Question.
You are a civil servant posted in State where elections were held recently. To ban the sale of alcohol was the main promise in the election manifesto of the newly elected Chief minister. To fulfill this promise, Chief Minister has ordered a total ban on the sale and purchase of alcohol in the state. Whether the government should interfere in the matter which is considered by many to be a matter of personal choice? Comment logically. (UPPSC 2020)
Answer.
The total ban on the sale and purchase of alcohol in the state is a complex decision as there are two perspectives of the decision-
The first perspective, the total ban on alcohol is justiciable as alcohol consumption can have negative consequences on individual health, family relationship, and social stability. Overconsumption of alcohol can lead to the risk of accidents, violence, and health problems that burden overall burden of society and government. In this can total ban is justiciable.
From another perspective, a total ban on alcohol is violence against individual rights and freedom. Many people enjoy drinking alcohol moderately and responsibly. In addition to that, easily availability of alcohol promotes the tourism industry, well developed tourist industry of Goa is an example of this. The alcohol industry provides jobs and generates tax revenue for the government. So, the total ban will have negative economic consequences.
So, there is a need to balance individual freedom, economic benefits, and negative consequences of alcohol consumption. So government should make awareness about the harmful impact of alcohol on individuals and society. A total ban on alcohol is not the solution. It needs to be done then there should be an open discussion with all stakeholders before the ban.
You may like also:
ConversionConversion EmoticonEmoticon