The deaths of 19 people in just two days after consuming suspected spurious liquor in Nagaland where prohibition has officially been in place since 1989 ought to be shocking.
Thirty-seven years after prohibition, Nagaland continues to grapple with alcohol demand and illicit liquor. Recent deaths from suspected spurious liquor renew questions over the policy’s human and social cost
It’s been thirty-seven years since total prohibition was officially declared in Nagaland, but that has done nothing to quell the thirst for alcohol; in fact, the thirst remains unquenchable. Since the demand is so high, supply has increased to keep pace — resulting in economic enrichment for a few but tragic consequences for many. Over the decades, Nagaland has had one of the highest rates of substance abuse and alcoholism in the country — along with corresponding high rates of drug- and alcohol-related diseases, including HIV/AIDS, and deaths. Despite the several-times-declared wars on drugs and alcohol by government agencies, including the Police Department, churches, social, women’s, student and youth organisations, the problems persist.
According to the State Police, last week Mokokchung district reported eight deaths and Tuensang district 11 deaths over the preceding two days following the consumption of suspected illicit liquor. The deaths of 19 people in just two days after consuming suspected spurious liquor in a State where prohibition has officially been in place since 1989 ought to be shocking, but they have only renewed the blame game that has been in play for decades.
The church wanted prohibition for a very long time, ostensibly because of the destructive nature of alcohol consumption. While this argument of the church is irrefutable, it may be noted that the Baptist denomination of Christianity is one of the most conservative, rigid and right-wing. And this was the denomination that was introduced in Nagaland way back in the 19th century. The Nagaland Baptist Church apparently believes that consuming alcohol, smoking and chewing tamul-paan are ungodly and sinful. So, prohibition is a natural corollary of that belief. Now, because the church wields enormous power over the congregation, whom political parties see as voters, it was smart of the church to seize the opportunity and press for prohibition, especially for the ruling party of that time, which seems to have been confronting the threat of anti-incumbency in the next elections. For the ruling party of that time, bowing down to the church’s demand for prohibition was a political calculation, strategy and gamble.
Neither the church nor the government was prepared for, perhaps did not even imagine, what would follow after prohibition was declared. And, to this day, they remain unprepared and unwilling to prepare. Instead of looking reality in the eye, the church increased its criticism and blame game; in fact, its rigidity prevented it from listening to and hearing reason. Its hubris over being able to make the government accede to its demand for prohibition seems to have consumed it. While the recent 19 deaths in Mokokchung and Tuensang districts are tragic and should never have happened, let us also not forget the thousands of alcohol-related deaths over the decades in hospitals, nursing homes, clinics, at home and in the streets due to the easy availability of spurious alcohol in Nagaland.
No souls can be saved by imposing prohibition. No government can implement total prohibition, and no church can keep vigil over each individual who decides to consume alcohol. Prohibition per se has failed miserably across the globe — the US being the prime example in the 1930s, which led to the emergence of the mafia, which in turn compounded matters and shook its social, economic and political foundations. Market dynamics are such that prohibiting or banning alcohol will neither stop demand nor supply but increase both without state supervision and at the cost of tax revenue to the state. It’s not that the church is unaware of this — alcohol being a lucrative industry in itself — but ego prevents it from relooking and revisiting total prohibition, counting the losses and making efforts to plug the gaping holes. Meanwhile, no political party or government wants to incur the wrath of the church and lose votes.
Not all who consume alcohol are alcoholics, but prohibition has forced non-alcoholics to consume whatever is available on the black market. Over the decades, our local newspapers have often published news and photographs of the Excise Department, church groups, women’s groups, youth groups and so many others destroying seized alcohol, yet demand persists, and so does the supply, often unimpeded. There is money in this booming black market, and this money even lines the pockets of the least suspected. Even a cursory look seems to suggest that prohibition is a windfall for many across sectors, as well as a form of religious and political public posturing.
Actually, the government had expressed its willingness to partially lift the prohibition, but the church wouldn’t have any of it. True, the previous and current governments have failed in proper policymaking and implementation of prohibition, but so has the church in teaching its flock ethics and moral precepts and instilling an unshakable value system. In fact, because the church cites the Christian-majority composition of our State as the basis for the logic that prohibition is in line with Christianity and necessary, the whole issue of total prohibition also brings with it the kind of Christianity that has been and is being preached. Asserting that alcohol consumption, smoking and tamul-paan chewing are sins while remaining silent on various forms of corruption, nepotism, violence against women and children, domestic violence, crimes, unfair means of accessing fake certificates and jobs, especially government employment, injustice, greed, envy, adultery, etc. — how does the church account for this selective silence? Or is it reading a different Bible?
Prohibition sounds more like moral policing than actual evangelising of Christ’s teachings and very much like Hindutva elements banning cow slaughter and dictating people’s food habits, etc. Yes, if prohibition is rooted in Christian belief, then all Christian beliefs must also be highlighted and practised. The problem with all religious institutions is that they give power to the higher echelons of their hierarchies to be selective about religious teachings and practices. For decades, the pro- and anti-prohibition debate has been raging in Nagaland, but prohibition continues, as do deaths related to the consumption of spurious alcohol readily available on every other street corner.
Meanwhile, a Special Investigation Team (SIT), headed by Additional Superintendent of Police I Bunglang Chang, has been constituted to investigate the aforesaid 19 deaths and trace the source and supply chain of the suspected adulterated liquor, Senior Superintendent of Police Vesupra Kezo said on Saturday (September 26). He also said samples have been sent to Guwahati for forensic examination to ascertain the cause of the deaths, adding, “We have obtained some leads, but it is too premature to disclose details.” Following the deaths, police conducted multiple raids, arrested 19 people and seized close to 3,000 bottles of liquor.
A humble beginning, but will it be enough to stop people from consuming alcohol and to prevent the manufacture and sale of adulterated liquor? Will the deaths of 19 people move the government and the church to rethink the silent, expensive and irredeemable cost of imposing prohibition?
Monalisa Changkija
(She is a Dimapur-based veteran journalist, poet, and former Proprietor, Publisher, and Editor of Nagaland Page)