The state of Gujarat hasn’t had a debate on its Prohibition policy since its inception sixty years ago. Any move for a public disputation is scorned by invoking the name of Mahatma Gandhi. Apart from that, there seems to be no political will to make a stand for personal freedoms, an ideal that the Mahatma symbolized. Every political party in the state supports a complete ban on liquor, whether it is practically possible to enforce the ban is another story altogether.
As we explained in the last blog post, that prohibiting a commodity from the market does not mean ending the demand for the product. As long as demand exists, there would be a supply to match that demand. Prohibition simply drives the supply underground into the hands of criminal corporations which are not bound by the usual regulations and ethics. News reports going as far as 1970s indicate hundreds of deaths related to spurious liquor in the state of Gujarat.
Ethanol is by far the safest and the most commonly used intoxicant around the world. In almost all countries of the world, adults are allowed to buy and consume alcohol with very little restrictions (although there are often laws about the exact hours bars and shops are allowed to sell alcohol, and laws against public drunkeness and drunk-driving), without increase in reports of violent crime. But when the society turns over a legitimate product into the hands of the liquor mafia it also relinquishes whatever control it had over its ill-effects. The laws intended to protect the interests of the weaker sections become the bane of their existence.
A number of women rights group have been consistently pushing for strict enforcement of the Prohibition laws in Gujarat and enactment of Prohibitory laws in other states of India, since they view social ills like domestic abuse and violence as a manifestation of alcohol. Their ire is misplaced. Alcohol itself is not responsible for poverty and social ills, it is government policy and excessive regulation that can potentially destroy opportunities for wealth creation and upliftment of the poor.
The morality of a free society is not one of intrusion by one group of individuals over the other.
