ASSIGNMENT ON POLITICAL

SCIENCE
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL
SCIENCE

TOPIC: IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

IN INDIA: A STUDY
NAME: KHABA KHANGEMBAM
ROLL: 2343008
SEMESTER: 2
PAPER: COMPARATIVE POLITICAL ANALYSIS
PAPER CODE: MPSC 201

SUBMITTED TO:
Dr. M Nandakishwor Singh
Assistant professor,
B.A, M.A, PGDHR, PHD
Specialization: Western Political Theory,
Philosophy and Indian Political Thought
 P age |1

PREFACE

This assignment has been done through reading of some of the well-known books
available in the market as well as library on the topic Importance of Social
Movements in India. The assignment pick up some the most important social
movement in India that has great impact on the nation as a whole
The assignment starts with the introduction on each chapter for better
understanding about the topic discussing in detail in each chapter. The content in
this assignment i all about my personal understanding based on my reading on
some of the books and materials mention in the reference section.
It end with a conclusion summarizing all the topics discussed in the assignment.
 P age |2

IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MOVEMENT IN INDIA: A CASE STUDY

Content

Sl. no. page

INTRODUCTION 3-6

i. Social Movement and its Definition

ii. Nature of Social Movement
iii. Elements of Social Movement

1. CHAPTER-1 THE ANTI-CORRUPTION MOVEMENT OF 2011 6-14

i. Introduction
ii. Origins of the Movement
iii. Key Figures and Mobilization
iv. Causes of the movement
v. Protests and Events in Subsequent Months
vi. Impact of Anti-Corruption movement
vii. Challenges Faced by the Movement

2. CHAPTER-2 ANTI-FARM LAW PROTEST 14-19

I. Introduction
II. Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities
III. Methods and Tools Used
IV. Influence, Outcomes, and Effects

3. CHAPTER-3
CONCLUSION 19-20

REFERENCE 21
 P age |3

IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MOVEMENT IN INDIA: A STUDY

Introduction
India, the 2nd most populated country in the world, is the largest democracy in the
world. Despite democratic nature, the Indian society is highly heterogeneous
where caste, race, religion, languages, regions, and other factors have all
contributed to the highly stratified nature of its society. There are deep-seated
social and economic inequalities. Norm regarding inter-group ties, marriage,
religion and ceremonial adherence retain stiff despite seven decades of democracy.
The history of India is littered with social movements launched in response to
institutional and cultural barriers that prevented people from moving in the
direction they desired .A loosely structured but long-lasting campaign in support of
a social aim, usually the implementation or prevention of a change in society's
structure or values. Despite their differences in size, social movements are all
inherently collaborative.

Definition:
Lorenz von Stein, a German sociologist, first used the term 'social movement' in his
book History of the French Social Movement from 1789 to the 1850. Social
movements are a type of collective activity. They are large informal gatherings of
people or businesses that are focused on specific concerns in politics and society.
To put it another way, they bring about, or reject, specific policies or practices, or
they undo a societal development. Some of the definitions of social movement are
as follows:
According to Herbert Blumer:
"Social movements can be viewed as collective enterprises to establish a new
order of life. They have their inception in a condition of unrest, and derive their
motive power on one hand from dissatisfaction with the current form of life, and
on the other hand, from wishes and hope for a new scheme or system of living”
According to Sidney Tarrow:
"Rather than seeing social movement as an expressions of extremism, violence and
deprivation, they are better defined as collective challenges, based on common
 P age |4

purposes and special solidarities, in sustained interaction with elites, opponents,

and authorities".
T. K. Oommen opines that "A movement is a conscious effort on the part of a group
to mitigate their deprivation and secure justice, a movement is conditioned by the
factors in the social structure; a movement is perhaps the chief mechanism through
which the deprived section demonstrates its power united by an ideology to
redress the evils or grievances" .
According to Doug McAdam,
"Social movement are those organized efforts, on the part of excluded groups, to
promote or resist changes in the structure of society that involve recourse to non-
institutional forms of political participation”
Nature of Social Movement
A social movement is an intentionally planned and organized action of people with
similar interests. participants in social movements attempt to brings about long-
lasting major changes in the social fabric in addition to criticizing decisions made
by authorities and making demands of them. A social movement needs to be at
least somewhat organized.
A social movement may be loosely organized, unofficially run, heavily
institutionalized, or bureaucratized. According to William Kornhauser, "Mass
movements mobilize people who are alienated from the going system, who do not
believe in the legitimacy of the established order, and who therefore are ready to
engage in efforts to destroy it. The greatest number of people available to mass
movement will be found in those sections of society that have the fewest ties to
the social order"
Elements of Social Movement
Social movement has no definite duration. It can last for a short period of time or
it can last for years. But it mainly depends upon the elements on which it is evolved.
There are four basic elements of social movement such as:
Collective Behavior of Social Movement: In this a considerable number of people
are engaged in a single agenda and tries to bring revolution in that particular field.
Expand beyond a Single Community or Event: In this, the movement deals with
some kind of local activities and it expands to some local communities.
 P age |5

Involving Systematic Efforts: This coordination is one of the most important aspect.
People engaged in this movement in proper coordination and with proper
cooperation.
Change-oriented: People's goal in this is to alter some aspect of how people think,
what they believe, and how they behave.

