Can A Bystander Be Suspended From School?

 By Michelle Ball, California Education Attorney for Students since 1995

What does it take to issue a valid school suspension?  Does a student have to DO something, or can they just be near someone who does something?  Over the years, I have seen bystanders (aka witnesses) punished by schools when they did nothing but watch others do wrong.  When are students who witness a wrong done by another guilty of an offense which can be properly punished by a school? 

The California Education Code lists out all the potential areas for which a student may be suspended or expelled.  It also lists out things that schools CANNOT punish students for.  Things not listed as suspension-eligible offenses are also not suspendable.  Schools are limited by these state laws, voted in by our legislature.  Of course, the codes can be vague, and cover a LOT of areas of alleged wrong, from arranging a drug sale, to possession of nicotine products.  

But what about bystanders or witnesses to an event?  What about the kid who watches as someone sells drugs to another but says nothing?  Or, the students who run to a fight and just stand there?  Unfortunately, sometimes schools punish students by association, believing as they were there, that they participated in the wrongful action.  

If a school validates a student did not actually commit a wrong, most just obtain their statement about the events and don't suspend the innocent student.  

Some, however, do.

A prime example I have seen is a school which suspended students observing a fight.  It seems that the school morphed a kid standing near a fight into an offender, claiming willful defiance.  I disagree strongly that standing near someone committing an actual prohibited act makes someone guilty of a wrong.  No suspension should issue when a student does not knowingly DO something prohibited.

Under Education Code section 48900(k), students may be suspended for willful defiance or disruption, but only if they are in ninth through twelfth grade, and it is highly questionable whether standing near a fight is defiant.  This in fact could be protected speech.  

These types of alleged bystander offenses should  be challenged by parents.  

The only disclaimer here, is the fact that California courts have sided with the schools, even for offenses which don't "fit" in delineated suspendable offenses, such as the restriction of students' ability to wear an American Flag shirt on Cinco de Mayo, to prevent alleged gang issues.  So, although I see no grounds for bystander offenses, the courts sometimes surprise you, supporting an almost dictatorial control over all kids under a school's authority.  

Best,

 

Michelle Ball

Education Law Attorney 

 

LAW OFFICE OF MICHELLE BALL 

717 K Street, Suite 228 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Phone: 916-444-9064 

Email:help@edlaw4students.com 

Fax: 916-444-1209

Website, Blog, Twitter, Youtube, Facebook

 

Please see my disclaimer on the bottom of my blog page. This is legal information, not legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed by this posting.  This blog may not be reproduced without permission from the author and proper attribution of authorship. This blog may not reflect the current state of the law.

READ MORE - Can A Bystander Be Suspended From School?

Indian, Pakistani journalists talk objectivity, challenging officials
There were several loose ends and leftover questions from last week’s peace journalism seminars for 80 engaged Indian and Pakistani journalists. (See previous post, below).

Q: One journalist said his family was murdered in Kashmir, and noted that it would be hard to bury his own emotions were he to report on this incident. Can this be reported objectively?

A: No one would expect objectivity under these circumstances. Objectivity is a goal that is worth striving for, though 100% objectivity isn’t realistically attainable. We all have biases. The best we can do as journalists is to be aware of our biases, and try to mitigate them. In this instance, I would ask to be excused from reporting about Kashmir, or for that matter, anything like this that is deeply personal. Any good editor would understand. If there was no choice but for me to report something that personally involved me (or in which I had a conflict of interest), then I would at least make my editor aware of the situation, and my biases, so that she could edit my story accordingly so as to remove the bias.

Q: In many countries, journalists fear the consequences of challenging official government narratives and officials. This wariness often leads to self-censorship. Given this understandable fear, how can we implement some of the changes that peace journalism recommends?

A: This is a problem in many places around the world, at least the ones I’ve worked in. The answer from my colleague Stephen Franklin is perfect. He says the key is “taking small steps to see how far you can go, and slowly test the pushback from editors, politicians, and government officials. That's how I've seen journalists in similar places try to work things out - although I've also seen them lose their jobs and their publications shut down.”

