Enforcement of Liquor Control Act 2551: A case study of Temple in The Chanthaburi Province.

Abstract

The research that had been conducted on the enforcement of the Alcohol Drinks Act B.E. 2551 as a case study of temples in Chanthaburi province. It indicated that there were a number of problems which were as follows: Firstly, the Alcohol Drink Act B.E. 2551 states that consumption of alcohol drinks within the grounds of temples is prohibited, but it failed to prevent individuals who consume the drinks from outside the temples to enter the premises. Thus, these alcohol drinkers could not be prosecuted by any means. Secondly, in order to prove that whether a person was drunk or not, the temples practically had very little control over this issue as they could warn that person if he/ she was obviously and seriously drunk. But for those who were slightly drunk carrying the alcohol drink in an obscure container in which it was more difficult to see or detect as the temples had no breathalyzer- a device to check the alcohol level- like the police do as well as the nature of temples was to welcome everyone to enter the premises. Thirdly,  not knowing about the existence of the act, it might sound strange, but many members of the public always mentioned this as an alibi when they broke the law. However, it was possible that people might not know about this alcohol drink act, but only when it was first introduced. Since then this alcohol drink act was now well-known throughout the country so that the excuse of not knowing about it would become a liability for the lawbreakers. The fourth problem stems from the nature of Thai traditions as it was normally found in the funeral services as the coroners might want to use  an alcohol drink to pay respect for the holy spirits prior the ceremony which might vary from one place to another. This problem was hard to eliminate since dealing with the belief and tradition of people might result in a serious setback. The fifth problem cuold be considered as two separate cases in which the first one was related to the individuals show no respects for the law as they are seriously drunk or being impetuous. This case might rarely occur and the temples could easily handle this issue by asking them to leave the premises. The second case regarded the permission to use the temple's ground for organizing an event or a party. In this case the temples had very little or no control over the consumption of alcohol drinks as the organizer had to have the drinks to serve the guests of the event or party.