Madras HC stays ban on slaughtered cattle sale: Defending ill-conceived move will embarrass Narendra Modi govt
The public outcry against the rule of Narendra Modi government ban on the sale of cattle for the market slaughter was sure to follow the decision and pressed rather ill-thought. Several states, including Kerala, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, have raised protests against the decision citing two main reasons: the fundamental right of citizens to choose their food, and secondly, the impact on meat / Of great work.
The situation worsened on Tuesday when the Supreme Court of Madras ordered the suspension of the new rules. With this, the Modi government in the Center is engaged in a fierce battle with state governments and the judiciary in its contested decision. The center is situated on a weak note here. In essence, the regulation of the commercial markets cattle and their derivatives is a matter of State, while the Center has to intervene in matters of animal welfare. The Modi government is likely to have more options to consider banning the sale of cattle for slaughter in livestock markets.
However, the Center has never ordered a total ban on the slaughter of cattle, but only prohibits the sale of animals for slaughtering livestock markets. It also placed restrictions on how these transactions occur; According to the notification under the 1960 Act on the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA), which empowers the plant in animal welfare, committees supervising animal markets will engage with traders That “animals are bought for agricultural purposes and not for the massacre”.
The idea, according to the government, was to ensure compliance with the rules on the treatment of livestock for slaughter and the quality of meat sold. But rather than dealing with specific problems, the functions of the livestock markets (for massacre) are completely banned. It was like throwing the baby in the bathroom.
Despite the declared intention to introduce new rules is good – to improve market hygiene, to discipline the sale of livestock and the quality of meat sold, etc. – the decision to ban the sale on the markets is not justified since most of the cattle trade and slaughter takes place in these bazaars. Only about 10 percent of the livestock for the slaughter is purchased directly from the farmer, according to DB Sabharwal, secretary of the All India Meat & Livestock Exporters Association. This is something that industry associations have said.
When supply is reduced, consumers will naturally be faced with steep price increases and businesses could be successful due to lower demand.
For these reasons, we expected game states to consume more meat. Especially for states like Kerala, where meat consumption is high (according to the State Finance Minister, over 70% of the population eats beef); People saw this as a government interference in their eating habits and their individual rights. The problem is aggravated with the center, including the “buffalo” in the list of prohibited meat. Previously, this was not the case. Even when the prohibition of the cow slaughter was present, meat that was used many hotels as “meat” was buffalo meat and not beef. The inclusion of this category was a double shock for consumers of meat and meat merchant in all these states.
Basically, the problem was not with the rules to improve commercial slaughterhouses of trade and meat, but the decision to end these sales à la carte. Instead, the government could restrict the changes only to improve the functioning of mandis, infrastructure, norms or transport of livestock for slaughter and the quality of meat sold in slaughterhouses – without prohibiting the sale of markets. won. This would have praised an intelligent reform and much of the meat trade and would not have caused the stress to the extent we see today.