These small steps, in my experience, are almost always possible, even in state owned or controlled media outlets. For example, I visited a state TV and radio outlet in Hawassa, Ethiopia in 2018, and was pleased to discover that peace journalism was possible even there. I wrote, “It’s clear at least some of the (state TV and radio) journalists feel frustrated and stifled, though it also evident from the discussion that they believe that at least some elements of PJ can be implemented at the state media in Hawassa. These PJ elements include giving a voice of the voiceless; responsible refugee and IDP reporting; media as reconciliation tool; and avoiding inflammatory reporting.” (http://stevenyoungblood.blogspot.com/2018/03/is-pj-possible-on-state-run-radio-and_27.html)

I’ve seen the “small steps” method work in places as diverse as Uganda (where politicians own many media outlets) and Yemen (with strict government censorship and licensing). The key, as articulated by my Pakistani and Indian colleagues last week, is to begin by reporting stories about what governments might see as non-controversial topics like climate, water, trade, agriculture, and Covid-19.

READ MORE -

Pakistani, Indian journalists gather on Zoom
Among peace journalism’s many powers is an ability to help journalists see their key role as bridge builders, cross-cultural agents who can help bring conflicting parties closer to reconciliation.

This bridge building, cross border role was emphasized last week as I “met” 80 Indian and Pakistani journalists on Zoom. The seminars last Tuesday through Friday were organized by the East-West Center, based in Hawaii.

My 90 minute seminars, given for 20 journalists at a time (10 from each country), began with a discussion of how “the other” is portrayed in media. The journalists then explored the basics of peace journalism, especially how language and violent, sensational framing can exacerbate conflicts. The journalists analyzed stories from their both countries for peace journalism content (or lack thereof).

The sessions concluded with the journalists breaking into groups and creating their own set of guidelines for more responsibly reporting cross border issues. These ideas on how to implement peace journalism included:

--Beginning with small steps and reporting “softer,” non-controversial stories (science, agriculture, health, etc.). These stories might include climate, water, and trade, for example. These small steps could “test the system,” so that journalists could know how far they can push the boundaries of what authorities would allow.

--Getting sober analysis from all sides during TV forums, not just “jingo-ists.” 

--Being careful to avoid demonizing and inflammatory language, including words like “enemy” and “terrorist.” 

--Avoiding blaming “them” for environmental problems.

--Using cross-border teams to fact check and verify info from the other side.

--Reporting stories that highlight commonalities—environmental crises, Covid-19 challenges, etc.

-- Interviewing everyday people, and not just officials—giving a voice to the voiceless, in the parlance of peace journalism.

--Producing counternarrative stories about Kashmir that debunk the media-perpetuated myth that the region is nothing but a war zone.

--Turning down the temperature, a difficult task given the structural challenges in India and Pakistan that favor TV shows that both toe the government line and are sensational, often featuring angry shouting matches. “We need a voice of reason,” one reporter noted. 

My four peace journalism seminars were only the beginning of a larger project for these Indian and Pakistani journalists titled, “Reporting on cross border issues of mutual concern.” This week, they will be trained on multimedia journalism, and later, split into groups to study reporting in four content areas—agriculture, environment, health, and economy. Each of these sessions is being taught by Univ. of Missouri professors. Then after these virtual sessions this month and next, the plan is to continue the project face-to-face by bringing the journalists and trainers to Kathmandu, Nepal sometime in 2021, depending on the pandemic. The idea is to get reporters from each country to team up on mutually compelling stories in the four content areas.  (For more, see https://www.eastwestcenter.org/professional-development/seminars-journalism-programs/reporting-cross-border-issues-mutual-concern )

The project is funded by the U.S. Dept. of State and implemented by the East-West Center, which “promotes better relations and understanding among the people and nations of the United States, Asia, and the Pacific through cooperative study, research, and dialogue,” according to its website. The Center is an independent, public, nonprofit organization with funding from the U.S. government, and additional support provided by private agencies, individuals, foundations, corporations, and governments in the region.

