Dr Sedevi Angami
As the Prohibition debate reaches a crucial consultation stage, it might be useful to ask some questions regarding our experience of the subject.
1. Will removing the NLTP solve the alcoholism issue in Nagaland?
Neither the NLTP nor its removal will solve the alcoholism problem. The issue is much more deep rooted and will require a different strategy.
2. When newspapers say that 80% of respondents favour removal of NLTP, does it reflect the reality of the Naga population’s desire?
No.
The way the survey was conducted needs to be verified. We need to know how the study was conducted and ensure that Bias did not take place.
The denominator is important.
Some of the variables that need to be verified are
• How many men or women were involved
• Mothers versus singles
• Urban versus rural
• Districts studied
• Age group interviewed – teenagers versus elderly
• Working people versus students
• Stratified occupational groups – eg politicians/ bureaucrats/ office goers/businessmen/ hotel owners/ teachers/ medical people etc
• Church goers versus non church goers
• Level of education
• Amount of correct information available to the respondents
• Type of information accessible to the respondents
Depending upon the type of respondent group you interview, the results are likely to be very different from each other. Subgroups will respond very differently.
It also depends on who has conducted the study. If the group conducting the study is already biased for or against the NLTP, they can manipulate or hide certain facts.
Without a properly conducted survey that is unbiased scientifically robust and sound – no survey is worth taking seriously. This study must be thoroughly objective and tested for its validity. An issue as important as the NLTP cannot be decided based on a poorly conducted survey.
A plebiscite on NLTP would be difficult to conduct for logistical reasons and so the study has to be a jointly conducted study with inputs from both pro and against NLTP sides to ensure that the study covered all aspects and is reliable.
3. What are the possible determinants for decision making for the Government?
• Public opinion – this can sway either way. The majority is not always right. It also depends upon how they are swayed by the kind of information they are fed and in what manner they are provided this information.
• Intensity of lobbying – background lobbying to acquire the favour of decision makers can often overrule all debates and discussions. Sometimes decisions are already made and consultations are done in order to give the impression of inclusivity.
• Surveys – These can influence the people heavily. If conducted impartially and professionally, surveys can help people make up their minds.
• Interests of involved parties – There are parties who stand to benefit from keeping or removal of the NLTP. Both parties can influence public opinion and decision makers.
• The media – Currently we have not had sufficient professional debate on the subject in a neutral arena. People from both sides have voiced and written their opinion in the media. This can be very confusing to the public. Depending upon the emotional content and reasons brought to the table by the writers, public can be swayed either way.
4. Will removal of the NLTP solve the issue of illicit or adulterated liquor?
No.
The very lucrative industry of illicit brew or fake IMFL will not stop and suddenly become legal. There is too much at stake.
You are therefore likely to have genuine and fake liquor being sold on the same stands. People are ingenious and will definitely find a way to continue their brew business. Only this time it will be with much more ease and done openly.
5. Will the number of deaths and alcoholism increase if NLTP is removed?
Yes.
Easy accessibility will invariably increase the incidence of alcoholism. It is quite likely that school and college children will start drinking with greater ease.
Ease of accessibility is always directly related to increase in use.
More alcoholism means more of all the problems that it generates.
It does not take much to visualize the impact of 5 legal outlets of alcohol in Dimapur on the population. 5 may not meet the need of Dimapur. Imagine 20 legal outlets in all towns of Nagaland. A little bit of mathematical modelling will predict the impact of this move.
6. Will corruption decrease if NLTP is removed?
Yes and no.
The number of licenses that are given to people to sell liquor officially will be up for grabs and it is apparent what normally happens when lucrative offers are presented.
7. Is there a plan to ensure that only genuine liquor is sold in a restricted number of outlets?
It would be interesting to see what the opponents of NLTP have to offer to develop a convincing, fool proof and regulated mechanism of ensuring that the Naga population drink in a responsible manner. Can they chart out a clear roadmap to reducing alcoholism?
Will removing the NLTP be the only solution offered?
Generally, it is easier to start a revolution than to Govern a country after the revolution is over.
8. Can we do a trial of removal of NLTP for short period to see whether things work out?
This might sound like an interesting experiment to try. However, it is unlikely that you will be able to reverse the clock or undo the decision once taken.
9. Does the example of failure on prohibition in other states not convince us that the same will happen to Nagaland?
No. We will need to study this for ourselves. Assuming that some act succeeded or failed in another place does not guarantee the same results in Nagaland.
When you try to extrapolate other populations experiences into the Nagaland scenario, you must take into context the variables
• Demographics
• Our cultural and developmental history
• Cultural context – close knit community versus an individualistic society.
• Faith
• Education status of our population
• Employment of our population
• Work culture – when people leave the office early, what next??
• Type of population – compare a highly sophisticated and developed western society with a tribal population just emerging from the woods 150 years back and joining the mainstream of civilization. '
• Developmental infrastructure and Facilities available
10. Who are the current parties involved in the prohibition debate? Could there be a conflict of interest among some of the parties? Have we legitimately covered all the parties involved?
• Government
• Church
• Business
• Media
• Institutions
• Tribal bodies
• Others
11. NLTP has its flaws. They are well known. What would make it work better?
• What are the measures that have taken place in the last 10 years to ensure that the NLTP was given a fair chance or had more teeth to ensure its mandate?
• Can we create a list of activities that have taken place or is potentially doable?
12. What have each of the parties done to decrease alcoholism?
• Church – Teaching on alcoholism in the church or Sunday school, support to alcoholic families, rehabilitation centres, deal with the issues that led to alcoholism
• Government - rehabilitation centres, education on alcoholism in the schools and colleges, enforcing regulations, legislations, empowering and partnering with civil society to reduce the scourge of alcoholism, medical facilities to treat and support alcoholics to return to normal
• Media – education of the public on alcoholism and its effects, partnering with church, government and civil society to reduce alcoholism
• Civil society – NGOs, tribal bodies, institutions etc
13. Is there really a desire of all these parties to overcome the issue of alcoholism or are we debating an act that may or may not have a bearing on the total effects of alcoholism in our society.
The real issue is ALCOHOLISM. It is not the NLTP act. As long as we continue to debate this act alone, we are avoiding the real issue. It is unlikely that we are going to get a definite answer through our debates. The final decision will result in some so called winners and some losers. The winners will go back home celebrating and the losers will be sore till the next time. Meanwhile alcoholism will continue to remain.
It is much easier to introduce or repeal the NLTP.
\
It is more difficult to deal with the issue of alcoholism.
\
Are we willing to take up the hard work in dealing with Alcoholism??
