Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Cash Crop Crisis:Farmer Suicides, Human Rights and the Agrarian Crisis in India


Affiliations
1 National Law University, Jodhpur, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


According to official estimates, more than a quarter of a million farmers have committed suicide in the last sixteen years-the largest wave of recorded suicides in the history of mankind. Most of the affected farmers are cash crop farmers and cotton farmers, in particular. Based on the available statistics, a farmer commits suicide every thirty minutes. While this is the official number, these statistics do not account for the actual number of farmer suicides taking place and the large number of lives that are affected due to the death of even single farmer in the family. Women, for example, are often excluded from farmer suicide statistics because most do not have title to land—a common prerequisite for being recognized as a farmer in official statistics and programs.

Cotton exemplifies India’s general shift toward cash crop cultivation, a shift that has contributed significantly to farmer vulnerability, as evidenced by the fact that the majority of suicides are committed by farmers in the cash crop sector. The cotton industry, like other cash crops in India, has also been dominated by foreign multinationals that promote genetically modified seeds and exert increasing control over the cost, quality, and availability of agricultural inputs.

This paper focuses on the human rights of Indian cotton farmers and of the estimated 1.5 million surviving family members who have been affected by the farmer suicide crisis to date. These farmers and their families are among the victims of India’s longstanding agrarian crisis. Economic reforms and the opening of Indian agriculture to the global market over the past two decades have increased costs, while reducing yields and profits for many farmers, to the point of great financial and emotional distress. Indebtedness is a major and proximate cause of farmer suicides in India. Many farmers, ironically, take their lives by ingesting the very pesticide they went into debt to purchase. The Indian government’s response to the crisis—largely in the form of limited debt relief and compensation programs—has, by and large, failed to address the magnitude and scope of the problem or its underlying causes.

This paper also aims to conclude with policy recommendations to address and upischolar_main the agrarian crisis in India. Thus, the paper concludes that taking the steps necessary to prevent farmer suicides and ensure farmers’ rights is not just a matter of sound policy or basic humanity for the Indian government; it is also a matter of hard legal obligation.

India is a State Party to multiple international human rights treaties and however, India with its failure to address this nationwide crisis of farmers’ suicides has also violated a number of human rights including the rights to: life, health, water and food, an adequate standard of living, equality and non-discrimination, and the right to an effective remedy, all of which are enshrined under Part III of the Constitution. It is neither inevitable, nor lawful, that the conditions which have led to this wave of suicides continue. The Indian government can, and must, act to put an end to this tragedy.