READ MORE -

Transitioning To College As A Disabled Student And Getting Support While You Are There

 By Michelle Ball, California Education Attorney for Students since 1995

Transitioning from high school to college can be exciting and challenging for young adults.  For a student who was previously on an IEP (Individualized Education Program) or Section 504 plan (accommodations plan) in high school, the challenges increase.  However, proper planning and talking to the right folks at the college or university where the student will attend or is attending can help.  

Students should be aware of changes that will occur as far as their obligations and the support levels to which they are entitled.  There is no more IEP plan or process, as all school IEP obligations vanish when the student graduates from high school.  There is no mandatory "504 meeting" to develop accommodations, nor obligation of staff to follow up for the student in college.  This means the student may be on their own, if they don't get a college support plan put in place and take steps to get it known and applied.  

Section 504 obligations continue to apply with colleges accepting federal funds, and the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) applies to most colleges, excluding religious colleges.  For public colleges, one looks to ADA Title II, and for private non-religious colleges, ADA Title III.  Housing requirements may be covered by the Fair Housing Act.  Other laws may also apply.  However, no one is obligated to do anything unless they are notified by the student of their disability and needs.

For academic and other accommodations, the first step is to contact the college or university's disabled students office, such as the "Student Disability Office" if a student attends the University of California, Davis (UCD), or the "Services for Students with Disabilities Office" at the California State University, Sacramento (CSUS).

Once a student makes contact, they should follow the procedures outlined by the college to become a registered disabled student.  This may involve provision of various documents evidencing a disabling condition, as well as meetings to discuss the student's needs in the classroom and at the college.  The discussion which ensues is typically called the "Interactive Process" during which the student should indicate what they think could assist them, with the school personnel offering their take on potential effective accommodations to help meet the student's needs.

The college is not obligated to alter the fundamental program in which the student must participate or the requirements for a degree, but they can set up items which can ensure the student proper access to the curriculum equal to other students.

Typically, there is a back and forth which may continue outside the meeting process, with a document eventually developed outlining what professors must do and put in place in their classrooms to assist the student.  The plan can also offer solutions for physical barriers and needs on campus, such as with regard to parking, accessible entrances and other items for the student to access their education and the campus.

Often the "plan" must be taken by the student and provided to professors who will need to implement it, prior to classes starting and/or before the student wants the accommodations to take effect.  This is different from during high

 school, where the obligation was on the school or school district staff to notify teachers and ensure an IEP was being implemented.  Now, the obligation to notify staff may be on the college student, depending on who must be notified (e.g. with some restrictions the student would not have access to applicable personnel and the college may need to step in).  

If there are issues with enforcement, the student can follow any internal process to resolve issues, or they can also file complaints outside the college with the US Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights or the US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, depending on the type of college.

If you or a loved one are in college now, and have disabilities, but don't have a formal support plan, it could be a good idea to look into what is available.  Even if a student is having no apparent issues or needs, it is often best to get these plans in place before an issue arises, as after it arises, the student cannot usually attack the college for "noncompliance" if the student either did not set up a a plan or failed to notify their professors about the plan.

Best,

 

Michelle Ball

Education Law Attorney 

 

LAW OFFICE OF MICHELLE BALL 

717 K Street, Suite 228 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Phone: 916-444-9064 

Email:help@edlaw4students.com 

Fax: 916-444-1209

Website, Blog, Twitter, Youtube, Facebook

 

Please see my disclaimer on the bottom of my blog page. This is legal information, not legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed by this posting.  This blog may not be reproduced without permission from the author and proper attribution of authorship. This blog may not reflect the current state of the law.

READ MORE - Transitioning To College As A Disabled Student And Getting Support While You Are There

Study: Media don't celebrate Trump's Covid diagnosis
The media’s coverage of Donald Trump’s bout with Covid-19 has been largely free of “just desserts” narratives, while attacks against him for being irresponsible have grown as the president has recovered, according to a new study.

A NexisUni database search of news on Oct. 3-4, the two days following Trump’s positive test announcement, maxed out at 10,000+ hits for “Trump and Covid.” (Maxed out means there were at least 10,000 stories, though the database shows only the first 10,000). Of these, only a small number of stories contained “just desserts” keywords like “karma” (114), “deserved” (370), “inevitable” (265), and “ironic” (65). There were even 126 hits for “didn’t deserve.” If fact, the phrase “just desserts” was found only twice in this search.

