Wrong solution

The Supreme Court’s ruling banning liquor sales within 500 metres of national and State highways is a well-intentioned but sweeping step. Last week’s ruling only reiterates the apex court’s December 2016 judgment following an appeal by the States; it has emphatically said that all types of liquor shops (retail outlets, bars and restaurants) along all national and State highways will have to close down if they are within 500 metres from the highway edge. However, there is little evidence to support the view that a ban is the solution to the undoubted menace of drunken driving. The apex court has also not adequately taken into account the effects of its order on the economy and livelihoods. The highway liquor ban could hurt an estimated 35,000 restaurants and bars in the western region alone and halve the country’s excise revenues from alcohol from current levels of ₹12,000 crore per annum. Maharashtra, which has over 13,500 bars and liquor shops, most of which are located along areas banned by the court, is expected to be the worst-hit. According to restaurateurs, States could lose ₹50,000 crore in overall tax revenues. Industry estimates may seem overblown, but even if less than 5 per cent of the jobs in the travel and tourism sector are affected, it could amount to 1.5 million jobs.

Apart from impacting bars situated alongside the highways, the ban will hurt the many small businesses which survive around them. While liquor vends may find it relatively easy to move, hotels and motels, which have invested heavily in creating specific infrastructure, may find it impossible to do so, and face the threat of substantial shrinkage in earnings. Besides, it is neither easy nor perhaps even desirable for bars to move away from the highways into residential neighbourhoods. In Kerala and other States, there has been stiff public opposition to bars opening in residential areas. Drunken driving is a safety hazard alright, but there are better ways of dealing with the problem — starting with stricter enforcement of current laws against such behaviour. A ‘zero tolerance’ approach to drunk driving has shown positive results wherever it has been enforced adequately, such as in Mumbai. On highways , tougher and more frequent policing, and stiffer consequences, like deterrent fines and loss of driving privileges, is bound to help. Poor enforcement of existing laws against drunk driving cannot become an excuse for extreme measures.

Alcoholism as a social evil is best tackled through civil society awareness campaigns rather than heavy-handed State interventions such as prohibition or court-ordered bans. There is also a disturbing undertone of moral policing — a willingness to undermine individual liberties and shackle market forces — that underlies such steps. Such moves go against efforts to project India as a liberal destination for tourism and business. A change of tone and policy flavour is called for to restore faith in the Government’s commitment to ‘minimum government, maximum governance’.

COMMENT NOW