India: millions continue to protest whilst police use tear gas and water cannons

India has seen the largest protest in history, with 250 million joining farmers last week, in one of the biggest nationwide strikes ever. Protesters have been met with tear gas and water cannons by Delhi police.

What are the protests about?

Farmers began the protests in opposition to three acts of parliament passed by Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in September. The legislation is set to deregulate the agricultural industry, meaning crops can be sold outside of government regulated mandis (Indian markets where most farmers trade), and instead allow private buyers and large companies to enter the market. Farmers normally sell their crops at their state’s Agricultural Produce Market Committee, with the assurance of the Minimum Support Price (MSP), which is the government-set price to buy produce. The new laws formalise contract trading, allowing corporations and private buyers to buy and hoard crops for future sales, which previously only government authorised agents could do. Farmers would have to tailor their production to suit a cooperation or private buyer’s demand, but this removes the assured prices that farmers normally receive.
Whilst the BJP defends the legislation, arguing that the changes will not harm farmers’ income but gives them the option to sell outside of the mandis system. However, farmers are distrustful of corporations, fearing that big businesses will decide their own prices, buy up all the crops, and thus risk farmers losing their land and livelihoods. Key protections for farmers will be lost to free market players, with farmers worried that it could eventually lead to the end of the wholesale, regulated markets with assured prices and no back-up. They also predict they would have little negotiating rights with corporations or private buyers if they were dissatisfied with the price for their produce, leaving them open to exploitation.
The farmers demand a reversal of the three new agricultural policies, and to legally codify the MSP to guarantee its protection. Wider demands include better support and representation from the government. Some of Modi’s party leaders have called the farmers “misguided” and “anti-national”, dismissing their concerns. Nearly 60% of the Indian population depend on agriculture for their livelihoods, yet it only makes up 15% of GDP.
Before the protests, many farmers felt frustration at the lack of concern from the government, being ignored when asking for better crop prices, irrigation systems to provide water during dry spells, and additional loan waivers. Despite being the backbone of local economies and being key to the production of essential goods, ignorance towards farmers has been a persistent problem and driven many to death. In 2019, there were over 10,000 farmer suicides in India, as many are plagued with debt and cannot overcome financial insecurity.

Clashes with police

The protests started small, organised by local farmers organisations, but have since developed into nationwide strikes. When talks with the central government failed, the protest movement “Dilli Chalo” began (On to Delhi). The protests are primarily concentrated in the northern states of Punjab and Haryana, termed the “food bowl” of India as the region where much of the crop production takes place. As protesters moved towards Delhi, they were met with heavy police deployment and barricades at the border. Tens of thousands of police and parliamentary troops were sent to stop the march, clashing with protesters.

Police fired tear gas shells and water cannons to deter protesters from moving forward. Images were shared on social media of police using batons against elderly protesters.

A viral image taken by Ravi Choudhary, a photojournalist for the Press Trust of India, showed a parliamentary policeman swinging a baton against an elderly Sikh man, but Modi supporters have claimed the image is unrealistic and the farmers have not been hit. Despite the force used against them, the protests have largely remained peaceful and have even set up camps to provide food and utilities. Images have been shared of farmers cooking at protest sites, providing food and drink for protesters, but also offering it to the police.
Protests have also spread internationally, organised by Indian diaspora groups. Thousands came out to protest in London on 6 November, congregating outside of the Indian embassy in Aldwych and other groups marching to Trafalgar Square. The Metropolitan police arrested 13 people in breach of COVID-19 laws. The protests occurred after a group of 36 MP’s, led by Labour MP Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, wrote to UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab asking him to communicate concerns over the protests in support of the farmers to his Indian counterpart. The letter highlighted that from a survey by The Sikh Council UK, 92% of UK Sikhs have ties to agricultural land in India and 84% are personally concerned about the impact of the new laws. Further to this, 93% of respondents felt that human rights violations will increase following the mass protests by Punjabi farmers.

“Being famous as India’s bread-basket, many Punjabis rely on farming for their existence. About three-quarters of the state’s 30 million-strong population is involved in agriculture. Therefore, these new laws present the Punjabis with a huge problem, with some describing it as a death warrant”, the letter reads.

Similarly in Canada, thousands showed solidarity in peaceful protests. In Saskatoon, people stood along the roadsides holding banners and signs, and more than 100 vehicles participated in a car rally outside Canada’s immigration museum in the south end of Halifax. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed his support for the protests, saying that “Canada will always stand up for the right of peaceful protest anywhere around the world. And we’re pleased to see moves towards de-escalation and dialogue.” He was criticised by Indian officials who accused him of meddling in India’s domestic affairs and encouraging the protests. Punjabi-Canadians make up 2% of the population, and Brampton City Councillor Gurpreet Singh Dhillon noted that there are many who have families back in India, therefore it was important for Brampton’s city council to pass a motion expressing solidarity with Indian farmers.

“We want to ensure that the fundamental and democratic right to protest is respected,” Dhillion said.

 

Curbed freedom of expression

Recent years have seen the Modi government cracking down on protests, suppressing the right to dissent and the right to free speech and press. At the end of 2019 and the beginning of 2020 before COVID-19 shutdowns, India saw widespread protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which provoked controversy over its discrimination towards Muslims. Over a thousand protesters were arrested during ongoing protests, and 27 people died as of December 2019. Two of those were 17-year olds who were reportedly killed due to police firing live ammunition on protesters in Assam.
As well as police violence and the suppression of protesters against the CAA legislation, India imposed a 175-day internet shutdown in the Kashmir and Jammu regions, which they unconstitutionally annexed in August 2019. This effectively cut off the regions from the rest of the world, making it difficult for the media to report on human rights abuses. Foreign journalists face visa restrictions to enter India and were banned from Kashmir and Jammu.
India ranks 140 of 180 on Reporters Without Borders press freedom index, with independent media slowly deteriorating. As newspapers and TV stations rely on government advertising, it tends to reward government friendly outlets and punish critics. Several Indian journalists have been killed in recent years, including female newspaper editor Gauri Lankesh in 2017 which police say was by extreme right-wing Hindu nationalists.
India must uphold the right to protest, free speech and expression. With human rights at stake, the international community should stress that those protesting should be protected and urge the Indian government to refrain from violent suppression.