Using the total of 10,000 news stories on Trump and Covid on these two days, even the most frequently appearing “just desserts” keyword, “deserved,” appeared in just 3.7% of the stories. Clearly, the media steered clear of most attacks that would imply that Trump got what he deserved, as well as language that might be seen as celebrating Trump’s infection. To do otherwise would have given right-wing media the red meat they crave to feed their narrative about the liberal media hating Trump.

According to a second NexisUni search, the “just desserts” narrative did not gain any additional traction the following two days. On Oct. 5 (the day Trump returned to the White House from the hospital) and Oct. 6, the keywords of “karma” and “deserved” showed slight increases (from 114 to 137 and from 114 to 137 respectively) while the term “inevitable” (265 to 199) had a decreased number of hits. The keyword “ironic” stayed about the same (65 to 68).

Statistically, the press took it easy on Trump on Oct. 3-4 when it came to his perceived lack of personal responsibility, and what some see as his cavalier attitude when it comes to exposing others to his infection. On these two full days, the search of 10,000+ Trump and Covid news stories showed a modest number of hits for the keywords “reckless” (267) and “irresponsible” (280—just 2.8% of the 10,000 stories).

However, on Oct. 5-6, the press attacks on Trump’s personal responsibility escalated. A NexisUni search found 10,000+ Trump and Covid stories on these dates. Of these, 858 used the term “reckless,” while another 579 used the word “irresponsible.” Both totals were more than double the preceding two days, perhaps indicating that the press felt increasingly comfortable justifiably attacking Trump as he recovered and his prognosis improved.

One interesting aside: Whether a deliberate poke in the eye or not, the press liberally used a term Trump hates, “obese.” From Oct. 3-6, “obese” appeared in 1296 of 10,000 Trump and Covid stories—about 13%.

In summary, despite what one might hear from conservative outlets, there was almost no celebration in the news media when Trump contracted the virus. Instead, between Oct. 3-6, in 10,000+ articles, the media offered “prayers” (1364 hits) and hopes for a “speedy recovery” (1602). Once Trump was back in the White House, attacks against his irresponsible behavior did escalate, justifiably so, since his behavior calls into question his judgment and commitment to protecting others.

READ MORE -

Post Independence, markets have failed Indian farmers

 

Reiterating what a former US Agriculture Secretary Earl Butz (at the time of Richard Nixon) had once given a call: “Get big or get out,” Sonny Perdue, US President Donald Trump’s Agriculture Secretary too recently said: “In America, the big get bigger and the small go out. I don’t think in America, (as) for any small business, we have a guaranteed income or guaranteed profitability. “ 

Wherever agriculture is being opened to markets, the big capital has successfully managed to push out the majority farming population and concentrated its control over food. That’s how the markets behave, with its own set of logic and ethics. As the big get bigger, the small farms struggle to survive. In America, after decades of market reforms in agriculture, only 1.5 per cent of its population has somehow managed to survive on the farm. Despite providing for $ 867 billion support under the Farm Bill 2018 over the next 10 years for agriculture, nutrition and conservation programmes, rising suicide rate, worrying trends of depression in rural areas, declining milk and farm commodity prices, and the mounting bankruptcy in farming – estimated at $ 425 billion -- will make it tough for the family farms to survive the transition.

With the suicide rate being 45 per cent higher in rural areas as compared to urban America, low prices and mounting debt has pushed much of the rural population into the grips of stress and depression. What happened in America is no exception. It has in fact become an international agricultural design, with agribusiness gaining strongholds over the food value chains across the globe, in reality their competitive strength depending on the huge subsidies received. In Europe, farming too is in a severe crisis despite an annual subsidy support of $ 100 billion, of which nearly 50 per cent goes as direct income support. Low prices and mounting debt has gradually pushed small farmers out of business. In UK alone, 3,000 dairy farms have closed down in the past four years. In France, a study had shown that nearly 500 farmers commit suicide on an average in a year. 

