Saturday, Nov 29, 2003
Saturday, Nov 29, 2003 |
| Opinion | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Opinion
-
News Analysis
By K.T. Sangameswaran
In the latest incident at Lakshmipuram near Ponneri in Tiruvallur district, the "villain of the piece" is again suspected to be methanol (methyl alcohol), chemical which claimed several lives in Cuddalore and Tiruvallur districts in the past few years. It was after several tragedies, in which methanol was identified as the killer, that the chemical was brought under the purview of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act to enable authorities to have vigil on its possession and its use by various industrial units. Even after methyl alcohol was brought under the ambit of the special legislation, the authorities were apprehensive whether its use could be effectively regulated, given its application in industries as a widely-used solvent. However, a senior police officer says that the local police could have prevented the open sale of the killer brew at Ponneri. Tiruvallur revenue district has the dubious distinction of having several "black spots" (where illicit distillation and sale is on) and there have been three major liquor tragedies in the last four years. Twelve persons died when they consumed the chemical at Putlur in 1999. Soon after the tragedy, the police traced the origin of alcohol to a company in the village, which sold the material to a local seller of the brew. Two years later at Kottur, near Red Hills, 34 persons died and at Menambedu (off Ambattur), 13 were killed after they consumed methyl alcohol. The worst was at Panruti in 2001, in which more than 50 persons lost their lives. A senior police officer explains that it is not the chemical, but the police and PEW personnel who should be blamed for the tragedies. Bootleggers either manage to obtain the chemical illegally from industrial units or the chemical is stolen for the purpose of being sold to drinkers. Irrespective of whether it is mixed with arrack or sold raw to consumers, it is the duty of the police to prevent illicit sale. Failure to act should invite drastic action against all those are responsible, including senior officials. Several persons died after consuming illicit brew in the State in the last few years. Sixtynine persons died in seven incidents in 1998; 25 in four instances the next year and 16 in two incidents in 2000. Though dereliction of duty by the police is considered serious, soon after a tragedy a few suspensions, mainly of lower-level officials, are made, and nothing is known about the matter thereafter. Senior-level officials are generally reluctant to divulge details regarding the action taken further against their colleagues. The police's inaction against bootlegging came in for the bitterest criticism from the Chairperson of the State Human Rights Commission, S.Nainar Sundaram (since deceased) in 2001. In a letter to the Tamil Nadu Government, he wrote, "If the State is honest and sincere in prohibition enforcement, it should ensure that prohibition is really enforced". He asked: "How can bootleggers have sway when there is enforcement of prohibition honestly and diligently?"
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