In India, there occurred so many social movements before and after the Indian
independence. These movements not only gave a jerk to the so called traditional
social and political aspects but it also provided a new shape to the whole Indian
social structure. In the 20th century so many remarkable movements occurred in
Indian society. In 1905 there occurred Swadeshi Movement, the revolution that
began in India's quest for independence centering on destabilizing the British
Empire by becoming self-sufficient Swadesh or independent nation . Satyagraha or
the Non-Violence Movement was founded by Mahatma Gandhi in order to return
the British to their homeland and free India from foreign domination. Later on, the
basis of Gandhian ideals, the Chipko Movement or the Chipko Andolana rose in
1973 led by Chandni Prasad Bhatt and Sunderlal Bahuguna to resist deforestation
by embracing trees rather than cutting them down etc..
Many such social movement occur in India which is of great importance which helps
in shaping a strong nation. In the country like India, where different community
reside with differing religions, belief, faith, custom and culture, it is with the help
of such social movement for the common cause unite all as one to fight for the
common goal. Indian Independence Movement (1857-1947), Non-Cooperation
movement (1920), Civil Disobedience Movement (1930), Anti-Corruption
Movement (2011) and recently the Farmer’s Protest (2020-2021) are among some
the importance social movement in India.

Some of the social movement are being discuss along with their importance and
the impact on the society:
 P age |6

CHAPTER -1
THE ANTI-CORRUPTION MOVEMENT OF 2011

Introduction
The anti-corruption movement of 2011 in India, commonly known as the "India
Against Corruption" (IAC) movement, was a significant grassroots campaign aimed
at combating widespread corruption in the country. The movement, which
captured the nation's attention and mobilized millions of citizens, had its origins in
the growing frustration with endemic corruption that permeated all levels of
government and society.
Origins of the Movement
The origins of the anti-corruption movement can be traced back to a series of
high-profile corruption scandals that rocked India in the late 2000s and early 2010s.
These included the 2G spectrum scam, the Commonwealth Games scam, and the
Adarsh Housing Society scam, among others. These scandals exposed the extent of
corruption within the government and the private sector, involving large sums of
money and implicating high-ranking officials and politicians. The public outcry over
these incidents highlighted the need for a robust mechanism to address and
prevent corruption.
The immediate catalyst for the movement was the demand for the Jan Lokpal Bill,
a stronger version of the existing Lokpal Bill, which aimed to establish an
independent ombudsman to investigate corruption cases involving public officials.
Civil society activists, legal experts, and ordinary citizens coalesced around this
cause, seeking to create a law that could effectively curb corruption.
Key Figures and Mobilization
Anna Hazare, a veteran social activist known for his work in rural development and
anti-corruption, emerged as the face of the movement. In April 2011, Hazare
announced a hunger strike at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi to demand the enactment
of the Jan Lokpal Bill. His non-violent protest and Gandhian methods resonated
with the public, leading to widespread support across the country.
Other prominent figures who played critical roles in the movement included Arvind
Kejriwal, a former Indian Revenue Service officer turned social activist; Kiran Bedi,
a retired Indian Police Service officer; and Prashant Bhushan, a senior lawyer. These
 P age |7

leaders helped organize and sustain the movement, leveraging their credibility and
public profiles to attract media attention and public support.
Causes of the movement
1. Systematic corruption:
Corruption was pervasive at all levels of government, from petty bribery in
public services to grand corruption involving high-ranking officials and significant
financial misappropriations. The existing anti-corruption mechanisms, such as the
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), were perceived as ineffective and
compromised due to political interference and lack of independence. This systemic
corruption eroded public trust in government institutions and hindered socio-
economic development.

2. Public discontent:
Growing public frustration with corruption scandals and the inefficiency of
existing anti-corruption measures created a demand for stronger laws and
independent oversight bodies. The perception that the wealthy and powerful could
evade justice through bribes and political connections fueled widespread anger and
disillusionment among the populace. This public discontent was a major driving
force behind the support for the Anti-Corruption Bill
3. International pressure:

India faced pressure from international organizations and foreign governments

to improve its corruption ranking and create a more transparent business
environment. Corruption was seen as a significant barrier to foreign investment
and economic growth. International bodies such as Transparency International
regularly highlighted the high levels of corruption in India, further emphasizing the
need for robust anti-corruption legislation.