Compare this with India, where 3.64-lakh farmers have officially committed suicide in the past 25 years as per the National Crime Record Bureau statistics. Despite 94 per cent farmers being dependent on markets all these years (as per the Shanta Kumar committee report), Indian agriculture is still in the throes of a terrible agrarian distress. Interestingly, an NSSO report in 2014-15 had shown that nearly 54 to 84 per cent farmers (depending on crops) in the kharif marketing season had sold their produce outside the mandis to private traders. In other words, farmers had the freedom to sell anywhere. They were not in the clutches of the mandis. The question therefore that needs to be asked is if markets were so efficient, why farmers should be increasingly abandoning agriculture and migrating to the cities. If markets were so benevolent, there is no reason why agriculture shouldn’t have been the engine of economic growth. I am not sure whether the markets have now undergone a heart transplant given the exuberance being shown, promising higher price discovery for farmers.  

But this is how markets operate. It pushes people away from agriculture primarily to provide cheap workforce for the industry. The big get bigger in the process and the small go out. For India, the Washington-based International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has a similar proposition – ‘move up or move out’. For several decades, mainline economists in India had been arguing on similar lines. Numerous committees and reports had pointed to the need to move towards market-friendly agriculture. Minimum Support Price (MSP) was blamed to be the culprit, coming in the way of real price discovery. In one form or the other, the emphasis had been on dismantling the vast network of Agriculture Produce Market Committee (APMC) regulated mandis in Punjab and Haryana.   

To strengthen the argument, even the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) had come out with a table ranking States in terms of market-friendliness. Bihar was among the states that topped the chart, and Punjab was at the bottom. 

Punjab is at the bottom of the chart because 87 per cent of wheat and rice (as per CACP) is procured by the Food Corporation of India (FCI) or by public sector agencies on its behalf at a guaranteed MSP. In Bihar, less than 1 per cent of the wheat harvest is procured. If this is market-friendliness, economists need to explain what is so good about it. In Punjab and Haryana, comprising the food bowl, farmers receive Rs 80,000-crore a year by way of price support. As far as I can remember, barring a few instances farmers have not received a price higher than the MSP in open markets. Market prices have always remained lower than the MSP announced for wheat and paddy, the two crops that are being procured. Similarly for the 23 crops for which MSP is announced every year, open market prices have generally been lower. That’s the reason why agriculture continues to be in a serious crisis.   

The real price discovery for farmers is by MSP only. The need therefore is to make MSP a legal right of for farmers and ensure that no trading takes places below the MSP, not only for wheat and paddy but for all the 23 crops for which MSP is announced. 

Although the government says MSP and APMC markets will remain intact under the new marketing reforms being ushered in, farmers fear that APMC mandis will gradually become redundant. With APMC markets heading towards a collapse, the new sets of reforms are aimed at encouraging corporatisation of agriculture, with big business moving in agriculture, storage and marketing. As the experience of US/Europe shows, when unregulated markets become dominant, small farmers are the first to be pushed out of agriculture. Given that 86 per cent farmers have less than five acres of land holdings, the message is clear: get big or get out. #

*Ensure no trading takes below MSP. The Tribune. Sept 24, 2020 https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/haryana/ensure-no-trading-takes-place-below-msp-145671#:~:text=In%20Punjab%20and%20Haryana%2C%20comprising,by%20way%20of%20price%20support.&text=The%20need%20therefore%20is%20to,for%20which%20MSP%20is%20announced.

READ MORE - Post Independence, markets have failed Indian farmers

In US, the big is getting bigger and small farmers are on way out -- My interview

At a time when farmers are up in arms against three contentious agriculture bills passed in Parliament advocating an open market system, agriculture expert and commentator Devinder Sharma talks to Sanjeev Verma on how open agriculture markets have failed to provide relief to farmers even in US and European countries.

What is your opinion about three contentious bills passed in Parliament despite protests from farmers?

These bills have now been passed in Parliament and would soon become law. Considering that farmers have been protesting on the streets for over a month now, it is high time we sit and talk to them and find out what their concerns are, what changes we need to incorporate in the legislation, what kind of safety nets are to be provided and how to regulate private investments and capital flowing into agriculture.

