ALCOHOL LAW A SHAM

By Bryan W. Tumwa
When the alcohol control law was suspended, thanks to a high court ruling on Friday, beer lovers had all the right to be happy. This is, however, not a permanent thing as the only reason it was put on hold was as a result of some liquor brewers who argued that the law stipulated that the industry had a grace period of 9 months before which to fully comply.
The war on drugs at the coast also took a dramatic turn with the PC asking law enforcers in the region not to arrest people who use the contraband drugs in public. The fight to control the substances people use is again proving to be a lost one.
All over the world, the war on drugs and alcohol abuse has been fought on different fronts and the winners have always been the users. By winners, I do not mean that the use of illegal drugs and consumption of illicit liquor is of any laudable benefit, but that the lengths that people will go just to experience ‘the high’ will always be a notch higher than the efforts to curtail them.
No matter how many nice things drop out of a bag of trash, it will always be exactly that- a bag of trash.
In effect, the law to control the consumption of alcohol is laughable to even think of. Apart from it spelling bad business for the traders and manufacturers, it provides another burden for the police to ensure that these rules are followed. The sheer number of people being taken to court as a result of breaking this law proves exactly that. The rebellion is rampant and it is not going to go away any time soon. Furthermore, the police fall under the most notorious government department when it comes to corruption. The enforcement of this law to the letter will mean that the war will be fought on two fronts- that of corruption and that of enforcement.
Looking at it from another perspective, the law on alcoholic drinks is going to be at loggerheads with the new constitution, especially when we consider the rights and freedoms contained in the bill of rights. The law infringed on is the consumer right whichstipulates that consumers have the right to goods and services of reasonable quality. Now, if the organs of government are responsible for rationing consumption, then the law in itself is aborted. What the government should be monitoring is only the quality of the products delivered to consumers either by public entities or by private persons and not when and how it is done. Very soon, the government will have so many grips on the lives of citizens that fundamental economic, social and political rights are going to be further curtailed.
Apartheid, for instance, dictated that members of the black race were not to purchase goods and services from certain designated white shops. This meant that the two races were not to interact in the same economic environment. This restriction is not far placed from that facing the alcohol takers in Kenya. Restricting them to specific times when to consume the product is derogatory to the public. For as long as there is no crime being committed or in is the process of being committed, the behavior of individuals should not warrant government scrutiny.
I am sure that whatever action the government takes is in good faith and that there are probably one or two good things in the Alcohol Control Act. However, no matter how many nice things drop out of the occasional bag of trash, it does not change the label on the bag. It will always be exactly that- a bag of trash.