed by the Supreme Court. We are not unilateral. He said, “Committee members prepare their own personal views on agricultural legislation and submit a report to the Supreme Court. It is our duty to listen to both sides and impose our doctrine.
On the question of adding someone else to the committee to replace Mann, he said it was created by the Supreme Court and only the Supreme Court would decide who should be appointed. Gulati said all members of the committee were equal and ruled out the possibility of being appointed chairman of the committee.
Joshi said, our opinion may be different, but when the court is given such responsibility, we must act in a fair and transparent manner. We do not give our opinion on the report, it is very clear. He said the committee is hoping to prepare a report within two months as directed by the Supreme Court.
We have been given the responsibility and are releasing it properly, ”Ghanwat said. “We want to tell the protesting farmers who are hesitant to come before the committee, on whose behalf or on behalf of the government.” We are all from the Supreme Court.
.