Protests and Events in Subsequent Months

Dandi March II in the United States was a 240-mile Indigenous Movement started
against corruption in India. It started on March 12, 2011, and ended on March 26.
It demanded the Lokpal Bill and black money back. The protest was also held in 40
cities in India, 45 cities in the USA, and eight other countries worldwide.
 P age |8

Following this incident, Anna Hazare asked to form a joint government and civil
society representatives committee to draft a solid anti-corruption law. However,
India’s Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, turned down Hazare’s request. As a
result, on April 5, 2011, Anna Ji began a hunger strike in Delhi’s Jantar Mantar. It
was part of India Against Corruption campaign. He stated that the fast would last
until the law was passed. Hazare did not allow politicians to remain with him, and
those who attempted to join him were expelled. Protests have spread to other
Indian cities like Mumbai, Bangalore, Ahmedabad, and Chennai. Prominent people
from sports, Bollywood and business had lent their support to Anna Hazare’s anti-
corruption campaign. The government was at odds with activists, reiterating that
the drafting committee is led by a minister appointed by the government rather
than a member of civil society, as demonstrators wanted to prevent the
government from undermining the bill and members.

In the same month, Baba Ramdev announced the formation of the Bharat
Swabhiman Andolan, an anti-corruption movement. However, the movement
gained traction only after major Union Ministers met with Ramdev in early June to
consider his concerns. Ramdev supported Anna Hazare’s anti-corruption
movement, and he led the second big protest in New Delhi’s Ramlila Maidan on
June 4 to raise awareness about the need for a law-abiding black repatriation law.
He also demanded that tax-free money be declared a national treasure and that
international banks’ money laundering is considered a crime against the
government. This was also a part of India Against Corruption campaign. On June 5,
police raided the Ramlila Maidan, detained Ramdev, and evacuated his supporters
after using tear gas and tear gas canisters. Following his detention, on June 6, the
Indian National Human Rights Commission requested that the Union Home
Secretary, the Delhi City Police Commissioner, and the Delhi Secretary-General
report the incident within two weeks. These human rights violations infuriated
Anna Ji, who responded by going on another hunger strike. Protests were held in
Bangalore, Hyderabad, Chennai, Jammu, Mumbai, Lucknow, and Nepal.

Impact of Anti-Corruption movement

1.Increase Awareness and Public Engagement:
The movement brought corruption to the forefront of national discourse,
mobilizing millions of Indians from diverse backgrounds. The unprecedented scale
of public participation, with mass protests, hunger strikes, and widespread media
coverage, raised awareness about corruption and its detrimental effects on society.
 P age |9

This civic engagement highlighted the power of collective action and the
importance of holding public officials accountable.
2. Legislative Changes:
One of the primary demands of the movement was the enactment of a strong
Jan Lokpal Bill, an anti-corruption law to establish an independent ombudsman.
While the movement itself did not immediately result in the passing of the exact
version of the Jan Lokpal Bill proposed by activists, it exerted significant pressure
on the government. In response, the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act was passed in
December 2013, aiming to establish an independent body to investigate corruption
cases involving public officials. Although the effectiveness of this law has been
debated, the movement undeniably accelerated legislative action against
corruption.
3. Political Impact:
The anti-corruption movement catalyzed significant political shifts. It led to the
rise of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), founded by movement leader Arvind Kejriwal
and other activists. AAP's platform centered on anti-corruption and governance
reforms, and it achieved remarkable success in the 2013 Delhi Legislative Assembly
election. The party's emergence disrupted traditional political dynamics,
challenging established parties and emphasizing the demand for clean and
transparent governance.
4. Government Accountability:
The movement increased pressure on the government and public institutions
to become more transparent and accountable. Various state governments and
central government departments began implementing measures to enhance
transparency, such as adopting e-governance initiatives, increasing the use of
technology in public services, and improving the mechanisms for citizens to report
corruption. This shift towards greater accountability, although gradual and
inconsistent, marked a significant step towards addressing systemic corruption.
5. Civil Society and Activism:
The 2011 movement empowered civil society and grassroots activism. It
inspired a new generation of activists and organizations to continue the fight
against corruption and other social issues. The movement's success demonstrated
 P a g e | 10

that sustained, non-violent protest could lead to meaningful change, encouraging

ongoing civic engagement and vigilance.
6. Judicial and Institutional Reforms:
The judiciary and various anti-corruption institutions also felt the ripple effects
of the movement. There was a renewed focus on strengthening existing anti-
corruption bodies like the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and the Central
Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The movement highlighted the need for these
institutions to operate independently and without political interference to
effectively combat corruption.