Keywords

Cash Crops, Human Rights, Farmers Rights, Constitution of India, International Human Rights, Agriculture.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Jason Motlagh, India’s Debt-Ridden Farmers Committing Suicide, SAN FRANCISCO CHRON., Mar. 23, 2008, available at http://articles.sfgate.com/2008-03-22/news/17168778_1_suicides-farmers-interest-rates. (“While India’s economy surges forward on the crest of globalization, thousands of farmers are taking their own lives every year to escape mounting debt and an uncertain future.”); Smita Narula, Equal by Law, Unequal by Caste: The “Untouchable” Condition in Critical Race Perspective, 255 WISCONSIN INT’L. L.J. 284 (2008), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1275789_code419245.pdf?abstractid=1273803&mirid=1.
  • THE DAMAGE DONE: AID, DEATH, AND DOGMA 16-19 (2005), available at http://www.christianaid.org.uk/Images/damage_done.pdf (describing the liberalization agenda of the World Bank, World Trade Organization, and International Monetary Fund).
  • See Food First Information and Action Network (FIAN), Parallel Report: The Right to Adequate Food in India 15 (2008), available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/docs/info-ngos/ParallelReport_India_FIAN.pdf (“In 1998, the World Bank’s structural adjustment policies forced India to open up its seed sector to global corporations [like Cargill, Monsanto, and Syngenta].”
  • See Neelima Deshmukh, Cotton Growers: Experience from Vidarbha, in AGRARIAN CRISIS AND FARMER SUICIDES 175, 185 (R.S. Deshpande & Saroj Arora eds., 2010) (“Cotton has become the deciding factor of politics in Maharashtra…In response to the ever swelling number of suicides by the farmers of Vidarbha, Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Sing visited the affected area along with his entourage on 1 July 2006[.]”).
  • See BHAGIRATH CHOUDHARY & KADAMBINI GAUR, INT’L SERV. FOR THE ACQUISITION OF AGRI-BIOTECH APPLICATIONS, BT COTTON IN INDIA: A COUNTRY PROFILE 4-5 (2010), available at http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/biotech_crop_profiles/bt_cotton_in_india-a_country_profile/download/Bt_Cotton_in_India-A_Country_Profile.pdf (purporting that adoption of Bt cotton in India is 85 percent of cotton area farmed).
  • Id.
  • Vidarbha, Maharashtra, a locus of cotton production, is thus a sort of epicenter of the crisis. Srijit Mishra, Agrarian Distress and Farmers’ Suicides in Maharashtra, in AGRARIAN CRISIS IN INDIA 126, 133 (D. Narasimha Reddy & Srijit Mishra eds., 2009) (“The plight of Western Vidarbha [in Maharashtra] is in some sense linked with that of cotton or rather its declining profitability because of increasing costs and relatively lower yields.”).
  • P. Sainath, Men of Letters, Unmoved Readers, THE HINDU, May 6, 2010, available at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/article422651.ece.
  • P. Sainath, Of luxury cars and lowly tractors, THE HINDU, Dec. 27, 2010, available at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/article995828.ece (explaining that although official data is only available until 2009, “we can assume that 2010 has seen at least 16,000 farmers’ suicides. (After all the yearly average for the last six years is 17,104).”).
  • Id.
  • P Sainath, Suicides are about the living, not the dead, THE HINDU, May 21, 2007, available at http://www.thehindu.com/2007/05/21/stories/2007052103541100.htm.
  • See SRIJIT MISHRA, INDIRA GANDHI INST. OF DEV. RES., MUMBAI, RISKS, FARMERS’ SUICIDES AND AGRARIAN CRISIS IN INDIA: IS THERE A WAY OUT? 7 (Sept. 2007), available at http://www.igidr.ac.in/pdf/publication/WP-2007-014.pdf (describing a study in Vidarbha wherein 96 of 111 farmers who committed suicide were indebted).
  • Id.
  • These figures are collated from data available from the National Crime Records Bureau, a division of the Ministry of Home Affairs. See Ministry of Home Affairs, National Crime Records Bureau, Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India Reports for previous years, http://ncrb.nic.in/adsi/main.htm (last visited May 7, 2011) [hereinafter NCRB] (providing reports for 1995-2008); MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NAT’L CRIME RECORDS BUREAU, ACCIDENTAL DEATHS AND SUICIDES IN INDIA 2009 (2009) [hereinafter NCRB 2009], available at http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-ADSI2009/ADSI2009-full-report.pdf (providing 2009 data).
  • Id.
  • Id.; Jason Motlagh, India’s Debt-Ridden Farmers Committing Suicide, SAN FRANCISCO CHRON., Mar. 23, 2008, available at http://articles.sfgate.com/2008-03-22/news/17168778_1_suicides-farmers-interest-rates. (“While India’s economy surges forward on the crest of globalization, thousands of farmers are taking their own lives every year to escape mounting debt and an uncertain future.”).
  • See Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter: Building resilience: a human rights framework for world food and nutrition security, 8, delivered to the 9th Session of the Human Rights Council, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/9/2 (Sept. 8, 2008), available at http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/officialreports/or1-a-1-hrc-9-23final-eng.pdf (noting that “investment in agriculture… has been neglected for many years both in the definition of priorities of official development assistance and in national budgets[.]”
  • For example, in 2008, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, (“the ESCR Committee”), had raised serious concerns about the increasing incidences of suicides among farmers.
  • U.N. Econ. & Soc. Council [ECOSOC], Comm. on Econ., Soc. & Cultural Rights, Consideration of Reports Submitted Under Articles 16 & 17 of the Covenant: Concluding Observations of the Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: India, 29, 69, U.N. Doc E/C.12/IND/CO/5 (May 2008), available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/docs/co/E.C.12.IND.CO.5.doc. The relationship between extreme poverty and human rights has also been addressed by U.N. human rights experts. In 2008, for example, the U.N. Independent Expert on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty underscored the relationship between poverty and human rights, noting that “Poverty can be both a cause and a result of human rights denials,” and that “while the non-fulfillment of human rights often causes poverty, poverty in many cases is a cause of human rights violations.” Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty, Report of the Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty, Magdalena Sepúlveda Carmona, 11, delivered to the 63rd Session of the U.N. General Assembly, U.N. Doc A/63/274 (Aug. 13, 2008), available at http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/459/30/PDF/N0845930.pdf?OpenElement. The Independent Expert added that, “The protection of human rights is instrumental to the reduction of extreme poverty.
