Opinion Sobering facts
Nitish Kumar claims that his government speaks for Bihar’s disprivileged. But his prohibition policy targets them the most
Express Archive
How ironic it is to find that while Chief Minister Nitish Kumar champions the cause of the dispossessed, the first convictions secured under his flagship legislation, the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act of 2016, are those of the poorest of the poor. Two brothers who are cart-pullers in Jehanabad have been put away for five years and face a fine of Rs 1 lakh. Sole bread-winners of their families, they can expect to languish in jail much longer, since they are incapable of paying either the fine, or legal fees. Their families are already deep in debt and can expect to remain so for over half a decade, for a single misdemeanour which is not even conclusively proved. Kumar’s policy draws on the Gandhian conceit that if people were weaned off liquor, the poor would spend the money saved on better nutrition for their families.
But the real world does not support such displacement analysis. In lived experience, from the US almost a century ago to present-day Indian states, prohibition has only driven the liquor trade underground, criminalising the populace. In July 2016, the government lifted the ban on toddy but left other categories of liquor illegal, putting powerful discretionary powers in the hands of the police. A breathalyser or a blood test can only detect levels of ethanol. They cannot tell whether the ethanol originated in toddy, IMFL or champagne. The enforcement agencies can take their pick when they frame charges.
Both criminalisation and discretionary powers are traditionally tilted against the less fortunate, who cannot afford either legal representation or bribes. No wonder 25,000 people have been booked in Bihar for prohibition violations, and the first convictions have incarcerated the poorest of the poor. By carving out the Mahadalit block, the Bihar government had sought to focus developmental attention on the extremely disadvantaged, but the prohibition policy would appear to be targeting the same communities, and has the capacity to snuff out whole families with every conviction.
In contrast, the more fortunate can get off the hook without too much inconvenience. Nitish Kumar cannot push forward both policies at the same time, since they work at cross purposes. Under the LDF, Kerala has had the wisdom to roll back the prohibition policy of the previous government. Kumar should reverse his own policy, if only because he risks losing a vote bank.
Share
