Online Reporter
The Government’s decision to intensify inspections of liquor outlets is both timely and necessary.
The revelations that some licences may have been issued to premises located near schools, hospitals, old people’s homes and places of worship raise serious questions about the effectiveness of the country’s liquor-licensing system and, more importantly, about the accountability of the authorities responsible for enforcing it.
A liquor licence is not merely a commercial permit. It is a regulatory instrument intended to balance legitimate business interests with the safety, welfare and character of the communities in which alcohol is sold. When licences are issued without regard to statutory requirements, the consequences extend far beyond the premises concerned.
The reported proliferation of bottle stores in some shopping centres is particularly troubling. There is nothing inherently wrong with a lawful alcohol business. Zimbabweans are entitled to engage in legitimate commerce, and the liquor industry provides employment, generates revenue and supports many livelihoods. But when bottle stores become disproportionately concentrated in communities,
authorities have a responsibility to ask whether the licensing system is functioning as intended.
The first question must therefore be accountability.
The National Liquor Inspectorate Programme is examining whether prescribed procedures were followed when licences were granted. This is an important step. If licences were issued in locations prohibited by law, the responsible authorities should explain how this happened.
That accountability should not be reduced to identifying individual outlets after the fact. It must include scrutiny of the licensing process itself: who received applications, who assessed them, what consultations were conducted, what objections were raised, what inspections took place and who ultimately approved the licences.
Local authorities cannot demand compliance from residents and businesses while failing to demonstrate compliance within their own institutions.
The Government must ensure that the inspection exercise is conducted transparently and according to law.
Where an irregularity is established, corrective action should follow without fear or favour.
The reported allegations of drug peddling make the matter even more serious. If liquor outlets are being used as fronts or points of distribution for dangerous substances such as crystal methamphetamine, law-enforcement agencies must investigate and prosecute those responsible in accordance with the law.
The concern about the sale of alcohol to underage persons is equally important. Children and adolescents are particularly vulnerable to the harmful effects associated with early alcohol exposure. Preventing underage sales cannot, however, be left entirely to occasional inspections. It requires a sustained system of enforcement in which licence holders know that violations will have predictable consequences.
Retailers should be expected to verify customers’ ages where necessary, keep proper records and train employees on their legal responsibilities.
Councils and other authorities, meanwhile, should conduct regular compliance checks rather than waiting for complaints or periodic crackdowns.
The wider lesson is that regulation works only when enforcement is consistent.
There is also a need to distinguish between regulation and simply reducing the number of liquor outlets.
Authorities should establish clear, objective criteria for determining whether an area is oversupplied. Community needs, population density, zoning, proximity to sensitive institutions, traffic and public-order considerations can all form part of that assessment.
The Government’s proposed reforms to make liquor licensing more stringent deserve attention.
Councils are closest to communities and are therefore best placed to understand local conditions.
But decentralisation of responsibility must come with decentralisation of accountability. If councils have the authority to issue licences, they must also have systems capable of demonstrating why those licences were granted and whether licence conditions continue to be met.
The country’s urban spaces should be places where commerce can flourish without compromising public safety or community wellbeing.
The Government’s campaign against illegal liquor outlets, drug distribution and underage drinking should therefore be understood as part of a broader governance challenge. Laws already on the books mean little if they are selectively enforced.
The immediate task is to establish the facts. Which licences were issued unlawfully? Which authorities approved them? Were objections ignored? Are outlets complying with their conditions? Where are drugs being distributed?
Once those questions have been answered, responsibility should follow the evidence.
The message to councils and liquor operators should be straightforward: commercial activity is welcome, but it must take place within the law.
Zimbabwe does not need a licensing system that merely issues permits. It needs one that protects communities, and supports lawful enterprise.
