Mizoram: MLTP Act leh Rape Crime

Mizoram hian zu khapna dân, Mizoram Liquor Total Prohibition Act (1995) kan neih avang hian kan khawtlâng hi a himin a nuam a ni tia sawi a awm fo ṭhin. Hei hi zu khapna dân kan neih chhunzawm zêlna tûra sawrkar, kohhran, pawl leh mimal thlenga kan ṭanfung pawimawh tak pakhat pawh niin a lang. Kum 2009 pawh khan kan Excise & Narcotics Dept. commissioner chuan MLTP Act kenkawh nâna YMA hmalâkna avangin kan khawtlang chu eng hunah pawh hmeichhia leh naupangte tân a him thu a lo tlangaupui tawh hial a. Tin, 2009 vêk khan kan Synod hotu pakhat chuan MLTP Act hi 100% in hlawhtling lo mahse he dân kan neih hnua kan khawtlâng nawm sawt zia a lo sawi bawk

Mipuite himna leh muanna hi state mawhphurhna lian ber pakhat a ni a, Hobbes, Locke leh Rousseau-te ‘Social Contract’ theory pawha ‘state’ awmna chhan ber pawh a ni nghe nghe a ni. Khawtlâng himna leh muanna kawnga tûnlai Mizoram kan panna lâi ber nia lang chu ‘rape’ (pawngsual) crime hi a ni. Tute nge ‘victim’ chu kan hre tlâng e! Tûn kum, 2012, kum chanve êm pawh a la vei hma hauh pawhin he dân bawhchhiatna thuthang hi kan hre nasa tawh hle a ni. Entîrnân: New Year khan Zuangtuia TB vei patlingin naupang kum 5 mi a pawngsual; February khan police-in rualbanlo nula Lungleiah; March-ah naupang kum 8 mi N. Vanlaiphaiah leh a dang tam tak a awm tawhin a awm mêk a ni. Heng entîrna aṭang ringawt pawh hian rape crime hi kan hmeichhia leh naupangte khawtlanga an him lohna entîrtu leh an him leh him lohna tehfung pawimawh ber pakhat a ni a tih theih a ni.

Mizoram rape crime rate hi National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) annual publication, Crime in India aṭangin a hriat theih a ni. NCRB official-te chuan ‘crime rate’ hi ‘the number of incidents per lakh population’ angin an chhût a; state tinte ‘rank of criminality’ pawh a rate sân dan indawtin an chhinchhiah ṭhin. NCRB chhinchhiahnaa Mizoram, rape crime bîka kan dinhmun, kan thlir dawn a ni.

Kum 2010 khan Mizoram hian rape crime rate 9.1 kan nei a (case 92 register niin), India state 28 leh UT 7 te zîngah sâng berin criminality rank-ah 1-na kan ni. 2009-a 8.3 rate aṭangin kan criminality chu 0.8 in a tam belh. Min hnaihtu state-te chu kan ṭhenawm, Tripura 6.6, Assam 5.6 and Meghalaya 5.7 te an ni. Zu heh ram kan tih ṭhin, Kerala (1.8), Punjab (2.0) te chu pawngsual lamah hian an khawtlâng a him fe zawk tih a hmuh theih. Tin, ‘Ram thim, Kristiante tihduhdahna ram’ kan tih, Orissa-ah pawh pawngsual rate hi 2.5 chauh a ni. Zu khapna dân nei ve tho, Gujarat leh Nagaland te erawh kum 2010 khan rape crime rate 0.07 chauh an nei thung a ni. Tin, MLTP kan neih hma 1990-1994 quinquennial (kum 5) average chu 6.14 niin MLTP hnuaiah hian rape rate hi a tlâkhniam loh mai bâkah pun lam a pan zawk a ni. 

