Leaders of the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM-Non-Political) and Kisan Mazdoor Morcha have firmly declined participation in talks with the Supreme Court-appointed committee tasked with resolving the ongoing farmers’ agitation and open the NH 44 at Shambhu Border.
Nearly 40 days after formation of the committee, the farmer leaders in a detailed letter addressed to the committee members, outlined their reasons for rejecting the offer of holding talks with the committee to resolve the issue, citing concerns about the committee’s formation, intent, and the Supreme Court’s handling of farmers’ demands.
The farmers have been staging protests at Sambu, Khanauri, and Ratanpura borders since February 13, for their pending demands including a guaranteed Minimum Support Price (MSP) and loan waivers. The protestors argued that the committee lacks credibility and dismiss the court’s claims that farmers had sought such a panel.
The letter clarified that the SKM and Kisan Mazdoor Morcha never demanded the formation of a committee to address their concerns. They pointed out that when the central government had previously proposed a similar body, it was outrightly rejected by the protestors. The unions argue that the committee formation appears to be an imposition rather than a genuine response to farmers’ demands. The letter expresses frustration that the court appears to have misinterpreted the government’s proposal as a demand from farmers. “This is an attempt to force a government-proposed solution on the movement,” the unions stated.
The protestors cited past neglect of farmers’ interests to highlight their skepticism toward the expert panel. The letter emphasized the unimplemented recommendations of the Swaminathan Commission (2006), which advocated for the C2 + 50% formula to determine crop prices.
The farmers recalled that they had approached the Supreme Court in 2015, seeking intervention to enforce the report’s recommendations, but the court did not take a decisive stand. “Had the court ensured the government implemented this report then, we would have trusted the current committee,” the letter added.
The SKM leaders also criticized the court for focusing on government allegations that protestors were armed while ignoring state-led violence against farmers. “There is no mention of the police brutality, toxic gas attacks, or the killing of young farmer Subhakaran Singh, allegedly at the hands of Haryana police,” the letter reads.
The unions further questioned the credibility of allowing the Haryana police to investigate the violence, stating, “How can one expect impartiality from those accused of these atrocities?”
The unions pushed back against the court’s suggestion to keep the protests apolitical, asserting that the movement has maintained a non-political stance since its inception. However, the letter questioned the court’s silence on political engagements by retired judges, referring to former Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi’s nomination to the Rajya Sabha. Another key reason for rejecting the talks was the lack of transparency regarding the committee’s authority. The protestors noted that the letter from the expert panel did not outline the committee’s powers or whether its recommendations would be enforceable. “Without clarity on its scope, any dialogue would be meaningless,” they argued. The farmers also criticized the court’s suggestion to move their protests to locations designated by state governments. They stated that a request for peaceful protests at Jantar Mantar or Ramlila Maidan in Delhi had already been submitted to the Delhi Police but remains unanswered.
Given the committee’s questionable intent, the court’s historical stance, and ongoing government neglect, the SKM and Kisan Mazdoor Morcha have reiterated their unwillingness to engage in dialogue with the expert panel. They declared their intention to continue the agitation until their demands, particularly MSP guarantees and loan waivers, are met.
“We will not talk to a committee that seems to serve the government’s agenda rather than uphold farmers’ rights,” the letter concludes.
