The Supreme Courtappointed committee on the contentious farm laws met for the first time on Tuesday and sought to assure all farmers of an unbiased hearing, the personal opinions of the three members overseeing the process notwithstanding.

“The Supreme Court has nominated us for this job not to share our views but to carry out consultations with all stakeholders and make recommendations based on these interactions,” Pramod Joshi, an agricultural economist who is one of the three remaining members of the committee, told The Telegraph.

The Supreme Court had appointed four members for the committee, but one of those nominated — Bhupinder Singh Mann, the chairman of the All India Kisan Coordination Committee, was quoted by his outfit as having recused himself, purportedly in deference to the prevailing sentiments of the farmers. The choice of committee nominees had drawn flak as all four are in favour of the three contentious farm laws, raising questions about their neutrality.

At Tuesday’s meeting, the three members essentially drew up a road map for the next two months to hold deliberations and receive opinions from all stakeholders, includ¬ing those opposed to the farm laws. Admitting that it would take some convincing to get the protesting farmers to participate in the process after they had rejected it outright, Joshi said the committee planned to set up a portal to allow everyone to submit their views to ensure transparency in the exercise.

In creating a portal and inviting all stakeholders, including the state governments, to submit their opinions, the committee will essentially be doing what the Narendra Modi government did not do while enacting the three laws — hold prelegislative consultations when the bills are supposed to be placed in the public domain to generate a debate and draw in all viewpoints.

“We will write to the protesting farmers and request them to participate, pointing out that we have not been tasked by the government but by the Supreme Court,” Joshi said.

The Samyukta Kisan Morcha, which had decided not to approach the courts against the laws, have been of the view that the Supreme Court has no role to play in a political decision taken by the executive.

Another member, Anil Ghanwat of the Shetkari Sanghatana, said the committee would also discuss with state marketing boards, farmer producer organisations and cooperatives. The Centre plans to submit before the committee and it remains to be seen if the state governments that have passed resolutions against the three farm laws also join.

For state governments which have mandis, the Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act results in loss of revenue as the new law allows farmers to sell their harvest outside the notified Agricultural Produce Market Committee mandis without paying state taxes or fees. This would mean further loss of revenue for states, already cashstrapped due to GST.

While ordering the setting up of the committee, the Supreme Court had said it was being constituted for the purpose of listening to the grievances of the farmers relating to the farm laws, the views of the government and to make recommendations.

As the movement prolongs, the SKM has had to deal with rumblings within its own leadership; particularly over the politicisation of the movement. After one section of the leadership took a grim view of Gurnam Singh Chaduni, a farm leader of Haryana, participating in an allparty meeting on the farm laws, another veteran, Shiv Kumar Sharma ‘Kakkaji’, was censured for making uncharitable remarks against Chaduni.

Both leaders explained their actions, and the matter was considered closed for the “wellbeing of the movement” and a general call was given on Tuesday to all protesters to avoid making allegations against each other, urging them not to lose sight of the task at hand at this critical juncture of the struggle.