Along with is a compilation of voices from the ground as expressed in different parts of India during the December 19 Protests Against the VB-G RAM G Bill.
On December 19, rural India spoke in many accents—but with a shared unease. From drought-hit districts to tribal belts and agrarian heartlands, agricultural labourers and rural workers across the country held coordinated protests against the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, which replaces the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). Organisers framed the mobilisations not as episodic dissent but as part of a longer struggle to defend rights-based welfare against increasing executive discretion.
Called by the NREGA Sangharsh Morcha, farm worker unions, and peasant organisations, the nationwide protests reflected widespread concern that a legally enforceable right to work was being replaced by a discretionary, mission-mode programme.
Maharashtra: “Without the Guarantee, Drought Becomes Death”
In several districts of Marathwada, groups of farm workers gathered outside tehsil offices, holding up job cards as symbols of survival.
“Here, farming depends on the monsoon and fate,” groups of agricultural labourers from drought-prone Marathwada districts said. “MGNREGA meant at least food when crops failed. Without the guarantee, drought becomes death.”
Workers said that while wage delays had become routine, the legal right to demand work still provided leverage.
“Earlier, we could demand work or unemployment allowance,” workers from Beed and Osmanabad districts said. “Now everything will depend on the mood of officials.”
Jharkhand: “From Right to Request”
In Ranchi, protests drew participation from Adivasi workers from Khunti, Gumla, and Simdega districts.
“MGNREGA allowed us to stay in our villages instead of migrating,” Adivasi workers from central Jharkhand said. “If the guarantee goes, migration will return.”
Activists accompanying the workers said the shift from a right to a scheme would have lasting consequences.
“This bill turns a constitutional promise into a programme,” said Adivasi rights activist Dayamani Barla. “A programme can be stopped. A right cannot.”
Bihar: “Migration Will Increase Again”
In Patna, groups of construction and agricultural labourers linked the new law directly to distress migration.
“Every train to Delhi is full of workers from Bihar,” groups of rural labourers from north and central Bihar said. “MGNREGA reduced migration slightly. Removing the guarantee will push people out again.”
Women workers highlighted how the programme enabled local employment.
“MGNREGA allowed us to work near home and care for our families,” women workers from Gopalganj and Muzaffarpur districts said. “Without it, we will be forced to leave.”
Kerala: “Women Will Pay the Price”
In Kerala, where women form a significant proportion of MGNREGA workers, protests were led largely by women’s collectives.
“MGNREGA gave us dignity, not charity,” groups of women workers from Alappuzha and Palakkad districts said. “If wages become uncertain, women will be the first to lose work.”
Trade union leaders warned that replacing a rights-based programme with a centralised mission would undermine decentralised planning.
“This is a retreat from democratic governance,” said CPI(M) leader and former MP Elamaram Kareem. “Kerala’s experience shows that employment guarantees work when people can demand them.”
Tamil Nadu: “This Is About Control, Not Development”
Protests in Madurai, Tiruchirapalli, and Dindigul focused on the erosion of local decision-making.
“MGNREGA worked because panchayats had a role,” groups of rural workers from southern Tamil Nadu said. “This bill takes control away from local bodies.
Workers also pointed to rising costs of living.
“Food prices are rising every month,” women workers from Dindigul and Theni districts said. “If work becomes uncertain, survival becomes uncertain.”
Punjab: Farmers and Labourers Together
In Punjab, farmer unions joined rural labourers, framing the issue as part of a wider agrarian crisis.
“When labourers lose income security, agriculture weakens,” said Sanyukt Kisan Morcha leader Balbir Singh Rajewal. “This reflects the same mindset that pushed the farm laws.”
Protesting labour groups echoed the concern.
“Rural employment schemes support the entire village economy,” groups of landless labourers from Punjab’s Doaba and Malwa regions said.
Northeast: “One Law Cannot Fit All”
In Nagaland, protests organised by the Congress and civil society groups highlighted the region’s dependence on public employment.
“Our villages have few alternatives,” groups of rural workers from Nagaland said. “A uniform law ignores regional realities.”
Senior Congress leader K. Therie said the bill failed to recognise economic disparities between states.
Political Opposition: “Anti-Village”
Opposition leaders across parties amplified the protests.
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi described the bill as “anti-village and anti-state,” arguing that development cannot be built by withdrawing guarantees from the poorest citizens.
“You cannot weaken the foundation and expect the structure to stand,” he said.
CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat said the legislation reflected a systematic dilution of labour protections.
“From labour laws to rural employment, guarantees are being steadily eroded,” she said.
Parliament vs the Streets
The protests coincided with dramatic scenes in Parliament, where Opposition MPs staged walkouts and overnight sit-ins following the bill’s passage. “ They rushed the law because they feared scrutiny,” said CPI general secretary D. Raja. “What Parliament avoided debating, the people debated on the streets.” Economists and labour researchers warned that replacing rights with schemes shifts power away from citizens. “ A scheme depends on budgetary discretion,” said social activist and economist Jean Drèze. “A right depends on law.”
What December 19 Revealed
As protests dispersed peacefully across states, organisers announced plans for sustained mobilisation.
“They can change the name and the structure,” groups of rural workers from Chhattisgarh and Odisha said while leaving protest sites. “But hunger does not change.”
December 19 did not reverse the VB-G RAM G Bill. But it revealed something harder to legislate away: rural India’s collective memory of what a guarantee meant—and its refusal to let that memory be erased quietly.
Courtesy: The AIDEM