The case is pending before the Supreme Court but the Apex Court of the country has only option either to declare the law valid or to declare it invalid. In both the situations, I don’t find it a strong solution. So let’s see the possible solutions.

There are three possible solutions to the farmer’s protest —

  1. If government takes the law back. Meaning thereby laws are repealed.
  2. If protesting farmers prove the law unconstitutional before the Supreme Court and Court declares the law unconstitutional.
  3. If protesting farmers are ready to compromise with amendments.

Let me discuss it one by one.

There is no question of taking the laws back by Narendra Modi led government as they regularly saying in meetings with farmers that they won’t take it back. This government is known for its commitment so what they are saying, they will definitely do.

Second point is to prove the law unconstitutional. But there is chances of loosing the battle too. Suppose protesting farmers loose the battle (chances are maximum) in court then they will have no legal remedies available.

Some constitutional experts like Prof. Faizan Mustafa are saying that these laws are unconstitutional because agriculture is state subject under the seventh schedule of the constitution on which only state government can make the laws. But, in reality, it is not so. These laws have been made under the provisions of concurrent list of seventh schedule of the constitution on which center and state both have power to make the laws but if the subject matter of both the laws are same, the law passed by Parliament shall prevail over the state’ law.

Now we will see the entries of concurrent list of seventh schedule of the constitution under which parliament has passed all the three farm laws: –

  • Entry 33 of concurrent list – Trade and commerce in, and the production, supply and distribution of,— (a) the products of any industry where the control of such industry by the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest, and imported goods of the same kind as such products; (b) foodstuffs, including edible oilseeds and oils; (c) cattle fodder, including oilcakes and other concentrates; (d) raw cotton, whether ginned or unginned, and cotton seed; and (e) raw jute.
  • Entry 7 of concurrent list – Contracts, including partnership, agency, contracts of carriage, and other special forms of contracts, but not including contracts relating to agricultural land.
  • Entry 3 of concurrent list – The maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community.

If you have idea about all three farm laws, i.e., The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020, Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020 and Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020, you can easily conclude that first one is passed under entry 33, second one is under entry 7 and last one is under entry 3. Even a single farm law out of all three is not coming within the ambit of the entries of state list. Meaning thereby these laws can not be held unconstitutional on the ground that agriculture is state subject and parliament has no power to make laws on it.

Third and last point, if the farmers compromise with amendments. This is the best possible solution in my opinion in which there would be a win-win situation for both the sides. Since government is ready to amend the laws, farmers should put their demands before the government and government should accept the genuine points of the farmers.

DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text.