Challenges Faced by the Movement

Despite its achievements, the anti-corruption movement faced several challenges:
1. Political Resistance:
The anti-corruption movement faced formidable resistance from entrenched
political entities that benefited from the existing corrupt system. These entities
often wielded significant power and influence, using their political leverage to
impede efforts to pass and implement anti-corruption legislation. Political
opposition resulted in prolonged delays and compromises in the legislative process,
with proposed laws being watered down or shelved altogether. Moreover, political
leaders sometimes actively thwarted anti-corruption measures to protect their
own interests and preserve the status quo. This resistance underscored the
entrenched nature of corruption within the political establishment and the
challenges inherent in effecting meaningful change.
2. Implementation Issues:
Despite the passage of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, the effective
implementation of anti-corruption laws remained elusive. Anti-corruption bodies
faced a myriad of challenges, including severe resource constraints, insufficient
staffing, and inadequate infrastructure. These limitations hampered their ability to
conduct thorough investigations and prosecute offenders effectively. Moreover,
bureaucratic obstacles and political interference further hindered the functioning
of these bodies, undermining their independence and efficacy. As a result, many
corruption cases languished without resolution, eroding public trust in the anti-
corruption framework and perpetuating a culture of impunity.
 P a g e | 11

3. Judicial Delays:
The sluggish pace of the Indian judicial system posed a significant obstacle to
the timely resolution of corruption cases. With a massive backlog of cases and
procedural inefficiencies, corruption trials often dragged on for years, if not
decades. This prolonged legal process undermined the deterrent effect of anti-
corruption measures, as offenders faced little immediate consequence for their
actions. Moreover, the protracted nature of legal proceedings added to the public's
frustration and disillusionment, reinforcing perceptions of a justice system that was
slow, inefficient, and susceptible to manipulation.
4. Sustained Public Engagement:
Maintaining long-term public engagement and awareness proved to be a
formidable challenge for the anti-corruption movement. While the initial wave of
public outcry garnered significant attention and support, sustaining momentum
over time proved difficult. As media attention waned and other issues vied for
public attention, the urgency of the anti-corruption cause diminished. Without
sustained pressure from an engaged citizenry, authorities were less inclined to
prioritize anti-corruption efforts, leading to complacency and inertia in addressing
systemic corruption. Reviving public interest and mobilizing ongoing grassroots
activism thus became crucial but challenging objectives for anti-corruption
advocates.
5. Cultural and Social Factor:
Corruption's deep-rooted presence in societal norms and practices posed a
formidable obstacle to reform efforts. In many communities, corruption had
become normalized as an unavoidable aspect of daily life, ingrained in social
interactions and institutional processes. Overcoming this entrenched acceptance
of corruption required more than just legal and institutional reforms; it
necessitated a fundamental shift in cultural attitudes and behaviors.
Comprehensive cultural and educational initiatives were needed to promote
ethical values, integrity, and accountability from an early age. However, changing
deeply ingrained societal norms proved to be a complex and long-term endeavor,
requiring sustained efforts across multiple fronts, including education, media, and
civil society engagement.
Passes of the bill:
 P a g e | 12

The movement initially pushed for the Jan Lokpal Bill, a stringent anti-corruption
bill drafted by civil society activists. The government, however, proposed its own
version of the bill, which was seen as weaker and less effective by the activists. This
led to further protests and a series of hunger strikes by Anna Hazare, increasing
public pressure on the government to adopt a stronger version of the bill. The
intense public pressure and media scrutiny forced the government to engage in
serious discussions and debates in Parliament. Despite political resistance and
disagreements among parties, the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill was eventually tabled
and debated extensively in both houses of Parliament.

After prolonged debates and negotiations, the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill was
passed by the Lok Sabha (the lower house of Parliament) on December 18, 2013,
and by the Rajya Sabha (the upper house) on December 17, 2013. The President of
India gave his assent to the bill on January 1, 2014, and it became the Lokpal and
Lokayuktas Act, 2013.

The act established the Lokpal as an independent institution with the power to
investigate and prosecute corruption cases involving public officials. It also
provided for the creation of Lokayuktas in each state within one year of the act’s
commencement. The Lokpal was empowered to receive complaints, initiate
investigations, and prosecute public officials found guilty of corruption.

