The dramatis personae: Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee(KPCC) president V. M. Sudheeran on one side and Chief Minister Oommen Chandy and his solid phalange of loyalists on the other. And the issue is the renewal of licences of 418 bars in the State closed in the wake of a Supreme Court verdict.

What has lent a sharper edge to the raging controversy is the Kerala High Court’s directive to the State Government to come out with its renewed liquor policy by August 26. The court has also asked the government to conduct inspections at the 418 bars and take a decision on their renewal eligibility within this period. The order further states that the secretary taxes and the excise commissioner should ensure that appropriate inspection is conducted within the stipulated period.

The court order has come in view of the failure of the KPCC and the Oommen Chandy-led United Democratic Front (UDF) Government to evolve a consensus on the controversial issue hitherto.

While the KPCC president has refused to budge an inch from his stand that the licences of the closed bars should not be renewed – it is the view of the majority of the KPCC executive and the people at large – the pro-renewal Congress leaders have argued pragmatism demands that licences of ‘standard’ bars among them should be renewed!

The KPCC-Government coordination committee, which met three days back, took the decision “not to grant licence to any of the closed 418 bars even if the Government has to re-examine their applications,” asserted Sudheeran after the meeting. The KPCC chief also took a dig at both the CM and the Excise minister K. Babu, a vociferous supporter of licence renewal, saying that the Government should be respecting and protecting the interests of the people and not those of the bar owners. He also deplored the efforts to reopen closed bars citing court directives.

Significantly, when the KPCC-Government coordination committee discussed the issue, all leaders except one strongly argued against licence renewal.

On the other hand, the Chief Minister argues that the 418 bars cannot be kept closed for all time. Owners of a few closed bars have moved the court and if the court gives an order in their favour, how can the bars be kept closed? That is the query the CM raised at the meeting. If necessary, the Government will unilaterally go ahead to renew the licences even if the KPCC does not support such a move.

But the KPCC chief has refused to relent even in the face of the Chief Ministerial pressure. If the Government takes a decision in favour of the bar owners, the KPCC will continue to oppose it, he said.

What remains to be seen is what stand the party high command will take on the issue. So far, it has refused to intervene in the issue. But since both the KPCC chief and the CM have refused to back off from the stand-off, the high command may be forced to intervene.

One thing is clear: Even if the Government takes a decision to renew the licences of a few bars, Sudheeran will score a moral victory. His reputation will go up by a few notches because of his refusal to bow to the pressure of the powerful liquor lobby and its supporters within the government.

Conversely, the Chief Minister and his pro-bar owner loyalists stand to lose heavily in terms of popular support, especially of women, who are firmly behind the KPCC chief in the matter. And that is a luxury the Chandy Government cannot afford, with the assembly elections only 18 months away.

It is a cruel joke that at a time when the Government should be focusing its attention on curbing the unprecedented price rise, which has caused untold suffering to the people of the state, it is expanding its energies on supporting the cause of the bar owners. Mind you, all this is happening in a party wedded to the cause of reducing the availability of liquor in a phased manner to achieve the long-term goal of complete prohibition. Can the people be blamed if they accuse the government of adopting a hypocritical policy of siding with the bar owners even as it sheds crocodile tears over the plight of women who bear the brunt of the consequences of liquor consumption in the state? (IPA Service)