Why not have nationwide prohibition? -Governance Now

Why not have nationwide prohibition?

Revenues earned from alcohol sales are justified neither morally nor economically given the state spending on health as well as crime control

Ashish Mehta | January 3, 2019 | Delhi

#liquor #Mahatma Gandhi #prohibition #alcohol ban #Gujarat

Illustration: Ashish Asthana

What would be the one thing you would do if you are prime minister for the time it takes to throw a lemon up in the air and catch it? Mahatma Gandhi’s answer, the anecdote goes, was that he’d ban alcohol. The notion of the whole country quitting on liquor is not as outrageous as it may seem at first blush.

Following Gandhi, one of the directive principles of state policy in the constitution says, “The State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.”

India has a long history of consuming various forms of liquor, but it was the colonial rulers who promoted it solely with an eye on revenue. Today, revenue has become the first line of defence argument against prohibition, without taking its moral price into account. It was during the British Rule that women protested and led temperance movements. In recent times, it is this push from women that has led to prohibition in Bihar. And statistics say crime in general and incidences of violence against women in particular have come down in Bihar since 2016.

Think

Prohibition is advised by a directive principle of state policy, no less
. . .
Revenues earned from alcohol sales are justified neither morally nor economically given the state spending on health as well as crime control
. . .
A countrywide ban is bound to be more effective than state-wide ban

Another argument against prohibition has been that it is never hundred percent effective, and liquor finds its ways to an underground market helped by corrupt officials. In Gujarat, where the ban has been in place since the state was formed in 1960, underground markets are well developed. True, but a big part of the reason is that liquor is officially available in each neighbouring state: what if there was no liquor legally available to divert across the border? Ineffective implementation of prohibition in the few states is actually a strong argument to ban it across the board.

This also means that instead of banning things (alcohol, tobacco, etc.) at the user end, better results can be ensured if things are banned at the manufacturing end. The state cannot ban the consumption on one hand and grant licences to manufactures on the other. Extending that argument, we could ask: is the state not being hypocritical by warning people through public health campaigns about the dangers of alcoholism, smoking, and tobacco consumption while at the same time allowing tobacco and liquor giants to conduct business?

Finally comes the ace-card argument from the liberal camp: the state intervention in private life, be it in the name of morality or national security, is evil. Alcohol is unhealthy, and so is sugar or salt. An adult citizen should have freedom to decide his or her life choices. But it’s a tricky argument: the so-called nanny state has to intervene when the matter (road safety, for example) goes beyond an individual’s life choices – and alcohol abuse is indeed a social matter. The state is also responsible towards young adults. In Gujarat, for a teenager inclined to a ‘rite of passage’ to adulthood, a smoke would be the default choice rather than alcohol.

Reality Check

The directive principles of state policy, unfortunately, are not always practical. Dismantling a thriving industry is next impossible. A ban can unwittingly promote more dangerous moonshine. The state experience has shown that the key to effective implementation is policing, and the police force in India is woefully short on numbers as well as scruples – something the Mahatma had not foreseen.

[email protected]

(This article appears in January 15, 2019 edition)

Comments

Other News

Consumer Justice at a Crossroads

Over the past four decades, India`s consumer protection landscape has undergone a remarkable transformation. What began with the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as a simple mechanism to empower ordinary citizens has evolved into a comprehensive framework capable of addressing challenges ranging from mislea

Doctors, experts call for ban on junk food ads, mandate warning labels

More than 30 doctors, medical scientists and public health professionals have urged the government to take decisive action against the aggressive advertising and marketing of junk food, calling for a watershed ban on advertisements for foods high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) and ultra-processed foods (UPF

Asiatic Lion population rises from 523 in 2015 to 891 in 2025

On World Lion Day 2026, environment, forest and climate change Minister Bhupender Yadav celebrated India’s remarkable journey in lion conservation and reaffirmed the country’s unwavering commitment to protecting wildlife and biodiversity. In a post on soc

Railways imposed ₹5.13 crore fine for food quality and hygiene violations

Indian Railways serve about 58 crore meals every year on an average. About only 0.0008% food quality related complaints are received on average. Based on complaints during the last three years, appropriate penal actions have been taken by IRCTC. Such actions include imposition of fines amounting to ₹5.13

STHAVAR: Why every Indian built asset needs a permanent digital identity

India has built digital systems for identity, payments, taxation, documents, logistics and public services. State governments, ministries, infrastructure agencies and urban local bodies have also created portals for land records, building permissions, project monitoring, property taxation and municipal s

Saksham Skill census identifies 22,000 job-ready candidates in one Mumbai ward

A first-of-its-kind AI-enabled skill census conducted in Mumbai`s H-West Ward has identified a potential livelihood pipeline of nearly 22,000 candidates, generated over 32,000 provisional job matches while revealing that 71.2 per cent of surveyed homemakers are willing to join the workforce, according to