Anna Hazare, Arvind Kejriwal, Kiran Bedi, Prashant Bhushan, Shanti Bhushan
Yogendra Yadav, Medha Patkar are some of the prominent leaders leading the
movement and the movement was remarkable for its broad-based participation,
cutting across various segments of society. From urban professionals to rural
activists, and from students to senior citizens, people from all walks of life joined
hands to demand greater accountability and transparency in governance. The
movement's success was significantly bolstered by the leadership and dedication
of prominent activists and public figures, who played crucial roles in mobilizing
support, framing legislative proposals, and maintaining the momentum of the
movement.

The Anti-Corruption movement in India, known as the India Against Corruption

(IAC) movement, was a significant moment in the country's democratic history.
Sparked by a series of high-profile corruption scandals, the movement galvanized
widespread public outrage and demanded robust measures to tackle the pervasive
issue of corruption. Led by prominent figures such as Anna Hazare, Arvind Kejriwal,
Kiran Bedi, and Prashant Bhushan, the movement drew millions of Indians from
 P a g e | 13

diverse backgrounds into a united front against corruption.

Anna Hazare’s hunger strike in April 2011 became the movement’s symbolic
epicenter, capturing national attention and drawing massive crowds to the streets.
The movement’s primary demand was the enactment of the Jan Lokpal Bill, a
stringent anti-corruption legislation aimed at establishing an independent
ombudsman, the Lokpal, to investigate and prosecute corruption cases involving
public officials. Despite facing significant political resistance, including delays and
dilution attempts, the relentless public pressure forced the government to take
action. The movement successfully maintained momentum through extensive
media coverage, public rallies, and strategic use of social media, ensuring that
corruption remained at the forefront of national discourse. The movement’s efforts
culminated in the passage of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act in December 2013. This
legislation, though not fully meeting all the activists' demands, established the
Lokpal at the national level and mandated the creation of Lokayuktas in the states.
It marked a significant step toward institutionalizing anti-corruption mechanisms in
India.

The movement also led to significant political changes, most notably the
emergence of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which won the Delhi Legislative
Assembly elections by campaigning on an anti-corruption platform.

The 2011 anti-corruption movement was a transformative event that highlighted

the power of collective action in demanding transparency and accountability from
the government. It succeeded in raising public awareness, mobilizing diverse
sections of society, and enacting crucial legislative reforms. While challenges in
implementation and political interference remain, the movement's legacy
continues to inspire ongoing efforts to combat corruption in India.

CHAPTER-2
ANTI-FARM LAW PROTEST

Introduction

India is a country where agriculture is the primary source of livelihood for a major section
of the population, and contributes 20.2 per cent of the Gross Value Added (GVA) share
(2020-21) in the total economy. Of the 458 million strong labor force population in India,
43 per cent is employed in agriculture, as per a 2019 official data. The Indian government
in its Agriculture census of 2015-16 noted that in the amongst these as many as 100,251
were marginal operational holding farmers, 25,809 were small land farmers, 13,993 were
 P a g e | 14

medium operational land holders, 5,561 small-medium farmers, and only 838 were large
landowners.

Since the early 1990s a deep agrarian crisis has continued to shroud the livelihoods of
small and marginal landholders, resulting in an ever increasing ‘epidemic’ of farmer
suicides in the country.

The primary causes of the crisis are:

1. Deepening debt from creditors to smallholders

2. Inadequate compensation for input costs
3. Non-viable farm sizes
4. Non-availability of assured water supply for irrigation
5. Increasing fuel prices
6. Inadequate payment for produce
7. Decreasing government investment in agriculture sector

Over the years, several governments have attempted to reform the agriculture sector by
linking it to private corporate sector [16]. With a similar agenda, the current government
led by the Bharatiya Janata Party introduced the three contentious farm bills in June 2020
amidst a pandemic. The three laws promulgated by the Cabinet by way of ordinance
were:

a) The Farmers' Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill,
2020:

The bill read “...seeks to provide for the creation of an ecosystem where the
farmers and traders enjoy the freedom of choice relating to sale and purchase of
farmers' produce which facilitates remunerative prices through competitive
alternative trading channels to promote efficient, transparent and barrier-free inter-
State and intra-State trade and commerce of farmers' produce outside physical
premises of markets or deemed markets notified under various State agricultural
produce market legislations; to provide a facilitative framework for electronic
trading and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto”

b) The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and

Farm Services Bill, 2020:

“…seeks to provide for a national framework on farming agreements that protects

and empowers farmers to engage with agri-business firms, processors,
wholesalers, exporters or large retailers for farm services and sale of future farming
produce at a mutually agreed remunerative price framework in a fair and
transparent manner and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto”.

c) Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill 2020:

“The bill provides a mechanism for the regulation of agricultural foodstuffs, namely
cereals, pulses, oilseeds, edible oils, potato, and supplies under extraordinary
 P a g e | 15

circumstances, which include extraordinary price rise, war, famine, and natural
calamity of a severe nature”.