  • India acceded to the ICCPR on April 10, 1979. UN Treaty Collection, ICCPR, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4〈=en (last visited Apr. 12, 2016).
  • India acceded to the ICESCR on April 10, 1979. UN Treaty Collection, ICESCR, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-3&chapter=4〈=en (last visited Apr. 12, 2016).
  • India signed CEDAW on July 30, 1980, and ratified it on July 9, 1993. UN Treaty Collection, CEDAW, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-8&chapter=4〈=en (last visited Apr. 12, 2016).
  • India acceded to the CRC on December 11, 1992. UN Treaty Collection, CRC, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11&chapter=4〈=en (last visited Apr. 12, 2016).
  • India signed ICERD on March 2, 1967, and ratified it on December 3, 1968. UN Treaty Collection, ICERD, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-2&chapter=4〈=en (last visited Apr. 12, 2016).
  • General Comment No. 3, 12. Especially vulnerable members of the population include, in the Committee’s view, the disabled (ECOSOC, Comm. on Econ. Soc. & Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 5: The Rights of Persons with Disabilities, ¶ 9, U.N. Doc. E/1995/22 (Dec. 9, 1994), available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/%28Symbol%29/4b0c449a9ab4ff72c12563ed0054f17d?Opendocument, the elderly (ECOSOC, Comm. on Econ. Soc. & Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 6: The economic, social, and cultural rights of older persons, 17, U.N. Doc. E/1996/22 (Dec. 8, 1995), available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/%28Symbol%29/482a0aced8049067c12563ed005acf9e?Opendocumen), and the homeless (ECOSOC, Comm. on Econ. Soc. & Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 4: The right to adequate housing (Art. 11(1)), 13, U.N. Doc. E/1992/23 (Dec. 13, 1991), available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/%28Symbol%29/469f4d91a9378221c12563ed0053547e?Opendocument.).
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [ICCPR], art. 2(3), Dec. 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/ccpr.pdf.
  • Human Rights Comm., General Comment No. 6: The right to life (art. 6), 5 (Apr. 30, 1982) [hereinafter General Comment No. 6: The right to life], available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/84ab9690ccd81fc7c12563ed0046fae3?Opendocument.
  • Id.
  • Id.
  • Article 21: “Protection of Life And Personal Liberty: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”.
  • In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, the Supreme Court gave a new dimension to Art. 21 and held that the right to live the right to live is not merely a physical right but includes within its ambit the right to live with human dignity. Elaborating the same view, the Court in Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi, observed that:“The right to live includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, viz., the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter over the head and facilities for reading writing and expressing oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing and mingling with fellow human beings and must include the right to basic necessities the basic necessities of life and also the right to carry on functions and activities as constitute the bare minimum expression of human self.”
  • Supra note 21.
  • Id.
  • Supra note 31.
  • Kishor Tiwari states flatly that the cotton farmer “is not earning anything.” According to a government survey cited to in 2007, Vidarbha cotton farmers are suffering net losses from their crops while the costs of food, education, and health care have all increased: Vidarbha Farmers' Suicides Inspire Highway Blockade Across India, ENVTL. NEWS SERVICE, Oct. 3, 2007, http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2007/2007-10-03-01.asp.
  • Supra note 21.
  • Id.
  • Id. at 12-13.
  • Id. at 56-60.
  • Id.
  • Vidarbha Farmers' Suicides Inspire Highway Blockade Across India, ENVTL. NEWS SERVICE, Oct. 3, 2007, http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2007/2007-10-03-01.asp.
  • In its recommendations after India’s most recent period State report submission under the ICESCR, the ESCR Committee “[drew] the attention of the State party [India] to para. 19 of the Committee’s General Comment No.12 on the right to adequate food (1999).” Consideration of Reports Submitted Under Articles 16 & 17 of the Covenant, supra note 173, 69. Paragraph 19 enumerates, non-exhaustively, the “[v]iolations of the right to food [that] can occur through the direct action of States or other entities insufficiently regulated by States.” General Comment No. 12, supra note 189, 19. The violations listed include: “the formal repeal or suspension of legislation necessary for the continued enjoyment of the right to food; denial of access to food to particular individuals or groups, whether the discrimination is based on legislation or is pro-active; the prevention of access to humanitarian food aid in internal conflicts or other emergency situations; adoption of legislation or policies which are manifestly incompatible with pre-existing legal obligations relating to the right to food; and failure to regulate activities of individuals or groups so as to prevent them from violating the right to food of others, or the failure of a State to take into account its international legal obligations regarding the right to food when entering into agreements with other States or with international organizations.” Id.
  • Id.
  • Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter:
  • Supra note 20, 21, 22, 23.
  • Id.
  • Id.
