When it comes to generating discussions or opinions on any given topic, perhaps nothing can beat the flurry of diverse viewpoints or arguments on the issue of liquor prohibition in Nagaland. Each side of the debate has their convincing point/s and it is like everyone seems to be speaking the truth. A few years ago, a senior bureaucrat serving the State government made a comment that if total prohibition has to be implemented we have to find ways on how best to strengthen the law and enforce it in letter in spirit. The point he was making was if prohibition had to stay, it must be implemented with full force. There should be no compromise. If we are half hearted in our approach, then it is better to do away with this Act. This is an objective assessment of how the Liquor Prohibition Act must be seen—you either embrace it fully or if we cannot enforce it, better to do away with it. The problem with the present situation is that there is no 100 percent backing for Liquor prohibition. As in most cases we are a divided people even when it comes to Liquor Prohibition. Theoretically or on paper all of us agree on total prohibition. In reality it’s a different story altogether. As we all know, liquor prohibition in Nagaland has not been very successful—government sponsored Hornbill Festival, Road Shows and parties witness abundant flow of Liquor unabated. The use of Govt. VIP vehicles, especially, the Police, for transportation of Liquor, has become very rampant. So the government has made a mockery of the Act.
The Church, here the Nagaland Baptist Church Council (NBCC), has been solidly behind the Prohibition Act and will not tolerate any move to either to do away with the Act or relax the use of liquor legally. On the other hand, the State government in the last few years have been seriously considering the option of lifting the ban on liquor or if not atleast a ‘partial’ easing of the Prohibition Act. The total failure of the Act coupled with the resource crunch faced by enforcement agencies in the form of manpower and infrastructure bottlenecks have led many (both within the government and outside including the NGOs) to re-think on the viability of enforcing the Act. While non performance of the Act is an important parameter for those who want the ban lifted, the loss of revenue is another worrying point for the State exchequer. A few years ago, the Finance Department revealed that after the Prohibition act was promulgated, the State was losing revenue to the tune of Rs 10 crore per annum. The State Excise Department, the nodal agency for implementing the Prohibition Act also divulged that in the year 1988-89, the year preceding prohibition, revenue to the tune of Rs.6 crore was generated, which could now have quadrupled to a estimate of about Rs 20 crore taking into consideration the rise in population and demand factor.
Although the Church is against the ban lift, the State government and most of the NGOs seem to be in favour of atleast a partial relaxation. The influence of the Church as a pressure group seems to be weighing hard on policy makers otherwise the Prohibition Act is as good as dead. And this is exactly the problem—the absence of will and motivation to embrace this Act in totality. The way forward is to strengthen the Act and act in unison—both by the State government and the national group/s with support from the Church and civil society. The steps been taken by the Naga underground group/s (NSCN/GPRN and GPRN/NSCN) is encouraging and a step in the right direction. One will have to see how far we are all able to enforce total prohibition without compromise.
