Imkong Walling
You will never understand bureaucracies until you understand that for bureaucrats procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing. - Thomas Sowell
The quote rings true when propped up against the customary governmental rituals. It succinctly captures what could well be termed performative acts orchestrated by administrative bodies catering to PR requirements — and sometimes in favour of client politics — without any visible signs on the ground. And, in the process, becoming a fool’s errand.
In Nagaland, there is the ever litigious alcohol prohibition law and the vain dog-meat ban that stand out as prime candidates. The latter turned out to be as much contentious as the former, with arbitrators split on the validity of dog-meat. The recent decree banning paan masala and gutkha containing tobacco or nicotine for one year is also, unfortunately, headed to be deemed an exercise in futility.
The health concern behind the ‘gutkha’ ban is evident. But it also demonstrates a delusional tendency to overlook the state’s failed prohibitionist posturing, while only succeeding in repeating past mistakes.
The alcohol ban has not stopped consumption, nor did the dog-meat ban drive canine-meat enthusiasts to rethink their protein choices. Together with these, the latest prohibition of a highly addictive substance reinforces the notion of a government completely detached from the reality.
It has given rise to a contradictory situation where, on one hand, the powers that be are enforcing a localised sale ban; on the other, doing nothing to stop manufacture. In fact, the state has no real power to outlaw manufacturing units that are legally operating beyond state lines.
The absurdity is amplified by the criminalising of consumers and small-time shop-keepers, while the manufacturers and big suppliers/distributors continue enjoying immunity and making money.
As is the case with alcohol prohibition, the principle of supply and demand comes into play, setting the ideal environment for black marketing, and driving the trade underground. Alongwith it, there is the prospect of windfall for not only enforcement personnel but also for extra-constitutional entities.
The supposed ‘by the book’ projection of statutes is what political scientist Theodore J Lowi described as “policy without law.” Lowi argued that when governments delegate vague authority to regulatory agencies, they create a system where policy is designed to satisfy public sentiment rather than to be realistically enforced.
By citing the Central Areca-nut Marketing Corporation case and the FSSAI directive, the policy-makers only implemented what was required of them– Performative.
They well know the ban is not going to work. But as far as bureaucratic procedure was concerned, they fulfilled their mandated bureaucratic role. The reality that the ban will drive the business underground does not bother them because “procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing.”
The writer is a Principal Correspondent at The Morung Express. Comments can be sent to imkongwalls@gmail.com