  • The right to water is explicit in CEDAW and the CRC. See CEDAW, supra note 34, art. 14(2) (“States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in rural areas in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, that they participate in and benefit from rural development and, in particular, shall ensure to such women the right:…(h) To enjoy adequate living conditions, particularly in relation to housing, sanitation, electricity and water supply, transport and communications.”); CRC, supra note 235, art. 24(2): “States Parties shall pursue full implementation of this right and, in particular, shall take appropriate measures:…(c) To combat disease and malnutrition, including within the framework of primary health care, through, inter alia, the application of readily available technology and through the provision of adequate nutritious foods and clean drinking-water, taking into consideration the dangers and risks of environmental pollution.”).
  • Human Rights Council, Human rights and access to safe drinking water and sanitation, 3, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/15/L.14 (Sept. 24, 2010), available at http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/LTD/G10/163/09/PDF/G1016309.pdf?OpenElement (“Affirms that the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation is derived from the right to an adequate standard of living and inextricably related to the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, as well as the right to life and human dignity.).
  • See Ramya Kanna, Spate of farmers’ suicides in India worrying WHO, THE HINDU, Oct. 15, 2006, available at http://www.hindu.com/2006/10/15/stories/2006101514820800.htm. Then-Director of the WHO Department of Mental Health and Substance Dependence, Benedetto Saraceno, expressed concern about the farmer suicides in India, which he believes are the result of “[u]ndiagnosed and untreated depression, along with catastrophic social circumstances and easy access to methods of suicide.” Saraceno stated that “[t]he WHO was working on putting on the agenda of the Indian Government the need to reduce access to the usual methods of suicide [namely pesticide ingestion]” noting that for example, “[s]ome methods adopted worldwide that seemed to have worked included making it difficult to open bottles of pesticide and reducing the toxicity.”). Id.
  • CRC, supra note 35, art. 24(1).
  • UDHR, supra note 23, art. 2; ICERD, supra note 29, arts. 1, 2, 5; ICESCR, supra note 13, arts. 2(2), 3; ICCPR, supra note 191, arts. 2(1), 3, 24(1); CRC, supra note 35, art. 2; CEDAW, supra note 34, arts. 1, 2, 11(2); General Comment No. 20, supra note 15, 29, 30, 32-34.
  • See Comm. on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, General Recommendation No. 29: Article 1, paragraph 1 of the Convention (Descent), 1, U.N. Doc. A/57/18 (Nov. 1, 2002), available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/f0902ff29d93de59c1256c6a00378d1f?Opendocument (“Strongly reaffirming that discrimination based on ‘descent’ includes discrimination against members of communities based on forms of social stratification such as caste and analogous systems of inherited status which nullify or impair their equal enjoyment of human rights[.]”).
  • See B.B. Mohanty, ‘We are Like the Living Dead’: Farmer Suicides in Maharashtra, Western India, 32 J. OF PEASANT STUD. 243, 259 (2005), available at http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/ftinterface~db=all~content=a714004004~fulltext=713240930 (citing Gail Omvedt, Dalit Suicides?, THE HINDU, Apr. 24, 1999) (“[T]he problem facing small farmers from the lower castes is simply stated. The cultivation of cotton requires extensive knowledge that was virtually new to such producers, not least because more than 58 per cent of them had been engaged in this highly competitive commercial economic activity for less than five years. Elsewhere in Maharashtra the same kind of difficulty has surfaced, in the shape of lower caste farmers being driven to suicide due to crop losses resulting from inadequate technical knowledge about the growing of commercial crop[.]”).
  • Id.
  • CEDAW, supra note 234, arts. 1-4. CEDAW forbids “any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women…on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.” Id., art. 1. It further allows for “temporary special measures aimed at accelerating de facto equality between men and women.” Id., art. 4.
  • Id.
  • As a State Party to multiple international human rights treaties, India must fulfill its obligations under these treaties. Alternative obligations are not an excuse for non-performance of human rights obligations. See generally Smita Narula, The Right to Food: Holding Global Actors Accountable Under International Law, 44 COLUM. J. OF TRANSNAT’L L. 641, 742 (2006) (“Member states [of international financial institutions] do not leave their human rights obligations at the door when entering these corridors of power.”).
  • The National Commission on Farmers was convened by the Indian government in 2004 and was led by M.S. Swaminathan. Sharad Joshi, National Commission on Farmers, at last, THE HINDU, Mar. 3, 2004, available at http://www.thehindubusinessline.in/2004/03/03/stories/2004030300160800.htm. The Commission presented recommendations to Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar in 2006. Swaminathan Commission calls for farmers’ policy, THE HINDU, Apr. 14, 2006, available at http://www.hindu.com/2006/04/14/stories/2006041410371700.htm. To date, it appears that there has been no attempt to implement the recommendations contained in the Commission’s report, nor does it appear that the Indian government has officially published the full report. The government has also not tabled an “Action Taken Report” with regard to the Commission’s recommendations, which it is required to do. A version of the recommendations is available as a synopsis. See GOV. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF AGRIC., NAT’L COMM’N ON FARMERS (NCF), SYNOPSIS OF NCF REPORT (Oct. 2006), available at http://www.indianfarmers.org/publication_books/Synopsis%20of%20NCF%20Report.pdf. A more complete version of the fifth and final report is also available. See NCF, SERVING FARMERS AND SAVING FARMING (Oct. 2006), available at http://krishakayog.gov.in/revdraft.pdf.
  • Id. at 24-25.
  • Id. at 6-8.
  • Peoples Forum for UPR in India, India: Stakeholders Report Under the UPR 3 (2007), available at http://www.achrweb.org/UN/HRC/UPR-India.pdf (“The denial and deprivation of the economic, social and cultural rights also led to violations right to life through suicide, hunger and starvation. A staggering 89,362 farmers committed suicide between 1997 and 2005. Since 2002, there has become one suicide every 30 minutes.”).
  • Navdanya, Social Human Rights in India 1 (2008), available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/docs/info-ngos/GMOsIndia40.doc.
  • Id

