India’s Farmers’ Protests: A Briefing and the Consequences

Feb 19

Feb 19 India’s Farmers’ Protests: A Briefing and the Consequences

In September of 2020, the Upper and Lower Houses of the Indian Parliament passed three separate bills: the Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act. Together, these bills loosen the rules around the sale, pricing and storage of farm products. The Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, called it a “watershed moment for Indian agriculture.”

But it’s also been called “anti-farmer.” The laws loosened protections that have historically protected farmers from an unbridled agricultural market. Additionally, one of the pieces of legislation stops disputes by farmers against corporations from being taken to regular courts. This removes the opportunity to dispute any harmful actions taken against them. 86% of India’s farmland is controlled by individual farmers, who own less than 5 acres of land each. More than 60% of the Indian population depend on farming for their livelihood. They are, understandably, concerned about these new laws.

While the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government lauds these new laws, arguing that “these reforms give expanded market access and provide greater flexibility to farmers,” more than 250 million people across India have taken to the streets to protest. Mostly centred in the Indian states of Haryana and Punjab, these protests converged on the borders of New Delhi in November and have escalated since then.

Protesters are demanding several things from the Indian government, including:

· “Withdrawal of all ‘anti-farmer laws and anti-worker labour codes’

· Payment of 7,500 Rupees to each non-tax paying family

· Monthly food distributions to needy families

· Expansion of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act of 2005 (MGNREGS) to include 200 workdays per year, higher wages, and the Act’s extension to urban industries

· Stopping the ‘privatization of the public sector, including the financial sector’ and halting the ‘corporatization of government-run manufacturing and service entities’

· Withdrawal of the ‘draconian forced premature retirement of government and PSU (Public Sector) employees’

· Pensions for all, the scrapping of the National Pension System, and the reimposition of the earlier pension plan with amendments”

Additionally, Indian authorities and government forces have been accused of committing human rights abuses against protesters and their supporters. The Indian government has restricted free speech by prohibiting protest, targeting critics of the government by jailing senior politicians, journalists and activists, and cutting internet access in New Delhi. In their suppression of the protests, the Indian government forces are using water cannons, chemical agents and batons.

The impact of these protests is evident both internally and externally.

Internally, the suppression of farmers by the BJP-led government could have consequences for the re-election of BJP officials, including Modi. The BJP has already lost a long-time ally, the Shiromani Akali Dal, which threatens its coalition government, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). If the BJP loses too many seats within Parliament, the party could lose its position of power. Additionally, the Congress party has been extremely outspoken in its opposition to the reforms and has called for a special parliamentary session to repeal the new bills. Again, this threatens the BJP’s hold over the Parliament. If the disagreement within Parliament is threatening to the BJP’s position, then so is their alienation of farmers, one of the largest constituencies in India’s electorate. The farmers have historically voted in favour of the BJP, and this loss of trust could threaten their margin in future elections. It is difficult to know the full extent of the impact that the protests will have on Indian democracy, but it certainly has the potential to jeopardise the BJP’s majority.

Externally, the Indian government’s actions could harm international relations. India has the world’s largest diaspora, of 18 million people. This diaspora has been active in their disapproval of the BJP-led government. To date, there have been demonstrations outside of Indian embassies in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia. The Global Indian Progressive Alliance, which represents several diaspora organizations across the world, has demanded that the Indian government recognize the farmers’ right to peaceful protest. The diaspora could play a potentially large role in the international community’s condemning the actions of Modi and the Indian government.

Several countries and international organizations have also spoken out against the suppression of the protests. The United Nations Human Rights Council has called for restraint by the protesters and the government. The United States has come out in support for the encouragement of dialogue and the right to protest in India. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, despite earlier calls from India to cease and desist commentary on the situation (or risk harming their diplomatic relationship), has said that “Canada will always stand up for the right of peaceful protests anywhere around the world” in reference to the farmers.

The internal and external consequences of India’s suppression of protests against the three farmers bills have yet to mature, and will only grow more complex. The full extent of the impact of months of protests on India, domestically and internationally, has yet to be seen.