After the bills were passed in Parliament, I saw a lot of excitement among the agri-business companies and mainline economists. They are all saying that farmers are being misled, and in reality they would stand to benefit and get a higher price. My question to them is that if you are willing to pay farmers a higher price than MSP, why can’t you stand with farmers and urge the government to accept their demand of bringing in a fourth bill to make MSP a legal right for farmers? In any case you are saying farmers will get a higher price so why can’t you assure them that in future no trading will take place below MSP?

This means we should ensure that MSP becomes a legal right for farmers. That will be the real freedom for a farmer, when he knows that whether he is selling in Punjab or in Bengaluru, whether inside or outside the mandi, he would at least get the MSP for his produce.

When the industry is promising higher prices that means the industry is willing to procure at a price above MSP. So the entire burden of higher price will not be passed on to the government, the private sector will be a major partner.

Can you throw some light on systems in place in the US, European Union (EU) and Australia, and how farmers there get strong government support and subsidies.

In the US and Europe, open markets in agriculture have been operative for six to seven decades. If open markets were so benevolent, the US or European farmers would not have been in the grip of a severe crisis. In the US, farmers are at present faced with a bankruptcy of $425 billion. This is at a time when the suicide rate in rural areas is 45% higher than in urban areas. This is also at a time when the US farmers receive an average of $60,000 annual subsidy. Whereas, farmers in India get nearly $200 annual subsidies.

The US has big retail like Walmart which has no stock limits. The US has not only ‘one country, one market’, it has in fact ‘one world, one market’ operative. They also have contract farming and commodity trading. The biggest commodity exchange is in Chicago. Despite all this, if the US farmers are passing through severe crises, it is a clear indication that market reforms in agriculture have not helped them. Even the chief economist of the US department of agriculture has said that since the 1960s farm incomes have been on a steep decline.

When 

Ronald Reagan

 was the US President, the then agriculture secretary Earl Butz had made a famous statement ‘get big or get out’. That is what exactly the markets in agriculture look forward to. The result has been that small farmers in the US have been pushed out. Today, the number of farmers has come down to around 1.5% of the population.

US President Donald Trump’s agriculture secretary too has reiterated the same, saying in America the big gets bigger and the small goes out. The same thing happened in Canada and in the EU. If we look at Europe, agriculture is receiving a support of $100 billion every year under the common agriculture policy programme. Of this, 50% goes as direct income support to farmers and yet farmers are in crises there. The stress and depression farmers are undergoing there is an indication that they are faced with declining financial stability on small farms.

What difference do you see in small and marginal landholdings in India as compared to large corporate-owned landholdings in the US or Europe?

In the US, the average landholding is more than 400 acres (160 hectares) and in Australia, it is more than 4,000 hectares. In India, the average land holding size is 1.1 hectare and 86% farmers have landholdings of less than 5 acres (2 hectares). If the open market model of agriculture has not worked for bigger landholdings in America, Canada, Europe and Australia, I don’t understand how it will work for small landholdings in India. Instead of blindly aping the open agriculture market model from there, the challenge here should be how to evolve our own model of agricultural marketing which conforms to the peculiar conditions of Indian agriculture - primarily helping small farmers.

Though the Centre declares MSP on 23 crops, it only procures paddy and wheat. When most of the other crops are sold much below the MSP, how can higher prices be provided to farmers?

Shanta Kumar

 (former Union minister) committee report had said that only 6% farmers in India get the benefit of MSP, which means the remaining 94% are dependent on the markets. If the markets were so efficient, I see no reason why Indian agriculture should be passing through such a terrible crisis. The same markets which did not perform for all these years are suddenly now being seen as saviors of farmers.

With only 6% farmers getting the MSP, the challenge now is to expand the MSP regime throughout the country. We have close to 7,000 

Agricultural Produce Market Committee

 (APMC) mandis across the country. The need is to set up 42,000 such mandis if we have to provide a mandi at a radius of 5 km. Since the government announces MSP for 23 crops, of which only wheat and rice is procured, and with some procurement of cotton and pulses, most of the remaining crops get a lower market price. I am looking forward to a time when we are able to take the MSP regime from the present 6% to benefit at least another 60% farmers. This will help realise the vision of Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas.

