It was during my visit to Sitamarhi in December, 2017 – four months after a flood wreaked havoc in Sitamarhi, destroying lives and livelihood of thousands of people and damaging crop worth thousand crores and bringing enormous loss to farmers of the district – I came across a few sharecroppers, mostly from scheduled caste, who had lost their entire crop due to flood. When I inquired about the government’s help, one of them replied with all the anger in his eyes “bahishkrit kar diya gaya hai humko sarkar dwara” (meaning: they have been outcast by the government).
Later on, his anger converted into tears as he explained how the attitude of the government towards sharecroppers had led to continuance of an informal bondage in agriculture. Moreover, he had to reduce intake of food to save money and return the loan. It clearly showed the helplessness of sharecroppers in Bihar.
In Bihar, agriculture contributes to 18% of GDP and employs around 70% of workforce. About 30% of the farming is done by sharecroppers. Given the low productivity in Bihar and large number of small and marginal land holdings, farmers have to lease in land for their subsistence. The land is mostly leased in on “batai basis” where the landowner and the sharecropper have to share input cost and the produce equally but mostly the sharecroppers had to bear the entire input cost, however the produce is shared equally.
So, in case of any disaster, it is the sharecropper who bears the brunt of the disaster, moreover due to lack of access to formal source of credit, the dependence on landowner increases and it later on converts into informal bondage. Moreover, almost every government scheme for farmers benefits those who own the land rather than those who till it; benefits of subsidies, crop compensation, loan, etc. provided by the government is entirely reaped by the landowner who in most cases had no relationship with farming.
Even the Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885 which provides occupancy rights to underraiyats comes to no help for sharecropper since the contract is largely oral and presence of many small and marginal farmers increases the demand of the land allowing the landowner to continue to practice.
The continuance of discrimination against sharecroppers by the government which came to power rallying on the support of sharecropper in the name of introducing bataidars bill, had not moved a single step towards it, rather, it had put the recommendations of Debabrata Bandyopadhyay committee to recognize the rights of the sharecroppers on back burner.
The continued protest by the farmer organisations largely comprising of upper caste and the existing landlords against the bill is a clear manifestation of losing their monopoly over agriculture and a challenge to their free ride. This thread is important to understand the politics behind the failure of land reforms in Bihar. The government had taken steps to allot land to Mahadalits, which is a laudable initiative, however, the distress sale of land under the burden of loan by the small and marginal farmers who are mostly dalits involved in sharecropping, does not improve the condition of the community as a whole.
Given the political alliance of the ruling party, it would be hard for the incumbent chief minister to enact the bill but the same failure to address the crisis among sharecroppers might act as Achilles heel for the incumbent government. Therefore, it is high time now that the present regime fulfills the promise done to the sharecroppers of Bihar otherwise people will decide the fate of the “jumlebaaz” government in the upcoming election.