Bootleg liquor epidemic: Dissecting it from a legal perspective

This year started off with several cases of fatal injury and death from heavy consumption of bootleg liquors. In January, a total record number of 35 people lost their lives from methanol-based alcohol poisoning.  

Methanol, commonly used as a solvent and fuel, is manufactured illegally in place of ethanol as drinkable alcohol. As stated by experts, methanol is highly toxic for humans and the ingestion of merely 10ml can result in complete blindness. 

Intake of over 30ml is enough to endanger human life within 5 hours after consumption. It further leads to metabolic acidosis and cannot be reverted unless treated on time with a specific antidote. 

Producing these methanol-based liquors despite knowing how life-endangering it is to the human body is a violation of Section 33 of the Food and Safety Act 2013, keeping aside several other violations. 

Considering that methanol is cheaper than ethanol, the production cost is not over Tk 300. However, the selling price is over Tk 3,000. What makes the matter even worse for consumers is that the two types of liquor cannot be differentiated by the naked eye. 

Several licensed homeopathic clinics and medicine shops have been known to supply the mentioned materials. Moreover, foreign imported alcohol warehouses reuse the bottles, opting for the much quicker easy-money option. 

The consumers trust a brand when they happen to drink the product but reusing the bottles or selling the methanol-based poison with false and improper labeling and bottling is a violation of several provisions including Sections 486 and 487 of the Penal Code 1860 and Section 32(1) of the Food and Safety Act 2013.

Foreign liquor is known to legally have a huge market for foreigners in our country. With the Covid-19 pandemic standing as a barrier to the country's economy, imports have been reduced, and many bars have chosen, knowingly or unknowingly, to obtain supplies from these bootleggers. These bars are equally at fault for providing these poisons to the consumers.

The producer and seller are both liable for the harm caused afterward. But does this free the consumer from liability? On what grounds were they allowed to consume alcohol? 

Apart from foreign passport holders, supposedly the diplomats drinking only in licensed bars and hotels; Section 10 of the Narcotics Control Act 2018 (which was later revised in 2020), state that indigenous people from the country i.e. Rangamati, Bandarban, and Khagrachari can consume their traditional liquors. 

However, Muslims need medical reasons to consume alcohol. Otherwise generally, every Bangladeshi requires a license or permit from the government to consume alcohol. If one fails to meet these aforementioned criteria, they are liable and partially contributory to the fatal consequences imposed on them. 

As per the WHO Global Status Report on Alcohol, a study conducted by WHO's World Health Survey claimed that youngsters (from ages 18 to 24) who are presumably/most definitely without a license are more likely to abuse alcohol. A survey conducted on the residential students of higher educational institutions in Dhaka revealed that 13.73% of males and 3.07% of females abused alcohol. 

This certain age group is not assumed to be mostly financially well off and that increases the chance of opting out for "cheaper" options thus increasing the likelihood of buying and consuming adulterated cheap liquors. Furthermore, it is extremely concerning in terms of the health of the population as a whole. 

Fake, contaminated, spiked, concentrated, bootlegging alcohol is forbidden. Sections 25 and 37 of the Food and Safety Act 2013, Section 41, 42, 43, and 50 of the Consumers' Rights Protection Act 2009 have frequently mentioned that toxic and adulterated products are illegal to produce. 

The Consumers' Rights Protection Act 2009 shed light on how producing or mixing anything harmful to the human body, particularly the consumer, in a product, is punishable by law. 

The same provision, Section 10 along with Section 36 of the Narcotics Control Act 2018 also applies to establishing a distillery to produce, distribute, sell, and preserve 'alcohol' and how it is unlawful without a permit or license. Section 36 clearly states how failing to acquire a license leads to imprisonment along with compensation. 

In accordance with Section 13 of the Act, the license needs to be renewed every three years. And if the distillery owner has any case filed against him for a crime committed by him or is engraved in controversies for his moral degradation, endure paying compensation and eventually get his license revoked.

Licensed and reputed homeopathic clinics that possess the materials or ingredients for the poison, in pursuit of the extra bucks are also accountable in law, under Section 37 of the Narcotics Control Act 2018. 

This is not an unfamiliar issue. The process of adulteration has been going on for years, but we are now seeing an increase in cases. The occasional cluster of fatal methanol poisoning is noticeable in recent years in Bangladesh. 

The bootleg liquor production must be eradicated from the root to avoid further harm, and proper enforcement of law can play a crucial role in it. The consequence being extremely deadly, consumers are urged to be alert too.

BFLHA logo

Bangladesh Forum for Legal & Humanitarian Affairs (BFLHA) is a non-profit organisation that works in the field of social justice by promoting human rights, providing pro bono preliminary legal aid, fighting for rule of law, conducting extensive legal research, & organising humanitarian campaigns.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.