NCRB records aṭang chuan MLTP Act hnuaiah hian rape crime hi state dangte aiin a tam zawk tih a hmuh theih a, zu khapna dân hi pawngsual hluar chhan erawh a ni kher lovang (Nagaland leh Gujarat example). Amaherawhchu, pawngsual hluar êm êmna ram hi khawtlâng nuam leh muanawm chu a ni thei lovang. Kan opening paragraph-a MLTP fakna statements-te nen chuan kan records hmuh chu a inang lo hle bawk a ni. Chuvangin, kan rama pawngsual a hluar zia aṭang hian kan khawtlâng hi hmeichhiate leh naupangte tân a him lo tih hi kohhran te, sawrkar te, NGO te, chhungkua leh mimal thlengin kan pawm tlân a, MLTP-te ang ‘solution’ tling lo lutuka inṭawng thlamuana innghat mai mai tawh lova, a ‘solution’ tak tak tûr beng sika kan ngaihtuah tlân a hun tawh tak zet zet a ni.

References:

1 National Crime Records Bureau, "Crime in India" (New Delhi: Ministry of Home Affairs)

2 Adam Halliday, “Gujarat, Mizoram: United in prohibition, but different in implementation,” The Indian Express (Jul 20, 2009); available from www.indianexpress.com/news/gujarat-mizoram-united-in-prohibition-but/491430/

3 “Mizoram Church no to liquor ban Act amendment,” WebIndia123 (Jun 6, 2009); available from http://news.webindia123.com/news/articles/India/20090606/1269373.html

4. Picture available from: http://thekgexpress.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/banned-alcohol.jpg

Hooch Tragedies and Alcohol Policies

18^th December, 2011 (12:50AM) 

A similarity between prohibition policy and price increase policy to control alcohol consumption is that both encourage bootlegging. Under prohibition, bootlegged liquor is the only means to obtain liquor (unless you have a liquor permit issued by a registered medical practitioner). Under price increase policy, legal liquor is too expensive for the poor people. Due to its relatively low prices, bootlegged liquor is consumed by the poor.

We all know the potency of bootlegged liquor in impacting hooch deaths. The rich may afford to consume Indian Manufactured Foreign Liquor (IMFL) under prohibition or price increase but the poor who consume unlicensed local brew are always at the risk of hooch deaths. Hooch tragedies are, therefore, mostly confined to the poor people. For eg., the recent hooch tragedy in West Bengal (December 2011), Gujarat's hooch death in 2009, Karnataka in 2008 etc. are confined mostly to the rural poor.

It remains a challenge for the government to tackle the black marketing of liquor. In response to the recent hooch tragedy in West Bengal, the Chief Minister of the state, Mamata Banerjee said, "I want to take strong action against those manufacturing and selling illegal liquor."¹ prior to this, as a result of the 2009 hooch tragedy in Ahmedabad where 136 people after consuming illicit liquor died and another hundreds were hospitalized, the Gujarat Assembly unanimously passed the Bombay Prohibition (Gujarat Amendment Act) on 28^th July, 2009. It provided harsher punishment to those who sell and manufacture illicit liquor.² The bill was passed unopposed by amending the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 (Gujarat Prohibition Act, 2009) in the absence of the Congress which boycotted the Assembly during that time.³ After keeping the bill on hold for more than two years, the Governor of the state, Kamla Beniwal gave her assent in December, 2011. While the old law provided punishment of imprisonment which may extend to one year only and fine to those who illegally manufacture, supply and sell hooch, the new law provided stringent punishments in the form of seven to ten years imprisonment, fine, and death penalty or life imprisonment in case of hooch tragedies.⁴

Laws, strict laws and still stricter laws! Will all these prevent the illicit market and curb the consumption of hooch? Or would it be a sound policy if:

i)                    a government repeals prohibition of alcohol?

ii)                  a government makes legal alcohol affordable?

References:

1. “India toxic alcohol kills 143 in West Bengal,” BBC Mobile (Dec. 15, 2011) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-16174531

2. “Gujarat Assembly passes bill proposing death for bootleggers,” People’s Post (Aug. 19, 2009) http://peoples-post.com/nation/state/1040-gujarat-assembly-passes-bill-proposing-death-for-bootleggers.html

3. “Modhi jihad against Cong on hooch bill,” (Dec. 21, 2009) http://currentnews.in/2009/12/21/modi-jihad-against-cong-on-hooch-bill/

4. “Hooch tragedy: Gujarat Governor okays death penalty,” DNA (Dec. 6, 2011) http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_hooch-tragedy-gujarat-governer-okays-death-penalty_1622133

5. Picture source: http://www.deccanchronicle.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/node-gallery-display/6516930102.jpg