By Imkong Walling
Debate courts alcohol once again. It comes in the wake of a renewed push by the Naga Council Dimapur and Dimapur Urban Council Chairmen Federation for freeing Dimapur district, at least, from the purview of the Nagaland Liquor Total Prohibition Act 1989, in effect since 1990.
The two organisations are also reportedly engaging with Dimapur-based tribal hohos and civil society organisations for garnering stronger consensus.
This bold pitch has had the church up in arms, defending the Prohibition law, urging stricter enforcement.
According to the church, banning alcohol aligns with Christian theology, an act triumphantly projected as upholding a “moral commitment,” a “Covenant” made between God and the people. It argues that it reflects “the Church’s stance that alcohol is a social evil destroying homes and families in Nagaland.”
The intent is clear, it means well. Unfortunately, the anti-alcohol chorus has devolved into a culture of pretense— a case of performative activism characterised by optics over real outcomes. By focusing on preserving a paper covenant, the church has missed the forest for the trees, a lived reality where 35 years of Prohibition has given way to an alcohol black market thriving with impunity. It has only satisfied the craving for a symbol, a moral facade, while ignoring the reality that the ban has failed to install sobriety.
The church claims that the concept of personal choice is not fully applicable in Naga society, implying that the people are not mature enough to exercise discretion over food or drink. It claims support for the Act is based on “thorough social analytical study,” asserting that “alcohol has not contributed anything good to anyone so far.” But where is this ghost study? In the same breath, it can be argued that the NLTP Act has not contributed anything good to anyone, except, maybe, profits to alcohol smugglers and retailers.
There is no denying the traumatic impact unrestrained alcohol use has on the body, mind and on the society. Its effect is profound. Alcoholism causes violence, breaks homes, claims lives but there is also a virtue called ‘moderation,’ finding a balance between extremes.
It pointed to what it claimed were the positive impacts of the NLTP Act— reduced alcohol-related transgressions, improved public health, and reduced road accidents. Unfortunately, again, it could not provide empirical evidence. It has been said before and has to be said again, “Let data speak.”
The Church should perhaps prick the conscience of its flock rather than taking the moral high ground, and pushing responsibility onto the government or the police.
In the real world, policy is judged by impact, not intent.
The writer is a Principal Correspondent at The Morung Express. Comments can be sent to imkongwalls@gmail.com