After carefully considering the three bills, farmers in Punjab expressed their concern and
found them unacceptable, concluding that the bills would privatize the agriculture sector
and benefit big corporates. To establish their resistance against the promulgation and
register their protest, the farmers in Punjab after meeting with 10 different farm unions
decided to stage protests and block highways in the state through a “tractor rally” and
“gherao” (literally encircle) the houses of MPs and MLAs in the state [20]. However,
despite the continued local protests, the bills were passed on the floor of the Indian
Parliament on September 20, 2020, “without a deliberative and consultative process, in a
blatantly undemocratic fashion through a voice vote instead of a recorded vote process”
[21]. The passage of agriculture bills in the Parliament was also a violation of federal
principles, since agriculture is a state/provincial subject under the Indian Constitution.This
move by the Indian government further escalated the protests on a national level.

Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities:

The gradual escalation of the protests to the national level only began from the state of
Punjab, due to its major reliance on the agrarian sector as a means of livelihood. The
protests first began on local individual levels in villages of Punjab organized by the local
farmer unions. After the passage of the bills in the Parliament in September, the farmer
unions under an umbrella of “Sangharsh Committee” comprising representatives of 32
unions [23] called for voluntarily getting arrested during September 8 to September 13 to
fill up the jails, or “Jail Bharo Andolan”, followed by sit-ins on railway lines across the state
from 14 to 24 September. They also called for a general strike across Punjab, a Punjab
Bandh (lit. close down Punjab), on the 25th of September 2020” [24].

Along with Punjab, farm and labour unions of neighbouring states of Haryana and Uttar
Pradesh lent their support to the movement, and it caught the attention of national media.
A big role in attracting support and mobilization of the young and old alike, as well as
gaining the attention of the Sikh diaspora in Canada, Australia and the UK in particular
was that of Punjabi singers and artistes, who had started to compose songs narrating the
ordeal of the farming community in the country [25]. Another way of mass mobilisation
was through word of mouth, particularly in villages where women played a crucial role,
knocking on doors of each house and explaining the consequences and repercussions of
the Farm laws.

Aytaç and Stokes (2020) in their article explain this phenomenon, “Social movements that
successfully construct a causal framework that casts grievances as a form of injustice,
especially an injustice purposely carried out by an identifiable agent, are more likely to
see angry people pouring into streets” [26]. This method yielded results in case of the
anti-farm laws protest when over a 100 farmer and labour unions extended support to the
“Delhi Chalo” (lit. Let’s go to Delhi) call by the Sangharsh Committee after two failed
negotiation attempts by the central government. The participating unions under the
coordination of bodies such as Samyukt Kisan Morcha, which became the main
representative body of the protests, and the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination
Committee etc..
 P a g e | 16

The march however culminated at three major highways around the national capital which
became the main sites of protest camps for over a year- Singhu border, Tikri border and
Ghazipur border. Thousands of farmers set up camps at the borders surrounding the
national capital, blocking major highways to mount pressure on the central government
due to police barricading at the inroads of Delhi.

The funding to sustain a mass social movement of this magnitude came from the
participants themselves, making it an open for all, voluntary and grassroot level
movement. Villagers of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh ensured a steady inflow of
resources through contribution of fixed sums of money, based on the village’s landholding
[28]. Several villages also contributed in kind, by bringing in water, beddings, tents, fuel,
etc. Apart from this, NGOs like the Khalsa Aid, Sikh temple (Gurudwara) management
committees, like the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbhandhak Committee (SGPC) and Delhi
Gurdwara Management Committee (DGMC) provided langar or free food from
community kitchen rooted in the Sikh tradition at the protest sites [29]. Furthermore, the
Sikh and Punjabi diaspora across the globe mobilised donations towards the protest sites.

Methods and Tools Used

Method:

Deliberative assemblies: participants coming together to discuss next course of action

to sustain the momentum of the movement, and recalibrate demands; Sit-in protests
(Dharna); Encirclement (Gherao): of government representatives to demand
accountability in a peaceful manner; Traffic and rail obstruction (Raasta-Rail roko);
Demonstration; Counterlegislation where state governments led by the opposition
Congress tabled bills counter to counter the Central agricultural legislation [30].

