Why did Govt of India maintain ominous silence in PepsiCo case against Gujarat farmers?: Activists

By A Representative
PepsiCo India Holdings Ltd, which withdrew their legal suits against the farmers at the Commercial Court of Ahmedabad and the district court of Modasa, have done it under intense public and political pressure, farmers’ rights groups have asserted in a statement, warning, this in no way means that the public campaign is over. The battle is only half won on the field. The Government of India maintained an ominous silence on the issue, taking cover of the matter being sub judice.
Addressing media, their advocate Anand Yagnik stated that these farmers are into subsistence farming and not commercial farming. It must be kept in mind that in India the right of farmer to cultivate land and agricultural produce is superior to the right of MNCs seeking protection in the name of registration. The law of India allows farmers to use even registered seeds and take produce.
Kapilbhai Shah, Coordinator, Beej Adhikar Manch, a newly formed platform to protect farmers’ seed sovereignty, recalled, when PepsiCo India made an application in February 2012 to the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights Authority for the registration of a particular potato variety, it had given a Declaration that it shall abide by all the provisions and guidelines of the PPV&FR Act 2001. It is highly objectionable that having agreed to compliances of registration, the company tried to find ‘long term amicable solution to protect its variety’ with the help of government.
Dr Rajendra Khimani, President of Gujarat Association of Agricultural Sciences, said any reference to some discussions that PepsiCo India was having with government was not acceptable, when such discussions did not involve the affected farmers and farmers’ organisations and when there was no need for such discussions in the first instance.
Khimani added, the Gujarat government can neither persuade nor dictate to farmers of this state that they need to take permission from some company that is claiming exclusive rights which then means that the government itself would be misleading the farmers on the law of the land.

Incarceration of Prof Saibaba 'revives' the question: What is crime, who is criminal?

By Kunal Pant* In 2016, a Supreme Court Judge asked the state of Maharashtra, “Do you want to extract a pound of flesh?” The statement was directed against the state for contesting the bail plea of Delhi University Professor GN Saibaba. Saibaba was arrested in 2014, a justification for which was to prevent him from committing what the police called “anti-national activities.”

Manufacturing, services: India's low-skill, middle-skill labour remains underemployed

By Francis Kuriakose* The Indian economy was in a state of deceleration well before Covid-19 made its impact in early 2020. This can be inferred from the declining trends of four important macroeconomic variables that indicate the health of the economy in the last quarter of 2019.

Modi’s Israel visit strengthened Pakistan’s hand in US–Iran truce: Ex-Indian diplomat

By Jag Jivan M. K. Bhadrakumar , a career diplomat with three decades of service in postings across the former Soviet Union, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, and Turkey, has warned that the current truce in the US–Iran war is “fragile and ridden with contradictions.” Writing in his blog India Punchline , Bhadrakumar argues that while Pakistan has emerged as a surprising broker of dialogue, the durability of the ceasefire remains uncertain.

Search This Blog