The Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) has opposed some provisions in the Draft Integrated Plant Diet Management Bill, 2022 alleging that they choose away the rights of States and farmers.
Inquiring the Central governing administration not to introduce any provision that could criminalise farmers, it needs a provision that lets farmers or other aggrieved functions to request lawful recourse if they are not contented with the appellate authority’s resolutions.
ASHA, a network of volunteers that seek to encourage sustainable farm livelihoods and farmers’ rights in India, required a mechanism to allow for the State governments to control the price, distribution and movement of fertilisers notified by them from time to time.
“It is crucial that bio-fertilisers, bio-stimulants and non-edible deoiled cakes are regulated by Condition governments to match their individual situations,” it claimed.
In its opinions to the draft floated by the Union Ministry of Fertilisers, ASHA also felt that farmers ought to be guarded from any inadvertent criminalisation and penalisation penalties.
“The restriction with regard to the use of fertilisers ought to exclude the farmers and should really not criminalise them in any way,” it explained.
A individual course of action really should be there for bio-stimulant, natural fertilisers, bio-fertilisers and non-edible de-oiled cakes, which incentivise localised production for localised distribution.
“This need to utilize to registration for manufacture as well as for genuine sale, stocking and distribution of a specified set of fertilisers. This need to be squarely below the purview of Condition governments,” it additional.
Referring to the provision that bars people from producing, promoting and internet marketing of fertilisers devoid of “obtaining the appropriate registration”, ASHA felt that the regulation really should basically incentivise self-assistance teams, NGOs and pastoralists to generate organic and natural fertilisers, bio-fertilisers, bio-promote and non-edible de-oiled cakes for area markets.
It desired the federal government to spell out compensation mechanisms for aggrieved farmers (who acquired sub-typical, misbranded or spurious fertilisers) at the taluka-stage in the statute by itself.
“Consumer Safety Act is not a appropriate statute wherever farmers can hope to get justice, whilst the full regulation of fertilisers is now being proposed below this new statute,” it felt.
It would also simply call for a fund to just take treatment of payment of compensations to farmers.
It uncovered fault with the provision that bars civil courts to have jurisdiction about the matters that appear under this Act, ASHA mentioned that there should be a provision to enable the aggrieved parties who are not satisfied with the appellate authority’s resolution.
February 26, 2022