Morung Express News
Dimapur | November 22
The Nagaland Liquor Total Prohibition (NLTP) Act continues to remain a contentious issue in the State, with a weekly poll by The Morung Express indicating strong and divergent public opinions on whether the law should be repealed, relaxed, or retained.
The responses, gathered from a cross-section of respondents, reveal three different positions: complete repeal of the Act, exemption for major urban districts, and a defence of the prohibition.
A majority of the polled responses advocated for a complete repeal of the NLTP Act. The primary argument centres on the law's ineffectiveness, with many pointing out that alcohol is “already banned but available.”
Several participants argued that the prohibition has fuelled a thriving black market. “A man is buying a bottle of rum for Rs 600, with the alcohol legalized it will cost around Rs 200-300 saving lots of money,” one respondent stated, highlighting the financial burden on consumers.
The economic potential for the state was another key factor. Many argued that legalisation would generate substantial revenue for Nagaland, which is a “low performing state,” and stop revenue from flowing to neighbouring states. There were also concerns about the unregulated quality of illicit alcohol and the corruption the ban allegedly engenders within law enforcement.
A second section of respondents suggested a middle path, recommending that the NLTP Act should not be repealed statewide but instead be lifted specifically in the state's two main urban centres, Dimapur and Kohima. They acknowledged the unique status and needs of these commercial and administrative hubs.
In contrast, a strong contingent defended the prohibition, arguing that the law should remain “uniform across Nagaland.” For them, alcohol is “a curse to the Naga society,” and any exemption would be “the worst nightmare.”
They called for stricter enforcement, urging law enforcement agencies and civil society to “act strictly” and “shutdown all the mineral water shops selling alcohol.” Some respondents said the current ban, though porous, still acts as a necessary “restraint” on consumption.
The debate also extended to the role of the Church, with one critic alleging, “The Church is only concerned about alcohol. They do not care about other problems plaguing our state.”