Tools:

Social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook and WhatsApp; Standardised

toolkit; Independent news media portals; Focus groups; Public meetings; Protest camps.
Social media platforms, especially Twitter played a central role in garnering global
attention and support in the face of state action against peaceful protestors at the sites,
including police batoning and water canons and illegal arrests of activists and journalists.
Social media platforms were helpful in various ways including real-time disinformation
fact-checking, keeping the Indian diaspora informed and also gaining the attention of
international activists, celebrities and politicians across the globe.

It further strengthened the activism through a standardised toolkit that was shared by
Greta Thunberg among several others on Twitter. A toolkit is a document with knowledge
and facts that helps a campaigner create tweet storms. Toolkits are standard operating
procedures and are commonly made for mass agitations, and is a legitimate plan to carry
out peaceful protests. The digital arm of the Samyukt Kisan Morcha, called the Kisan Ekta
Morcha, consisting of its five-members, tech savvy farmers from Punjab, Haryana and
Rajasthan handled the promotions and digital campaigns on the official social media
pages of the protest, records videos, devising hashtags, taking photographs and
streaming press conferences. They tweeted slogans and videos in thousands every day
 P a g e | 17

A unique aspect of these protests was the mobilisation of masses irrespective of age and
language brackets, which meant that the new technologies could not be used as the only
ways of information and communication. Therefore, vernacular texts were used to
educate the masses and unify the movement, while also effectively communicating
agendas in small focus groups. Youth activists in small towns and villages also took turns
every ten days to go on a door-to-door campaign to inform the participants of the updates
on protest sites.

To keep the environment at the protest sites dynamic, several activities and service hubs
including libraries, massage tents, marketplaces and even makeshift schools were set up
by the participants and NGOs.

Influence, Outcomes, and Effects:

The agitation amassed a gathering of atleast 35 million protesters (unofficial data)

together at three protest sites at the national capital’s border through a period of ten days
in January 2021, making it one of the largest, longest and biggest self-sustained,
voluntary, non-violent protests in modern Indian history.

Several international organizations and world leaders took note of the state brutality
against dissenters and unjustified arrests of pro-agitation independent journalists, and
called on the Modi government to stop the atrocities. The protests also gained
unprecedented solidarity across the world, especially in Canada, New Zealand, Australia,
the UK, and the USA, where Sikh and Punjabi diaspora staged demonstrations outside
Indian embassies.

The protests also saw as many as 702 fatalities during the period of over one year, as
per data provided by the SKM, representative body of the farm unions [35], however the
government has so far refused to acknowledge the numbers, also refusing any
compensation to their families.

On 12 January 2021, the Supreme Court of India responding to a petition filed by the
farmers’ bodies, stayed the implementation of the farm laws and appointed a committee
to look into farmer grievances related to the farm laws [36]. Finally, on 19 November 2021,
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, announced the complete rollback and repeal of the
farm laws in the winter session of the Parliament in December 2021 [37].

Since the success of the year-long resistance, experts have highlighted one of the most
important aspects of the movement that enabled the bridging of historic class, caste and
gender divisions in the Indian society [38]. The success of the civilians-led, decentralised
and horizontal structure of protest is proof enough to counter the theory that movements
without a top-down leadership often fail. The anti-farm laws protests also established
that deliberative participatory ways of governance are essential for a smooth
implementation of policies and that stakeholders need to be consulted before introducing
a law.

Historically, protests and demonstrations have brought tidal changes in the governance
of a country. Aytaç & Stokes (2020) in their article point out that the less tightly organised
 P a g e | 18

movements of the people often begin with very specific complaints, but grow to have a
broader meaning and to embrace broader demands. This especially stands true in the
case of the Indian anti-farm laws protests of 2020-21. Not only did the farm unions take
back their right to livelihood through the protests, they have also challenged the neoliberal
leanings driving the policy formulation for one of the most essential and one of the biggest
sectors of economy of India. Moreover, the challenge of fine print over the legal recourse
facilities in the farm bill protected the rights of all citizens.

Importance of anti-corruption movement and anti-farm protest:

The anti-corruption movement in India, prominently led by Anna Hazare in 2011,

was instrumental in raising awareness about the rampant corruption permeating
various levels of government and public institutions. This movement galvanized
citizens, especially the urban middle class, students, and professionals, to engage
in civic activism, demanding greater transparency and accountability. One of its
significant achievements was the enactment of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act in
2013, aimed at establishing an independent ombudsman to address corruption.
Additionally, the movement spurred the creation of new political entities like the
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which capitalized on the anti-corruption sentiment to
achieve electoral success. By empowering civil society organizations and watchdog
groups, the anti-corruption movement has left a lasting impact on India's political
landscape, promoting continued vigilance against corruption.
The anti-farm protests, which erupted in 2020 in response to three controversial
farm laws, highlighted the deep-seated issues within India's agricultural sector.
Farmers feared these laws would undermine their livelihoods by favoring large
corporations, leading to widespread unrest. The protests garnered support from a
broad spectrum of society, bridging the rural-urban divide and demonstrating
extensive solidarity. The movement's persistence led to the eventual repeal of the
farm laws in November 2021, illustrating the power of sustained, peaceful protest
in effecting policy change. This engagement showcased the resilience and
determination of the farming community, emphasizing the importance of
democratic participation. The protests also underscored the necessity for
agricultural reforms that consider the socio-economic realities of farmers, ensuring
policies that protect their interests while promoting modernization and efficiency
in the sector.
 P a g e | 19