Abstract Views: 207

PDF Views: 0




  • Cash Crop Crisis:Farmer Suicides, Human Rights and the Agrarian Crisis in India

Abstract Views: 207  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Akanksha Jumde
National Law University, Jodhpur, India

Abstract


According to official estimates, more than a quarter of a million farmers have committed suicide in the last sixteen years-the largest wave of recorded suicides in the history of mankind. Most of the affected farmers are cash crop farmers and cotton farmers, in particular. Based on the available statistics, a farmer commits suicide every thirty minutes. While this is the official number, these statistics do not account for the actual number of farmer suicides taking place and the large number of lives that are affected due to the death of even single farmer in the family. Women, for example, are often excluded from farmer suicide statistics because most do not have title to land—a common prerequisite for being recognized as a farmer in official statistics and programs.

Cotton exemplifies India’s general shift toward cash crop cultivation, a shift that has contributed significantly to farmer vulnerability, as evidenced by the fact that the majority of suicides are committed by farmers in the cash crop sector. The cotton industry, like other cash crops in India, has also been dominated by foreign multinationals that promote genetically modified seeds and exert increasing control over the cost, quality, and availability of agricultural inputs.

This paper focuses on the human rights of Indian cotton farmers and of the estimated 1.5 million surviving family members who have been affected by the farmer suicide crisis to date. These farmers and their families are among the victims of India’s longstanding agrarian crisis. Economic reforms and the opening of Indian agriculture to the global market over the past two decades have increased costs, while reducing yields and profits for many farmers, to the point of great financial and emotional distress. Indebtedness is a major and proximate cause of farmer suicides in India. Many farmers, ironically, take their lives by ingesting the very pesticide they went into debt to purchase. The Indian government’s response to the crisis—largely in the form of limited debt relief and compensation programs—has, by and large, failed to address the magnitude and scope of the problem or its underlying causes.

This paper also aims to conclude with policy recommendations to address and upischolar_main the agrarian crisis in India. Thus, the paper concludes that taking the steps necessary to prevent farmer suicides and ensure farmers’ rights is not just a matter of sound policy or basic humanity for the Indian government; it is also a matter of hard legal obligation.

India is a State Party to multiple international human rights treaties and however, India with its failure to address this nationwide crisis of farmers’ suicides has also violated a number of human rights including the rights to: life, health, water and food, an adequate standard of living, equality and non-discrimination, and the right to an effective remedy, all of which are enshrined under Part III of the Constitution. It is neither inevitable, nor lawful, that the conditions which have led to this wave of suicides continue. The Indian government can, and must, act to put an end to this tragedy.


Keywords


Cash Crops, Human Rights, Farmers Rights, Constitution of India, International Human Rights, Agriculture.

References