Bold disruption: Congress lawmakers in Belagavi accuse the Centre of weaponizing investigations against their leaders and fiercely oppose renaming MGNREGA to VB-G Ram G. The December 17 protest unfolded as Karnataka’s winter session kicked off, with legislators gathering before the Suvarna Soudha Mahatma Gandhi statue to condemn the Union Government and BJP leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah.
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah framed the central government’s actions as vindictive politics aimed at erasing party legitimacy, citing a rise in national debt from ₹53 lakh crore at independence to ₹148 lakh crore under Modi’s tenure. He also criticized Modi’s promise to deliver two crore jobs annually, labeling it unfulfilled.
On the National Herald case, the CM argued that the newspaper, founded in 1937 during the freedom struggle, remains a Congress property and accused the BJP of using legal mechanisms to attack Congress leadership with false charges.
The protesters highlighted what they described as a setback for the BJP after the Delhi High Court dismissed the Enforcement Directorate’s plea in the National Herald matter, signaling a public-relations setback for the Centre.
Discontent extended to the proposal to rename MGNREGA as VB-G Ram G Ram G indicates a broader claim that renaming erodes Mahatma Gandhi’s legacy. A participating leader questioned, “What is wrong with Gandhi’s name?” suggesting the move reflects a broader anti-Gandhian stance within the BJP.
Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar asserted that central agencies, including the ED, are being used to target Congress leaders, referencing his own PMLA-related detention as evidence. He warned of continued protests against the renaming scheme.
Several ministers—Revenue Minister Krishna Byregowda, Industries Minister M.B. Patil, Health Minister Dinesh Gundu Rao, and Forest Minister Eshwar Khandre—addressed the rally, reaffirming solidarity with the Congress line that the central government is misusing agencies for political gains.
This development raises questions about how political narratives shape policy moves and the degree to which legal actions are perceived as partisan tools. Do you think renaming a major rural employment program amounts to political signaling, or should it be evaluated purely on policy merits and impact? Share your views in the comments.