As the US and other European markets have a high focus on quality of agricultural produce, where does India stand?

There is no denying that the focus of US agriculture has been on improving the quality, and that is why there has been a rise of major agri-business corporations. They have also focused on building the food value chain. Whenever agri-business companies have stepped in, they have brought in technology to check quality norms. But let us not forget, in the US, because of the takeover of the dairy sector by big corporations since the 1970s, 93% of small dairy farms have been closed down. These dairy farms were also having sophisticated technology. They closed down because the prices crashed and the big business increased milk production.

How do you see the increase in MSP for wheat and paddy since 1970?

In 1970, the MSP for wheat was Rs 76 per quintal. In 2015, after 45 years, it was Rs 1,450 per quintal. This means an increase of 19 times. If you compare this with income parity norms of other sections of the society, basic pay and dearness allowance (other emoluments not added) of government employees have increased by 120 to 150 times during these 45 years. In the case of university and college professors, this has increased by 150 to 170 times and of school teachers by 280 to 320 times in the same period. So what do you expect the farmer to do?

A study done by Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development in collaboration with the Delhi-based think tank Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations had shown that between 2000 and 2016-17, Indian farmers lost Rs 45 lakh crore. Can we imagine how much farmers are suffering? Imagine if this loss was encountered by corporates, the entire nation would have woken up to the crises India is facing. But this particular subject is not at all discussed in the media.

The economic survey 2016 tells us that the average income of a farming family in 17 states of India, which means roughly half the country, is Rs 20,000 a year. This means a farmer’s family is surviving on nearly Rs 1,666 per month.

But there are also flaws in the APMC mandi system.

Some flaws have evolved over a period. There is cartelisation and mafia. So, why not reform the APMCs? We need to remove the political influence in mandis and ensure mandis operate in a professional manner. We need to see that there is competition within the APMC mandi.

Bihar did away with the APMC Act in 2006 and it is said that the decision made farmers’ condition worse. But why did not farmers in Bihar protest like farmers in Punjab and Haryana?

If bulk of the delivery in APMC mandis is in Punjab and Haryana, they are the ones who know where the shoe pinches. In Punjab 87% of wheat and paddy is procured. In Haryana, it may be around 80%. But in Uttar Pradesh, only 7% procurement takes place, in Rajasthan it is 4% and in Bihar it was hardly 1%. So, when they do not have any idea what procurement is all about, how do you expect them to stand up and protest?

What do you say about the Essential Commodities Bill passed in Parliament in which commodities like onion, potatoes, cereals, pulses and edible oil have been removed from the list of essential commodities and one cannot know how much stock a person is holding?

This means that we have actually legalised hoarding under the garb of saying that farmers would actually benefit. When there is asymmetry in power, how do you expect a big player to negotiate with a small player? Secondly, when there would be hoarding at this scale, the big storage companies would be calling shots and deciding what the prices would be. #

Source: If Open Markets were so benevolent, farmers in US and Europe wouldn't be in severe crisis. The Times of India. Chandigarh. Sept 26, 2020. 

https://m.timesofindia.com/city/chandigarh/if-open-markets-were-so-benevolent-farmers-in-us-or-europe-would-not-be-in-severe-crises/amp_articleshow/78328364.cms

READ MORE - In US, the big is getting bigger and small farmers are on way out -- My interview

The new Peace Journalism magazine has arrived!
The October, 2020 edition of the Peace Journalist magazine is out! It features reports on Zoom conferences and peace journalism projects from Brazil, Israel, Yemen, Sudan, and elsewhere.

The magazine is posted on Issuu at:
 https://issuu.com/peacejournalism/docs/peace_journalist_oct_2020-web .

A downloadable/viewable .pdf file of the magazine is at: 
https://www.park.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Peace-Journalist-Oct-2020-web.pdf

The Peace Journalist is a semi annual publication featuring news and information by, for, and about peace journalism practitioners, academics, and students. Our next edition is April, 2021. See page 2 of the magazine for submission details. We welcome and encourage submissions from everyone.

Enjoy!

READ MORE -