Satarupa Chakraborty: CJI's Remarks on Women Farmers Are an Assault on Human Agency and Constitutional Rights / Pratap Bhanu Mehta: SC’s order on the farm bills is terrible constitutional precedent, bereft of judgment
Chastising the Centre for its handling of the farmers’ protest, the Supreme Court on January 11 observed that it will not pass an order that “citizens should not protest”. This was encouraging. But subsequent remarks made by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) S.A. Bobde, have given cause for concern. He asked: “Why are women and elders kept in the protest?”
He also asked advocate H.S. Phoolka to ‘persuade’ the women and elderly protesters to go back from the protest sites, indicating that an order may be passed by the court later to this end. On January 12, the CJI pronounced in the court, “We want to place on record our appreciation for this stand (about elders, women and children not participating in protests in future).” These remarks irk the question – who is considered a citizen and who isn’t? Can there be a ‘guardian’ at a given protest site to decide who should be ‘kept’ there and who should not be? Such a stance is not only an attack on human agency, but also puts the custodian of law in a questionable position. The CJI’s statement takes women for granted and endorses infantilisation of labour by women. That he would seek women and elders to be sent back by ‘persuasion’ is condemnable, as his stance portrays either ignorance or a deep sense of prejudice on the role of women in farming….
https://thewire.in/women/cji-bobde-women-farmers-protest-remarks-rights
SC’s order on the farm bills is terrible constitutional precedent, bereft of judgment
The Supreme Court is increasingly looking like one of those
fantasy creatures with disjointed shapes, where nothing is what it appears to
be. The forms keep mysteriously changing, with benign faces masking more
ominous fangs, and shapes shifting as the need arises. So this is a
constitutional court that does not pronounce on the constitutionality of laws.
Instead, it wades into political and administrative management without the
imprimatur of any law. It positions itself as a saviour of democracy only to make
a mockery of the parliamentary process. It wades into conflict management, only
to hide behind the façade of some expert committee. It pretends that
distributive conflicts are technical ones. It finds ruses to defuse genuine
democratic protest. Yet it will not facilitate the orderly and law-bound
expression of protest…
https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/supreme-court-stay-on-farm-laws-protests-7143857/
Discussion on Indian Agriculture and the ongoing Kisan agitation
Navsharan
Singh: A million reasons to march
Jairus
Banaji on the Indian corporate strategy of subordinating farm households and
family labor
STATE OF
RURAL AND AGRARIAN INDIA REPORT 2020. By the Network of Rural and Agrarian
Studies
Jairus Banaji on the Indian corporatist strategy of
subordinating farm households and family labor
Navsharan Singh: A million reasons to march
Discussion on Indian Agriculture and the ongoing Kisan
agitation
Amit Bhaduri: Faces in mirror held up by farmers’
protest
Can Capitalism and Democracy Coexist?
Amandeep Sandhu on Arthiyas - extract from PANJAB:
Journeys Through Fault Lines
Ravinder Kaur:
Has Modi finally met his match in India's farmers?
Indian Farmers' Protest - Work in progress videos
STATE OF RURAL AND AGRARIAN INDIA REPORT 2020. By the
Network of Rural and Agrarian Studies
MAGAR: A South Asian News Alligator !
Foreign Minister S Jaishankar Is Fighting With Historian Ramachandra Guha On Nehru's Cabinet
Ramachandra Guha: Gandhi said RSS was ‘communal with a
totalitarian outlook’ – and that’s still true