Conclusion:
The Anti-Farm Law Protest and the Anti-Corruption Movement in India are
emblematic of the evolving dynamics between the state and civil society in the
world's largest democracy. Both movements, although distinct in their origins and
immediate goals, reflect a broader struggle for justice, accountability, and
democratic governance in India. The Anti-Farm Law Protest, which began in late
2020, was a reaction to three agricultural laws passed by the Indian government,
perceived by many farmers as a threat to their livelihoods. These laws aimed to
deregulate the agricultural sector, allowing farmers to sell their produce outside
government-regulated markets. However, farmers feared that these reforms
would lead to the dismantling of the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system and
leave them vulnerable to exploitation by large corporations. The protests quickly
gained momentum, with tens of thousands of farmers camping at the borders of
Delhi for months, demanding the repeal of the laws. The movement highlighted the
deep-seated agrarian distress in India, rooted in decades of neglect and policy
missteps. It also showcased the power of collective action and solidarity, as farmers
from different states, supported by various social and political organizations, came
together to voice their concerns. The eventual decision by the government to
repeal the farm laws in November 2021 marked a significant victory for the
protesting farmers and underscored the importance of democratic dialogue and
responsiveness to public grievances.
On the other hand, the Anti-Corruption Movement of 2011, spearheaded
by social activist Anna Hazare, was a response to rampant corruption and a demand
for greater transparency and accountability in governance. The movement gained
nationwide support, drawing attention to high-profile corruption scandals and the
inefficacy of existing anti-corruption mechanisms. Anna Hazare's hunger strike at
Jantar Mantar in Delhi became a focal point for public outrage against corruption,
leading to widespread protests across the country. The movement's primary
demand was the enactment of the Jan Lokpal Bill, which aimed to establish an
independent ombudsman to investigate corruption cases. The Anti-Corruption
Movement not only mobilized millions of Indians but also led to significant political
changes, including the formation of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which campaigned
on an anti-corruption platform and won a significant mandate in the Delhi state
elections. Both movements underscore the critical role of civil society in holding
the government accountable and shaping public policy. The Anti-Farm Law Protest
 P a g e | 20

highlighted the vulnerabilities and aspirations of the agrarian community, while the
Anti-Corruption Movement brought to the forefront the demand for clean
governance. These movements also illustrate the complexities of India's
democracy, where diverse and often conflicting interests must be negotiated
through dialogue and protest. Moreover, these movements have had lasting
impacts on Indian society and politics.The farmers' protest has renewed focus on
agrarian issues and the need for sustainable agricultural policies. It has also shown
the importance of listening to the voices of those directly affected by policy
changes. The Anti-Corruption Movement, meanwhile, has led to greater awareness
and discourse on the need for systemic reforms to combat corruption. It has also
demonstrated the potential for grassroots movements to influence national politics
and bring about legislative changes.
Over all, the Anti-Farm Law Protest and the Anti-Corruption Movement are
significant chapters in India's ongoing journey towards a more inclusive and
accountable democracy. They remind us that the strength of a democracy lies in its
ability to accommodate dissent, engage with diverse viewpoints, and evolve in
response to the aspirations and challenges of its people. These movements serve
as a testament to the power of collective action and the enduring spirit of India's
democratic ethos.
 P a g e | 21

REFERENCE
1. Mehta, A. (2012). India's Anti-Corruption Crusade: Anna Hazare and the
Movement of 2011. New Delhi
2. Aiyar, S. S. A. (2011). India’s Anti-Corruption Movement: Anna Hazare and the
Struggle for Accountability. Asia-Pacific Review .
3. Bhattacharya, D. (2021). Resistance and Solidarity: The Farmers' Movement in
India. Journal of Peasant Studies.
4. Singh, B., & Jodhka, S. S. (2021). The Indian Farmers' Protest: An Overview.
Economic & Political Weekly.
5. Ghosh, J. (2021). The Farmers' Protests in India: Rethinking State and Market in
Agrarian Contexts. Third World Quarterly.