“The problem is not the intention behind the circular. The problem is the way it was drafted, issued and communicated.
If the government genuinely wants to keep a 500 metre radius around every school free from drugs and related activity, such a directive cannot be treated as an Education Department matter alone. A school campus may be under the administrative control of the Education Department, but the roads, shops, establishments, public spaces and other properties surrounding that campus fall under different authorities. Depending on the location, these could involve the police, local bodies, panchayats, municipalities, the Excise Department, Health Department, Revenue authorities and other enforcement agencies.
Therefore, a circular dealing with an area extending 500 metres beyond school premises should logically have involved all the relevant agencies.”
Chief Minister Pramod Sawant’s attempt to clear the air over the Education Department’s 500 metre drug-free zone circular is understandable. The government certainly has a responsibility to prevent confusion and ensure that Goa’s image is not unnecessarily tarnished. But the Chief Minister’s explanation does not address the central question. If the intention was to create a meaningful drug-free zone around schools, why was the responsibility left to a circular issued by the Education Department, an agency whose jurisdiction is essentially confined to educational institutions?
The problem is not the intention behind the circular. The problem is the way it was drafted, issued and communicated.
If the government genuinely wants to keep a 500 metre radius around every school free from drugs and related activity, such a directive cannot be treated as an Education Department matter alone. A school campus may be under the administrative control of the Education Department, but the roads, shops, establishments, public spaces and other properties surrounding that campus fall under different authorities. Depending on the location, these could involve the police, local bodies, panchayats, municipalities, the Excise Department, Health Department, Revenue authorities and other enforcement agencies.
Therefore, a circular dealing with an area extending 500 metres beyond school premises should logically have involved all the relevant agencies.
This is where the government needs to accept that there was an administrative and communication failure instead of simply asking people not to misinterpret the directive.
The Chief Minister has said that the circular follows guidelines issued by the Government of India and the Narcotics Control Bureau. If that is the case, the government should make the guidelines public and explain exactly how they are being implemented in Goa. More importantly, there must be clarity about which agency is responsible for enforcement within the 500 metre radius.
Awareness is one thing. Enforcement is another.
The Education Department can certainly create awareness among students, teachers and parents. It can monitor suspicious activities within school campuses and report concerns to the appropriate authorities. But it cannot, by itself, police every establishment located 500 metres from a school.
That distinction is important because a poorly worded circular can create more confusion than clarity. Does the 500 metre restriction apply to shops? Restaurants? Pharmacies? Paying guest accommodations? Bars? Construction sites? Private properties? Roads? What exactly constitutes a drug-free zone? Who will inspect these areas? Who will register offences? Who will take action? Under which law?
These questions cannot be answered by an Education Department circular alone.
If the government’s objective is to create drug-free zones around schools, it should issue a comprehensive government order involving all relevant departments and enforcement agencies. There should be a clearly marked radius, defined responsibilities and a mechanism for regular inspections and reporting. Police and the Anti-Narcotics Cell must have a central role because they possess the authority and expertise to investigate and take action against drug-related offences.
The government also needs to distinguish between a drug-free zone as a policy objective and a geographical restriction created through an administrative circular. Saying that Goa must be drug-free is a legitimate and necessary aspiration. But achieving it requires more than issuing a circular.
The Chief Minister has repeatedly maintained that Goa’s Anti-Narcotics Cell is strong and vigilant. That vigilance should now be visible through coordinated action. If suspicious establishments are operating near schools, action should follow. If there are intelligence inputs about drug peddling around educational institutions, they should be investigated. If certain locations have emerged as vulnerable points, enforcement should be intensified there.
There is also a larger issue here. Goa cannot afford to treat the drug menace merely as an image problem. Drugs are a serious social and law enforcement challenge. Attempting to protect Goa’s image by asking people not to “malign” the state will not solve the problem. The best way to protect Goa’s image is to demonstrate that the state has the political will, administrative coordination and enforcement machinery to deal with the menace.
The 500 metre circular may have been badly worded, but it has highlighted an important issue. If the government really means business, it should correct the circular rather than defend its wording.
Let the Education Department handle schools. Let the police and Anti-Narcotics Cell handle enforcement. Let local authorities regulate establishments within their jurisdiction. Let the Excise and other concerned departments perform their statutory roles.
And let the government bring all of them under one coordinated drug prevention framework.
Goa does not need a confusing circular. It needs a clearly defined, legally sound and jointly enforced policy.
The objective should not merely be a 500-metre drug-free zone around schools. The ultimate objective must be a drug-free Goa.
