Farmer Protest: CJI Asked The Government – Will You Stay The Farm Laws Or Should We Impose The Stay?

Delhi, January 11, 2021: The protest on agricultural laws has been on the streets for more than a quarter of a month. The Supreme Court hearing is being held on the legality of the peasant movement and the agricultural laws. During the hearing itself, the Chief Justice said, “We are disappointed with the process.” 

During this time, the Supreme Court clearly asked them to stop imposing these laws, otherwise the Supreme Court will have to impose a ban. The validity of agricultural laws has been challenged by farmers’ organization and lawyer ML Sharma. Sharma has said in the petition that the Central Government does not have the right to enact laws related to agriculture. Agriculture and land is the subject of the state and it is shown in Entries 14 to 18 in List 2 (State List) of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. It is clearly a matter of the state. Therefore, this law should be repealed. At present, the bench has completed the hearing and the results regarding the case may arrive today or tomorrow.

Farmer protest Supreme Court hearing updates: 

· The Supreme Court said that if we postpone the law, no reason shall remain for the movement to continue. The court suggested the name of former CJI Lodha for the committee, but the Center said they would recommend the person. After this, the bench was adjourned. It is believed that the result may arrive today or tomorrow.

· On the agricultural laws, the Supreme Court said that we do not wish to say anything, the protests may continue, but who will take responsibility for all this? The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said that we have not ordered to issue a stay order against the law, but the problem has to be resolved.

· Salve said that the court should keep in mind that in this way the demand to put a stay order on other laws will also arise. After this, the Supreme Court indicated the formation of a committee on agricultural laws, which will listen to the grievances of the people.

· Harish Salve, appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeking to end the agitation, said that if the court issues a stay order, then he assures on their behalf that they are ready to debate provisionally with the committee. To this, the farmers’ lawyer said that for this they would have to talk to the farmers as there are 400 organizations. For this, they should be given a day’s time.

· The court said that the farmers are protesting against the laws, let them express their objections to the committee, we can accept the committee’s recommendations. The Supreme Court said that we are extremely disappointed and regretful that the Center could not find the solution to the problem and the farmers’ demonstration.

· The Supreme Court told the farmers’ organizations that are protesting against the agricultural laws that as the Supreme Court is the supreme most judicial body of India and will definitely fulfill their duty and work on the matter. They also stated that they are unaware of whether people are following the laws of social distancing or not, but are worried about the adequate provision of their (farmers) food and water.

· The Supreme Court has questioned the government – will you ban the agricultural laws or shall we impose the ban? After this, the central government opposed the ban on new agricultural laws. Attorney General K.K. Venugopal told the court that no law can be banned unless it violates fundamental rights or constitutional schemes.

· The Supreme Court reiterated the need of the committee on agricultural laws and said that if the committee suggested, it would prohibit the enforcement of this law.

· The Supreme Court said that it wanted the matter to be resolved through negotiations, but no response has been given by the Center to ban agricultural laws for the time being.

· The Supreme Court said that we are not talking about the repeal of these agricultural laws at the moment, it is a very delicate situation. However, the court rebuked the Center and said that we do not know whether you are part of the solution or the problem.

· The Supreme Court said that if something went wrong, each one of us would be responsible. Hearing the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of agricultural laws, the CJI said that we do not want anyone’s blood on our hands.

· The Supreme Court told the Center on the new agricultural laws, “What is going on?” States are rebelling against your laws. Not a single petition was filed before us, stating that these three agricultural laws are beneficial for the farmers.

· Chief Justice said that some people have committed suicide, old and women are part of the movement.

· During the hearing of a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the three agricultural laws, the Chief Justice said that we do not know whether the negotiations are underway. Can the Krishi laws be implemented only for a short period of time?

· As soon as the hearing started in the Supreme Court, the government affirmed that negotiations were going on from both sides. On this, the Chief Justice said that we are very disappointed with the way the talks are going on between the government and farmers regarding the new agricultural laws.

· Supreme Court begins hearing. These petitions include petitions filed by DMK MP Tiruchi Siva, RJD MP Manoj K Jha.

· The hearing on Monday before the three judges headed by Chief Justice, SA Bobde is important because the government has said that if the Supreme Court gives its verdict in favor of the farmers then they won’t have to protest. Agriculture Minister Narendra Singh Tomar had said that the Central Government has made the laws on the basis of entry 33 of the concurrent list, they feel that this entry has the right to make laws on agricultural marketing.

· Significantly, on the last hearing, the court said that it will simultaneously hear petitions challenging the end of the farmer movement and challenging the agricultural laws. However, the government opposed this and affirmed that if a hearing was initiated on the legality of these laws, then the negotiations with the farmers would have to be halted. The government had said that the next round of talks with farmers would be held on Saturday. But this conversation failed yesterday. The farmers are adamant about withdrawing the laws.

Mention of possibility of corona outbreak         

Four, including lawyer Rishabh Sharma, have filed petitions to remove the farmer agitators from Delhi’s borders. He stated that the Covid-19 could be spread by the crowding on their borders. On the other hand, the petition challenging the agricultural laws has been filed by four including Bharatiya Kisan Union, Bhanu faction, MP Tiruchi Siva.