Problem with lockdown

The merits of the argument for and against waiving the interest on the loan moratorium notwithstanding, the Supreme Court’s strong disapproval of the Centre’s approach strikes at the core of how the issue of life and livelihood has been handled since March-end. ‘The problem was created by your lockdown... plight of the people has to be considered,’ the apex court has reminded the government. The message is as much applicable to state governments and UTs. Weekend lockdowns and new restrictions on trade have been imposed across the region, but with little thought given to the impact it has on earnings. In the face of falling sales, mounting debts and negligible relief, shops have been presented with an odd-even plan. The anger is palpable.

Is there proven research on Sunday shopping carrying a much higher risk for coronavirus, but not through the week? That liquor shops remaining open till much after the deadline is not a public health scare, but all other businesses are? The pandemic’s reach is widening, the need to act tough and drill sense is understandable. Ordering closure of shops cannot be the solution, especially when no help has been forthcoming for the losses accrued and the staff and owners in most cases have been very particular about following safety norms.

We pointed out in these columns in April the plight of the invisible people — the millions of hardworking, honest, uncared-for Indians — in the most effective lockdown in the world. It was left to the administrator, politician or bureaucrat to decide who will sink, how much and how fast. It was argued at the very outset that a graded but positive response, and not a negative clampdown, was the answer. Four months down the line, has anything changed? Life has to go on, and must. Restrictions, penal provisions are all fine, but any strategy that rests on depriving people of their livelihood is flawed. If you can’t help, at least don’t make it worse.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.