Church bodies warn selective dilution of NLTP Act, urging stronger enforcement and cautioning against social harm in Nagaland.
Share
DIMAPUR — As calls grow louder to dilute the Nagaland Liquor Total Prohibition (NLTP) Act, the Dimapur Baptist Pastors’ Fellowship and the Dimapur Baptist Women Union have cautioned against what they termed a selective, short-sighted approach, warning that weakening the law—particularly in Dimapur—could deepen social harm and erode Nagaland’s moral fabric.
In a joint statement, the two church bodies observed that the renewed debate on NLTP Act has exposed sharp divisions within Naga society, with certain civil society organisations (CSOs) increasingly blaming the Nagaland Baptist Church Council (NBCC) and churches for blocking reform.
Such accusations, they stated, oversimplify a complex issue that requires moral, legal, and social reflection rather than “convenient scapegoating.”
Taking strong exception to proposals advocating lifting the NLTP Act only in Dimapur district, the organisations questioned the logic of linking legality to proximity to the Assam border.
“What is permitted in Dimapur will not remain confined there,” the statement read, cautioning that alcohol would inevitably spread to villages and districts across Nagaland.
Pointing to the visible sale and consumption of alcohol even under prohibition—including during major public events—the church bodies argued that the core problem lies not in the law itself but in poor enforcement.
Also read: East Dimapur village councils back demand to repeal NLTP Act
Weak implementation, they stated, should prompt administrative reform and strengthening of mechanisms, not abandonment of the Act.
The two Baptist bodies also challenged economic arguments advanced by CSOs, such as increased revenue generation, regulation, and improved liquor quality.
While acknowledging these claims, the organisation stressed that they ignore the wider social costs of alcohol abuse, including broken families, domestic violence, poverty, declining productivity, and public health consequences.
Citing global public health evidence, they warned that greater availability leads to increased consumption and harm—an outcome Nagaland, already burdened by unemployment and social stress, can ill afford.
They further noted that even in Dimapur, several colonies have voluntarily regulated or banned alcohol, demonstrating that community discipline and moral consensus can succeed where enforcement struggles.
Rejecting comparisons with the failure of prohibition in early twentieth-century United States, the organisations stated that Nagaland’s socio-cultural and faith-based context is fundamentally different and policies must be evaluated within local realities.
They also warned that legalisation would remove the psychological restraint created by prohibition, particularly among youth, turning curiosity into habit through open social sanctioning.
While affirming the right of CSOs to seek reforms, the two groups stated that blaming the NBCC diverts attention from real challenges such as manpower shortages and administrative weakness, which the Excise department itself has acknowledged.
Instead, they called for strengthening the NLTP Act, reforming enforcement, and fostering collaboration among the state, civil society, and faith institutions.
The NLTP Act, they added, represents more than a legal restriction—it reflects Nagaland’s moral vision and concern for social well-being. Any selective dilution risks inconsistency, wider social harm, and deeper division within society, they warned.