The Kerala High Court’s strong pitch for curbing daytime functioning of bars has found a resonance across the State, but opinions appear to differ on the best way forward and the diverse implications of such a measure.
Almost everybody with whom The Hindu spoke on the subject has agreed that heavy liquor consumption was an issue that needed to be addressed in Kerala.
However, there is no unanimity on the wisdom of enforcing restrictions of the kind proposed by the high court.
While some like Debhasis Chatterjee, Director, Indian Institute of Management, Kozhikode, welcomes the court’s proposal to restrict the working hours of bars, anti-liquor activists, including the litterateurs Sugathakumari and C. Radhakrishnan, do not feel so.
Glass half empty
Ms. Sugathakumari says such a measure will have little effect on consumption of liquor in Kerala as long as the restriction does not extend to the outlets of the Kerala State Beverages Corporation (Bevco).
Mr. Radhakrishnan is not even that optimistic. “The timing for taking a drink is more of a personal choice. I don’t think there will be any change in the volume of alcohol being consumed by restricting its sales before 5 p.m. Take a look at the long queues before retail shops on days before ‘dry’ days, such as the first of every month; it more than compensates the restricted sales. What we need is to inculcate consciousness about one’s own health and civic sense in individuals,” he says.
But according to Paul Zachariah, writer, “This is not something to be decided by the State or the judiciary. The choice should be left to the individual. The State’s job is to the prevent drinking from going to morbid levels. But this is far more complex than most of us, including the courts, think.”
In the perception of the former Supreme Court judge K.T. Thomas, it is the stigmatisation of drinking that is at the root of the problem.
“In societies (like those in the west) where there is no social taboo, the number of alcoholics is significantly lower than in Kerala. In a society like Kerala, even the slightest support given to moderate alcohol consumption might perhaps prove to be dangerous. But calling for total prohibition and attributing social taboo to alcohol is equally dangerous,” he says.
Shut the tap
T.P. Kunhikannan, State committee member, Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad, is aligned with Ms. Sugathakumari on the issue. “As long as the Bevco outlets remain open, the supply is maintained. If the objective is to reduce consumption, the restriction on bars should be backed by strict enforcement at all levels,” he says.
But Prof. Chatterjee supports the high court. “We have somehow assumed that just because we live in a market economy, we should have a market society. Nobody appreciates a drunk guy knocking you down on the road in broad daylight. I welcome this step, though I wish it was the community which had taken this initiative and not the judiciary,” he says.
Kalaparambath Thomas Paulachan, senior fellow with the Indian Association of Clinical Psychologists, agrees with him for another reason. “When alcohol availability is reduced to just evenings, the number of drinking hours will be reduced. People would stop by 10.30 p.m. .
No class divide
O.J. Chinnamma, President (Women’s Wing), Kerala Madhya Nirodhana Samithi, and an anti-liquor activist for 30 years, has a ground view of the situation.
“A bar owner once told me that only the rich visit bars. I stood outside one whole morning to see professionals, students, retired people go in,” she says. “Toddy shops don’t sell toddy anymore. They serve poison. What security does a woman have if her husband is an alcoholic?
No cold turkey
She, however, agrees that the level of alcoholism in the State is so high that banning alcohol at one go is not feasible.
“This has to be done gradually. Restricting the time is a viable way, because somebody who spends Rs. 1,000 in a bar will reduce it by half,” she says.
C.J. John, consultant psychiatrist, does not think that the restriction might not bring down per capita consumption, but feels that it might be a positive and rational step in bringing some discipline to the drinking habits of Malayalees who, he points out, lack the ability to enjoy drinking as a social leisure activity and almost always consume the maximum possible quantity within the minimum possible time.
“Consuming liquor during the forenoon is a sign of diseased alcoholism, which needs to be clinically treated. It is also debatable whether restriction should start from 5 p.m. or earlier or whether it should be extended to later hours,” he said.
Ms. Sugathakumari also cautions about the possible fallout of such a measure. “Alcoholics will ensure their daily fix at any cost. If bars are closed during daytime, they will just opt to drink at home or in public places,” she says.
Rubbishing the common excuse that the government’s coffers will dry up if it were not to get revenue from the sale of liquor, she says, “The government’s financial problems cannot be solved by Bevco. The loss from accidents, crime and violence caused by consumption of liquor is at least 10 times the revenue from liquor sale.”
Nanny State
But then, not all are taking the high court observations without raising questions about its implications for personal freedoms. “Agreed that heavy drinking is a problem that should be addressed, but any move to enforce restrictions will be a violation of personal freedom. If this rule is brought in, it will be like treating the citizens like children who cannot think for themselves or take decisions,” C.S. Venkiteswaran, media critic, says. And there are also those like the lawyer and social and political commentator Jayasankar who feel that the high court has overstepped its limits.
“This suggestion is against the Supreme Court’s observation that judiciary should not get involved in the policy-framing process. Such a restriction is not practical, especially when the retail outlets of the beverages corporation are kept open during daytime,” Mr. Jayasankar says.
