Agriculture law: Central government filed an affidavit in Supreme Court

68
War between activists and Supreme Court may intensify

The central government has hurriedly filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court keeping its stand on agricultural laws.

The Supreme Court will pronounce its decision on the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Central Government’s agricultural laws.

In this case, there was a long hearing in the Supreme Court on Monday in which the court had expressed its displeasure with the Central Government.

The court showed strong attitude that the government has passed this law of some consultation, as a result of which the farmers have been sitting on dharna for more than a month.

The central government has hurriedly filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court keeping its stand on agricultural laws.

The Supreme Court will pronounce its decision on the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Central Government’s agricultural laws.

In this case, there was a long hearing in the Supreme Court on Monday in which the court had expressed its displeasure with the Central Government.

The court showed strong attitude that the government has passed this law of some consultation, as a result of which the farmers have been sitting on dharna for more than a month.

The government said that it was necessary to bring out some facts, that is why this affidavit is being filed.

In its affidavit, the government says that the central government has been in serious discussion with the state governments for the last two decades for agricultural reforms.

The government claims that the farmers of the country are happy with these agricultural laws because through them they will get additional opportunities to sell their crops apart from the existing facilities.

According to the government, no rights have been taken away from these laws.

The affidavit further states that the government has made every effort to address the grievances of some farmers who are protesting about it.

The government said that farmers across the country have accepted this law and only a few farmers and other people who are against this law have put a condition for its withdrawal.

The government, in its affidavit, once again said, “The demand for withdrawal of laws is neither justified nor acceptable to the central government.”

Farmers refuse to be part of the committee

Earlier, farmers have refused to be a part of any committee constituted by the Supreme Court to remove the deadlock between the government and agitating farmers regarding agricultural laws.

In the hearing held on Monday, the court said that it is being considered to stop the implementation of these agricultural laws. On Monday, the court said strongly that no solution has been found so far by the dialogue between the government and the farmers, so the court can set up a committee to resolve this issue.

But the farmers have refused to be part of any such committee.

The farmers issued a statement late on Monday evening saying that they are grateful to the Supreme Court for understanding the farmers’ problem and for the words that brought comfort to the heart during the court hearing on Monday.

The farmers said that they also welcome the suggestion of the Supreme Court to put agricultural laws on hold, but the farmers are not ready to be part of any committee appointed by the Supreme Court on their individual level and collectively.

He said that his lawyers had clearly stated in the court on Monday that they have no right to give their consent to the formation of any committee without consulting the farmers.

Farmers said that on Monday evening they had a long discussion with their lawyers and after considering its benefits, they have come to the same conclusion unanimously that they will not be part of any committee due to the obstinate attitude of the government.

Meanwhile, Agriculture Minister Narendra Singh Tomar said on Monday’s hearing, “The issue of agricultural laws is under consideration in the Supreme Court and I do not think it necessary to comment on this. The next round of talks with farmer leaders is to be held on January 15. I hope Is that we’ll find a solution. “

The Supreme Court on Monday expressed its displeasure at the way the central government passed the agricultural laws and how the protests of farmers started after that have been handled.

The Congress has given its response saying that Prime Minister Narendra Modi should apologize to the farmers after the Supreme Court reprimand and withdraw these three laws.

Senior journalist Suchitra Mohanty , who covered the Supreme Court , told BBC Hindi that the Supreme Court on Monday expressed displeasure over the way the government handled the farmers’ issue and asked what was happening?

The court told the government, “You have made a law without adequate consultation which has resulted in this protest. You people are in public life, the Government of India has to take responsibility for this. If the responsibility in the government If there was any feeling of that, you should have stopped them for a short time. If you are bringing the law, then you can do it in a better way. “

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Arvind Bobde heard the petitions filed on the issue of agrarian laws and farmers’ protests. Among these were petitions by DMK MP Tiruchi Shiva and RJD MP Manoj Jha. These people have raised questions about the constitutional validity of agricultural laws.

The court said, “We do not think that the central government is handling this matter well. We have to take a step today. This is a serious matter. We are proposing to set up a committee on this. We They are also considering that the implementation of these laws should be banned till the next order. “

Proposal to constitute committee

Regarding the central government’s attitude on this matter, the Supreme Court further said, “We suggest that the implementation of these laws should be stopped to open the way for dialogue before the committee. We do not want to say anything more. Continue the protest But who will take responsibility for it? “

“Regardless of whether you believe it or not, the Supreme Court will do its job. Even if you continue your sit-in at the protest venue or if the protest moves a little or its scope increases in some other area. We are afraid that it might disturb the peace “If something happens, each one of us will be responsible for it. We don’t want anyone’s blood to splatter on our hands. We are the Supreme Court. We will do what we have to do. Try to understand it.”

The Supreme Court asserted, “If the Central Government does not want to stop the implementation of agricultural laws, then we will give a stay order on this. The Government of India will have to take responsibility for this. If you (the Center) are bringing these laws, then you can do this better can do.”

Fear of breach of peace

The court also said that not a single petition has been filed in which these laws have been described as good. “The court asked, we do not know if negotiations are going on? But can’t these laws be stopped for a short time?”

“If we stop the enforcement of agricultural laws then you can continue your protest. We do not want such criticisms that the court is suppressing the Protest. It needs to be considered whether the protesters Can be removed a little bit away from there. To be honest, we are afraid that there might be something that could disturb the peace. Whether it is intentional or non-intentional. We want to make sure that the roads But there is no violence. “

“We will stop the implementation of agricultural laws. We want to make it clear that we are not suppressing the protest. You can continue the protest. But the question is, should the protests continue in the same place? If If the central government does not want to stop the law, we will stop the implementation of these laws. “

Stay order on laws

Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for a farmers’ organization in the Supreme Court, said, “How can such an important law be passed in Parliament by voice vote? If the government was serious, it could have called a joint session of Parliament and the government Why are you hesitant to do this. Farmers should be allowed to go to Ramlila Maidan. We are not interested in any kind of violence. “

Attorney General KK Venugopal said that in the old judgments of the Supreme Court it has been said that the court cannot pass a stay order on the laws. Venugopal put before the Supreme Court the decision of those decisions in which the court said that stay on the laws cannot be granted.

He said, “The court cannot grant a stay order on any law unless the court recognizes that the law has been passed without any legal right and infringes on fundamental rights.”

Peaceful protest

On this argument, the Supreme Court said that we are sorry to say that as a central government, you have not been able to solve this problem. However, the Attorney General said that the farmers are protesting in a peaceful manner.

Venugopal said, “Whatever happened at Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar’s rally cannot happen. To ruin a day of national importance like January 26, farmers are planning to march on Rajpath with their tractors. “

Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for one of the petitioners, said that there are some elements which need to be removed from the protest venue. Salve referred to a Canadian organization which is raising money under the banner of ‘Justice for Sikhs’.

Petitioner ML Sharma said that Parliament had no right to make agricultural laws. On this, the Supreme Court said that we do not understand your arguments. We will hear this later.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here