Why Mumbai's meat ban is an outdated, Talibanic diktat
The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation's decision to suspend the sale of mutton and chicken on the four days when the Jain community observes Paryushan, the period when it stays away from all root vegetables, has its origins in a resolution that had been adopted by the civic body as far back as 1964. It made no sense then (when the ban was imposed for only two days) - and it makes no sense now.
What doesn't make sense is the opposition of the Congress because back in 2004, the then Maharashtra government, presided over by the Congress-NCP combine, had passed a resolution extending the ban by two more days. The ban used to be quietly imposed in the past, without leading to any excitement, but this time, the Shiv Sena and the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena have decided to join hands against the BJP on this issue. The satellite town of Mira-Bhayander, has upped the ante and extended the ban to all eight days of the Paryushan period.
Those are the facts of the matter that has, rightly, led to an outpouring of anger against the Talibanic diktat based on a resolution passed more than 50 years ago. When the state and its functionaries start intruding into the kitchens and personal lives of its citizens, they only succeed in opening the floodgates of irrationality.
Tomorrow, if the Catholics start demanding a similar ban during Lent, will the civic body oblige them with the same alacrity with which they acted in this instance? And what if the Muslims, taking a leaf out of a recent order issued in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, start asking for all restaurants and food stalls to remain shut during Ramzan, and for adherents of other religions to refrain from participating in any festive activities when the fasting period is on?
If religious sentiments start becoming the drivers of state policy, there will be no end to such absurdities. What people eat is their private business. The purview of the state ends with ensuring that food is produced, sold and consumed in hygienic conditions - and it is exactly in this department that it fails miserably not only in Maharashtra, but elsewhere in the country. The travesty of Maggi being banned because of a red flag being raised in (of all places!) Bahraich, UP, had led to this concern. Anyone who has eaten at Aminabad, Lucknow, the home of Tundey's kebabs, knows what I mean. Even our iconic eateries thrive in grit and grime.
The state is taking the easy way out - impose populist bans, often to the detriment of members of one community (a ban on mutton and chicken, and beef, which is permanently banned in Maharashtra and Haryana, hits butchers economically and butchers in our country are almost always Muslims), and ignore its role in the upkeep of public health and food safety.
A state that has failed in formulating and implementing food safety standards for street vendors and restaurants in the unorganised sector, starting with dhabas, must first get its act together, before going around imposing irrational bans.
I must end my rant with the most comical situation that can arise if a civic body somewhere in this country decides to ban the sale of fish, mutton and chicken when a section of Hindus follow the dietary restrictions of the Navratras in the run-up to Dussehra. That would have the Bengalis up in arms - and foaming at the mouth - because it is inauspicious for them not to consume at least one non-vegetarian item per meal in the nine days when Maa Durga descends from the heavens to be with her extended family.