For Super Middlemen

Context: The new farm laws transgress Constitution’s federal structure.

Farm laws recently enacted by the Parliament:

1. The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020 (Act No. 20 of 2020).
2. Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020 (Act No. 21 of 2020).
3. The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act (ECA), 2020 (Act No. 22 of 2020).

Positive implications: Absolute freedom to carry on inter-state or intra-sate trade and commerce in farm produce and removal of levy or fee under the state laws.

Issues with the enactment of farm laws:

• Strips the states’ right: Act No. 20 and Act No. 21 are clearly referable to Entry 14 and Entry 28 of state list, which includes “agriculture” and “markets”. 
  • Supreme Court (S.C.) judgement on ITC Ltd. v/s Agricultural Produce Market Committee (2002) implied that the Parliament is incompetent to legislate on agriculture.
• Observation of Constitution-framers: wanted states to deal exclusively with matters relating to agriculture.
  • E.g. T T Krishnamachari (a member of the Drafting Committee of Constitution) rejected an amendment that sought planning of agriculture and land revenue systems, at an all-India scale.
  • He did not believe that the Centre is capable of handling vast problems in agriculture, and they should only have certain powers for the purpose of coordination.
• Against the Directive Principles of State Policy: to distribute resources to serve common good
  • It creates “super middlemen” by promoting trading giants in agriculture who can control agricultural activity.
• Against the interests of the general public: Rather it serves the interests of large businesses.
  • E.g. Act 22, made the ECA, 1955, redundant, and now the government can control the supply and price of essential commodities only in exceptional circumstances.
• Inadequate in addressing the inherent problems of the cultivators: as they are illiterate and ignorant; as recognised by S.C. in C. V. S. Arunachala Nadar Etc vs The State of Madras & Others.
  • The court held that “the establishment of regulated markets must form an essential part of any ordered plan of agricultural development in this country.”