Farmer Protest: Farmers will take out 'tractor parade' despite Supreme Court order

Posted on 13th Jan 2021 by rohit kumar

The farmers who are agitating on the borders of Delhi say that they welcome the initiative of the Supreme Court, but they allege that the committee which has been formed with the demands of the farmers will work in 'the government's favor'.

 

Rakesh Tikait, a representative of farmers' associations and leader of the Bharatiya Kisan Union, while talking to the BBC said that the farmers are not confident of the four people whose committee has been formed because some of them openly supported the government about the agriculture bill. Have done

 

Talking on the phone from the outskirts of Delhi after the proceedings in the Supreme Court, Rakesh Tikait said that the farmers will continue their agitation and will not change the site of their movement either.

 

He said, "We thank the Supreme Court that the Hon'ble Chief Justice and other judges of the Bench at least understood the hardships of the agitating farmers. The Supreme Court has also defended the right to agitate. This A very big deal. "

 

But Tikait says that the farmers are not going to get anything by postponing the bill. He said, "We demand that the government withdraw the agricultural law. Apart from this, we do not want anything. By the way, we are taking the opinion of the law experts, but it is certain that until the bill is returned, there is no return home."

 

The farmers were not in favor of the committee

 

On Monday, Dushyant Dave, Prashant Kishore, HS Phoolka, and Coleen Gonzalez were not present in the court proceedings on behalf of the farmers in the Supreme Court.

 

The farmer unions had yesterday made it clear that they were not in favor of the formation of any committee in this case and had also said that no lawyer would be present on their behalf during the hearing on Tuesday.

 

Earlier, the United Kisan Morcha issued a joint statement that "It is clear from the dogma of the government that it will not agree to the committee on the question of withdrawing the law."

 

But after the directions of the Supreme Court, the round of meetings has started and agitating farmers' organizations are discussing their future strategy.

 

Paramjit Singh, who is working for the United Kisan Morcha, says that almost all organizations agree that there is no solution to the committee. He says that the postponement of the laws till the next order means that the matter will be pulled and the matter will turn around where it is today.

 

Senior journalist Arvind Kumar, who is knowledgeable about agricultural affairs and farmer history, said that farmers are suspecting the intention of the government because the way the farmers adopted the process of passing these laws, they consider it wrong.

 

Arvind Kumar says that if the government had convened a special session of Parliament before passing these laws and the members would have expressed their opinion on this, then the farmers would not have been suspicious of the government's intention.

 

He said, "The government should have replaced the ordinance with a bill related to agricultural law. If such a government had done so, the farmers would not have been angry. Then the comments made by the members of the Union Cabinet about the farmers agitating from time to time. Have also done the work of provoking the farmers. "

 

The movement will continue

 

While speaking to the BBC, Joint Secretary and Advocate of All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee, said that after the Supreme Court proceedings, representatives of farmers organizations met under the auspices of United Farmers Orchha and they have decided that the tractor which is on Republic Day The call for a march has been called, it will continue.

 

Talking to the BBC, he said that this march has been said to be taken out when the government program ends. He says, "After the end of the official program on Republic Day, a citizen of India can celebrate this day. It is everyone's right. Where did the image of someone in it get tarnished?"

 

Saha says that the farmers' organizations have also decided that they will challenge the directions of the Supreme Court because everyone is unanimous that those who make the policy should talk to the farmers and not the court.

 

According to Saha, the farmers' organizations said that the women involved in the movement have come on their own. He said that the court should not consider these agitating women as weak.

 

At the same time, Professor Darshan Pal of the Revolutionary Farmers Union said, "In the Supreme Court committee, whether they are BS or the other three members, all have been supporting the agricultural laws brought by the government. In such a situation, they will take a one-way decision So that is not going to benefit the farmers. "

 

The committee which has been constituted by the Supreme Court includes Anil Ghanawat of the Shetkari organization, Ashok Gulati, agricultural economist, and Pramod Joshi, head of the International Food Policy Research Institute of South Asia.

 

Questions related to committee members

 

The opinion of the legalists is divided on the order of the Supreme Court to postpone agricultural laws till the next order.

 

While former Supreme Court judge Justice Rajendra Mal Lodha said that he had come up with the proposal to preside over the committee, which he turned down, former Supreme Court judge Markandey Katju said that the judiciary, executive, and legislature have their limitations. In which all three should work.

 

According to Katju, the judges should avoid activism more and their style of functioning should not be seen from anywhere, which suggests that they are trying to run the government. They say that the judiciary should respect other organs of democracy and should not encroach on their jurisdiction.

 

Other legalists, including Katju, also believe that Parliament should also have the right to repeal the laws made by Parliament.

 

Katju admits, "The court or judge can say that such a law is unconstitutional or 'ultra vires' according to the constitution. But the court or the judge cannot stop the law from being implemented."