The Supreme Court of India has recommended the establishment of a “neutral umpire” to mediate and resolve the ongoing blockade at the Shambhu border between Punjab and Haryana, amidst a tense standoff related to farmers’ protests. The court’s intervention comes as both sides face significant challenges in addressing the farmers’ grievances and managing the disruptions caused by the blockade.
During a recent hearing, the Supreme Court, led by Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, emphasized the need for an impartial mediator to bridge the trust deficit between the protesting farmers and the government. “You have to take some steps to reach out to farmers. Why would they otherwise want to come to Delhi? You are sending ministers from here and despite their best intentions, there is a trust deficit. They will think you are only talking about self-interest and ignoring local issues. Why don’t you send a neutral umpire?” the bench inquired.
The hearing focused on the ongoing dispute over the Shambhu border blockade, which has been a flashpoint of contention between the farmers and the authorities. The blockade was initially set up in February after several farmers’ organizations announced a march to Delhi to demand, among other things, a legal guarantee for Minimum Support Price (MSP) for crops. The move resulted in clashes between the protesters and security personnel.
Haryana’s Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the state’s actions, arguing that while Haryana has no objection to farmers’ protests, the use of heavy machinery like tanks and JCBs (excavators) exacerbates tensions. Mehta challenged a recent high court order mandating the removal of barricades at the border, arguing that such measures are crucial for maintaining order and preventing potential disruptions.
The Supreme Court underscored that the highway cannot remain blocked indefinitely, as it affects public convenience and economic activities. The Solicitor General sought a temporary pause on the high court’s directive to remove barricades, citing concerns over public safety and legal restrictions. He described JCBs and similar equipment as “virtual war tanks,” emphasizing their role in heightening the conflict.
Punjab’s Attorney General Gurminder Singh highlighted the economic ramifications of the blockade, noting its severe impact on the state’s economy.
In response, the Supreme Court proposed the formation of a committee comprising eminent individuals to facilitate dialogue between the farmers, the Haryana government, and the central authorities. The committee’s mandate would be to understand the viewpoints of all parties, address their concerns, and work towards a fair and just resolution.
The court directed that all parties adhere to a status quo while the committee is constituted and instructed both states to coordinate efforts to gradually remove the barricades without causing undue inconvenience to the public.
In its order, the bench stated, “We have impressed upon them to have instructions re: constitution of some independent committee comprising such eminent persons who can reach out to farmers and other stakeholders in order to find out viable solution to their demands that can be fair, just and in the interests of one and all.”
Sources By Agencies
