Farmers’ protest couldn’t end up well in Supreme Court, Stay Order Proves This. The domain of the court is the lawfulness of farm rules, but there is far more to the farmers’ protests than that. When the Supreme Court strongly referred to the Centre for its approach to the farmers’ protests on Monday.It was, 11 January, it was tempting to see this as a positive step in the row over the contentious farm laws. The intervention of the court could help to resolve the stand-off between the government and the farmers protesting.
A day later, the subsequent stay on enforcing the farm laws gave a similar temptation. To see the supreme court as a rational mediator who is willing to step in. Also try to take steps to ensure that the government negotiates with the farmers on their demands in good faith.
The question, however, is that in this aspect of the stand-off between the farmers and the Centre. There is really no position for the court to play and, indeed, its presence only risks muddying the waters.
This is not just about the fact that all four members of the ‘expert committee’ have already voiced their support for the laws. They argued against their removal, set up by the court to hear from all relevant stakeholders and report. The issues with the strategy of the court go deeper but, sadly, run counter to its institutional functions.
ALSO READ: Will Work From Home Boost Female Employment?
The SC will inevitably end up being pulled into the day’s significant socio-political flashpoints. But its role in them must also contribute to the legal issues involved, where it can play a judicial role.
Nevertheless, the judges have made some less-than-helpful statements that have created controversy and have not helped to create confidence with the protesting farmers.