MOOT PROPOSITION

1. “Mayura” is a democratic country with ancient history, tradition and culture consisting of
28 States and 8 union territories and having a total population of 1.25 Crore.

2. Mayura has a written constitution identical to the Constitution of India and the spirit of
socialism embodied in the preamble pervades the entire constitution. Social Justice,
Federalism, Independent Judiciary, Separation of powers are some of the other significant
features. The legislative powers are the same as in the seventh schedule of the Constitution
which consist of three lists namely, Union List, State List, and Concurrent list. The laws in
Mayura are the same as in India. The democratic socialism is acknowledged as the cherished
goal of the political system in Mayura since independence.

3. Agriculture has been the primary occupation of the people of Mayura and it approximately
contributes to 17% of GDP. After the independence of Mayura, the Mayura Union Party
(MUP) won the elections and formed the government. They prioritized the agricultural sector
which is the foundation of Mayura’s economy.

4. Nearly, 40 per cent of the farmers in Mayura own two and a half to five acres of land and
more than half own less than 20 acres. Only a small percentage qualify to be labelled as big
landlords.

5. MUP government introduced a slew of policies and investments in all facets from
irrigation, fertilizers to land reforms to achieve the goal of self-sufficiency in agriculture. The
country's main crops include rice, wheat and several vegetables and fruits.

6. In the successive years, MUP government focused on raising public investment in

7. Therefore, Dhahiya Farmers Association (DFA), a body protecting the rights and
safeguarding the welfare of the farmers, conducted a survey in different parts of Mayura to
find the efficacy of this policy measure.

8. The findings of the survey revealed that “the structure, conduct and performance of
agricultural marketing system in the country was ridden with inefficiencies. Not all the
agricultural produce have been accorded the MSP. Many segments of the agricultural sector,
particularly, the perishable commodities including fruits, vegetables, flowers, meat, fish and
livestock have not received the appropriate level of attention and treatment.”

9. The DFA appealed to the Union and State governments to take appropriate measures to
prevent distress sale by the farmers under the exploitation of creditors, traders and the
intermediaries.

10. An expert committee was constituted by the MUP government to review the situation in
all states. Based on the recommendations of the committee, a major reform towards the
organized agricultural marketing sector were ushered in with adoption of Agriculture Produce
Markets (Regulation) Acts and Agricultural Produce Market Committee by all the states and
Union Territories in 1960’s and 1970’s.

11. Even though APMR brought in a great improvement from the preceding trader-dominated
exploitative system, it failed to serve the objective of price discovery in a fair and transparent
manner.

12. In the year 2010, Deshbandhu, collector of Vidhule district was upset with the increasing
number of farmer’s suicide in his district and across the country. He started an NGO named
“Pavalan” to provide help to the small and marginal farmers who were at the mercy of the
traders and middleman. To relieve the farmers from the web of perpetual indebtedness,
“Pavalan” along with “DFA” held agitations all over of the country pressing for waiver of
farm loans and providing subsidies for agricultural inputs.

13. Meanwhile in 2014, Mayura People Party (MPP) with a thumping majority came to
power and formed the government by defeating MUP. On assuming power the newly elected
government as promised in their political manifesto brought many schemes and policies for
the upliftment of farmers through which more than 80 lakh of main and marginal farmers
were benefited.

14. The MPP government within two years of assuming power ordered the Department of
Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers welfare to study and analyse the shortcomings of the
current agricultural market environment of the country. The findings of the study revealed the
prevalence of corruption and monopoly of traders and middleman in the markets. It brought
to light the poor state of infrastructure in these markets and also that they didn’t function in
the interest of the farmers.
15. Subsequently, there was an outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic which brought the entire
world to a standstill. All the governments of the world including “Mayura” imposed
lockdown in an effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus. As a stimulus to the flagging
economy, different measures were taken by the government.

16. The Government with an aim to transform the agriculture and its allied sector introduced
three bills namely, 1. Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation)
Bill, 2020 2. Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and
Farm Services Bill, 2020 and 3. Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill, 2020. These new
legislations are identical to the Indian ones. While introducing the bills, the minister
announced that all these measures would give effect to the neoliberal policy shift which is
essential for a welfare state. Further, he said these laws would bring farmers better
opportunities and usher in new technologies in agriculture and enable the farmers to sell their
products throughout the country without any barriers.

17. But this created uproar in the parliament as all the opposition members of the parliament
were against it and termed it as ‘anti-farm bills’. Despite this, the bills were passed through
the procedure of the voice-vote in the parliament, even though division was asked for in the
Upper House.

18. However, few members of the parliament who were a part of the ruling party resigned
protesting against the laws passed. They stated to the media that their resignation was an
action in the spirit of democracy.

19. There was chaos as farmers all over the country protested. The apprehension of the
protestors was that these enactments would result in the privatization of agriculture and
would transform agriculture into industry-based sector.

20. The State Governments were also not in favour of the enactments. They declared that
these Acts passed by MPP Government as unconstitutional as it encroached upon the Entries
in the State List under the Seventh Schedule. Moreover, to cater to the demands of the
farmers of their respective States, several States passed amendments to the said Acts.

21. Also, more than a lakh of farmers from various states congregated in the capital to protest
and demonstrate their opposition to the farm laws through indefinite strike and dharna. The
mass strike by the farmers in the freezing cold without adequate food and basic amenities
gained the attention of the people across the world and the media around the world. On the
70th day of the protest, a farmer named “Charan Das” aged 75 years, from the State of
Jalampur committed suicide leaving behind a suicide note which revealed his fear of loss of
livelihood due to these farm laws.

22. Next day, in an interview to a leading news channel, his son “Veer Prathap” accused the
government of its callous attitude in responding to the protests of the farmers. He alleged that
a major corporate group Vadhani had established a number of warehouses in his district and
across the country and these laws were passed to facilitate the corporate takeover of the
farming sector.

23. After this tragic incident, the MPP government took initiatives to resolve the crisis by
inviting the protesting farmers for talks. But even after multiple rounds of talks consensus
could not be reached. Meanwhile, the protesting farmers were asked to vacate from the place
of dharna and a petition was filed in the Apex Court of Mayura for their removal from the
capital.

24. The opposing States Governments filed a petition under Article 131 challenging the
legislative competence in enacting these laws as it violates the fabric of federalism which is
the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. It also contended that the union government by
these enactments has relinquished its duties to protect and safeguard the farmers and
consumers.

25. The Dhahiya Farmers Association has also filed a Public Interest Litigation under Article
32 of Constitution contending that these laws violated their Fundamental Rights.

26. ‘Pavalan’ the NGO filed a PIL seeking a stay to the implementation of the farm laws.

27. The Supreme Court after staying the implementation of the Act appointed a team of
Economists to negotiate with the agitating farmers even though the farmers and the
Government did not agree to the said course of action.

28. The Court has now fixed all the cases for hearing as to the correctness and propriety of
the above and also the validity of the legislations.