hidden image

Farm Bills: Attack on Federalism and Livelihood of Farmers

Joseph Maliakan Joseph Maliakan
02 Nov 2020

The government’s three Farm Bills are not only a blatant attack on the federal structure of the Constitution but also adversely affect the livelihoods of millions of small and marginal farmers across the length and breadth of the country. It will also have far-reaching consequences, obviously very negative, on the country’s food security.

The first question that arises when one analyses the Farm Bills is that, if it is going to greatly benefit the farmers, why did the central government not take into confidence the states or the farmers before the ordinances were promulgated in June and subsequently the Bills were presented and passed without debate in the monsoon session of the Parliament in September. Even a suggestion by the Opposition to refer the Bills to a select committee was not considered by the government.

As per the 7th Schedule of the Indian Constitution, agriculture, agricultural markets, education, research and land are the primary legislative domains of the states. One is at a total loss to understand why the Modi government chose to encroach upon the states’ domain and enter into bitter confrontation with the states, especially the ones ruled by non-BJP governments.

In a vast and diverse country like India, no central law, especially dealing with agriculture, can be implemented without the cooperation of state governments. There are many ways through which the states can circumvent the central laws without coming into conflict. The Rajasthan, Punjab and Kerala governments have already adopted several measures, some through executive orders and others through legislation which in effect nullifies the central legislation. Punjab has passed a bill to restore the agricultural safeguards for farmers through the regulatory framework of Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961, to secure and protect the interests and livelihoods of farmers and farm labourers as also all others engaged in agriculture and related activities. Kerala has declared Minimum Support Price (MSP) for 16 items of agricultural produce to circumvent the central Farm Bills. The constitutionality of the laws are also being challenged in the Supreme Court.

The Farm Bills basically promise removal of restrictions on marketing farm products, allow cultivators to engage with private companies to sell their crops – in other words, undertake contract farming, and grant farmers the freedom to sell their produce at any place and to any person of their choice in a private market.

Farmers believe that this is the first step towards removing MSP for different farm products, especially paddy and wheat. Though the Modi government has been asserting that MSP will continue, nowhere in the Bills is MSP even mentioned. 

As for the farmers’ capacity to operate in a private market, even in Punjab, agriculturally the most advanced state in the country, 86.2 percent are small and marginal farmers holding less than two acres of land per household and cannot be expected to operate profitably in a private market. If this is the case with Punjab, one can imagine the plight of farmers in other states when they will be compelled to operate in a purely private market without any regulations whatsoever. Even though agriculture is exclusively in the states’ domain, the central act prohibits the state governments from levying any market fee, cess or levy outside the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) areas.

Ironically, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020, prohibits farmers from approaching the civil courts against violations of contracts or cheating by private players. All powers for dispute resolution is vested in the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the District Magistrate. Our administrators, the majority of whom still working with the mindset of the colonial administrators, can hardly be expected to deliver justice to the poor farmers.

And under Clause 18 of the Act, no legal action can be taken against any government official if the actions are in ‘good faith’. It is virtually impossible to prove that any action by a corrupt government official is taken in bad faith. In short, while the farm acts have been made law with laudable intentions, they are likely to, at least in the immediate future, adversely affect the lives of farmers.
 

Recent Posts

By choosing the name Leo XIV, the new Pope signals a commitment to justice, humility, and modern relevance—echoing Leo XIII's legacy of defending workers' rights and embracing science, while addressin
apicture A. J. Philip
12 May 2025
India's development dream demands more than GDP growth—social equity, peace, and inclusive governance. Rising communal polarisation, divisive laws, and political exploitation of religious identity thr
apicture Jacob Peenikaparambil
12 May 2025
"The Earth is a very small stage in a vast, cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilt by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and triumph they can become momentary masters of a frac
apicture M L Satyan
12 May 2025
In Pahalgam, the terrorists intentionally asked the names of the victims before firing them because they wanted to create a feeling in the minds of Indians that the Muslims killed the Hindus, and that
apicture Jijo Thomas Placheril
12 May 2025
Despite long opposing caste census as divisive, the BJP has now embraced it, likely for electoral gain. Rooted in upper-caste ideology, the RSS-BJP's caste politics have historically undermined social
apicture Ram Puniyani
12 May 2025
Moral ambition urges people to reject hollow careers and pursue meaningful change. Rutger Bregman critiques societal conformity, wasted talent, inequality, and environmental harm, advocating for purpo
apicture G Ramachandram
12 May 2025
The bulldozer, once a tool of construction, now symbolises state-sponsored intimidation—used to demolish homes, silence dissent, and marginalise minorities. Justice demands more than compensation; it
apicture Thomas Menamparampil
12 May 2025
If the drums must beat, let it be for celebration, not conflict. For parades, not pyres. For a country that chooses peace not because it is weak, but because it is strong enough to want no more widows
apicture Robert Clements
12 May 2025
She lost her husband in the attack, yet said she gained two Kashmiri brothers—an almost unbelievable testament to humanity rising above terror, even as the absence of security exposed the failure that
apicture A. J. Philip
05 May 2025
Amid grief, Kashmiris condemned terror and offered aid, while media and political voices stoked communal hatred. True patriotism lies in unity, accountability, and empathy—the values that can heal Ind
apicture Jacob Peenikaparambil
05 May 2025