LETTER | Now I am not saying that I am for the idea that you should drink alcohol when you join a Thaipusam procession.

As an Indian myself, I am certainly aware of the nuisance that a drunk can cause during an event like Thaipusam, much to the inconvenience and irritation of everyone else in attendance.

My question however is in regards to the law.

Just because most people who attend Thaipusam would prefer for the event to be alcohol-free, can the authorities ban the sales and consumption of alcohol during Thaipusam, when they don’t have any legal powers to do so?

The Perak Human Resources, Health, Indian Community Affairs and National Integration Committee chairperson A Sivanesan seems to believe so because he has declared that the sales and consumption of alcohol during Thaipusam the procession in Ipoh is banned, although the law doesn’t allocate any powers to him to make such a declaration.

“Previously, there were complaints about alcohol sales and consumption during the procession, especially at night, but no firm action was taken.

“This time, if it happens again, the police will not compromise.

“Offenders will be immediately arrested and dragged to court,” Sivanesan was quoted as saying after a state-level Thaipusam coordination meeting on Feb 6.

Why ban?

Although Sivanesan is aware that there are no specific laws prohibiting alcohol consumption at religious events, which will involve a chariot procession along many kilometres on a public road, he is of the opinion that said offenders could still be charged under the Penal Code for causing a public nuisance due to intoxication.

Now, nobody doubts that authorities have the power to detain somebody who behaves in an unruly manner in a public place after consuming alcohol, but the question that we have to ask ourselves is why couldn’t Sivanesan just say that those who cause drunken havoc at the Thaipusam celebration will be arrested by the police, without going so far as to say that alcohol sales and consumption will be banned at the Thaipusam celebration?

Even if alcohol sales can be banned, because I feel that there might be laws to prevent the sales of alcohol along the road where the Thaipusam procession is to be held, by vendors who are not licensed to sell alcohol, I certainly doubt that the authorities in Perak can arrest a person for consuming alcohol while watching the procession in progress, if the person bought it at an authorised outlet and is not acting in an unruly manner.

After all, I doubt there is a law that says that you can’t have a beer in a peaceful manner on the side of a road.

If it is not illegal, but merely uncouth (at least according to my personal opinion), do the authorities have the right to unilaterally assume powers that are not given to them, in order to prevent or ban an action or behaviour that they have no powers to prevent or ban?

I ask this question, because if a precedent is set, whereby authorities are unilaterally allowed to exercise power that is not given to them, under the premise that their actions will be publicly supported, what if the precedent is used by the authorities to unilaterally act on other matters?

Do things properly

Take for example the recent brouhaha about the banning of the sales of alcohol in Muslim-majority areas around Ipoh.

If today we consent to the authorities in Ipoh to ban alcohol during Thaipusam, what if tomorrow, they decide to ban the sales of alcohol in Muslim-majority areas in Perak, for the same reason?

If an authority can ban alcohol in certain areas during Thaipusam for three days, why can’t another authority ban alcohol in another area for 365 days? What is the difference?

If authorities wish to curb alcohol consumption during Thaipusam, it should be done the proper way - getting a law passed to give the authorities to ban the consumption of alcohol under special reasons, rather than an ad hoc measure that requires the authorities to wield powers they don’t have to enact at the last minute.

The authorities surely knew when Thaipusam was going to fall in 2025 from last year itself. Knowing this, they should have initiated action to get a law that would allow them to curb the sales and consumption of alcohol during Thaipusam months before Thaipusam arrived, so that when the authorities moved to arrest someone for drinking alcohol at Thaipusam this year, they would be acting within the law, not outside of it.

Non-existent powers

You can’t lose a ringgit to save a sen.

While I do think that preventing or curbing the consumption and sales of alcohol during Thaipusam is a good idea, I don’t think it should be executed to the extent of empowering authorities with powers that they don’t have.

Considering that, I hope that higher authorities in the country will nullify the declaration of the Perak State human resources, health, Indian community affairs and national integration committee to ban the sales and consumption of alcohol during the Thaipusam procession in Perak, so as to not create a precedent where we will condone an authority of acting outside the scope of the law.

With the Penal Code empowering authorities to charge a person with causing a public nuisance, the authority should just use that law to curb cases of drunken unruliness during Thaipusam for now.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.