By Suraj Nandrekar
The deadly fire in Anjuna has once again exposed a disturbing truth. In India, large scale safety reforms rarely come from foresight. They come from funerals. Every time lives are lost, the machinery of the state suddenly moves with speed. High level meetings are called. Committees rush to inspect. Emergency orders are issued. Police teams pursue the accused. Courts hear urgent pleas. And the public is left wondering why this urgency was missing the day before the tragedy.
The Chief Minister’s meeting with senior officials and the Tourism Minister focused on what establishments must do to keep people safe. That discussion should have taken place long before the night the blaze broke out. Goa’s tourism industry thrives on crowded bars, clubs, restaurants and event venues. The risks are obvious. Yet enforcement is often sporadic, sometimes absent and too often shaped by convenience rather than duty. The two minutes of silence observed for the victims served as a solemn tribute, but it also highlighted a deeper silence. It was the silence of inaction in the months and years when these establishments operated without rigorous oversight.
Now the Joint Inspection Monitoring Committee is out in Pernem, Bardez and Tiswadi, examining bars, clubs and restaurants for fire compliance. Emergency exits, hydrants, alarms and evacuation plans will all be scrutinized. But these spaces have been functioning openly. They have hosted thousands of people without any significant intervention from authorities. When inspections take place only after lives are lost, they become a spectacle of damage control rather than a genuine commitment to prevention.
The sweeping order under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, banning fireworks and pyrotechnic devices inside tourist establishments across North Goa, is another example. Such a prohibition should have been standard practice in a state known for packed indoor events. Pyrotechnics inside enclosed or semi enclosed spaces are inherently dangerous. Yet only after a massive fire do we see decisive action. This is not proactive governance. It is a reaction to failure.
The developments in the investigation further reflect a system that springs into action only after disaster strikes. The Rohini Court heard the bail plea of the absconding Luthra brothers, who allegedly booked tickets to Thailand at the same time firefighters were battling the blaze and pulling people out of danger. The court denied immediate relief, and Goa Police opposed the plea. Another accused, Ajay Gupta, has been produced before a magistrate and will now be brought to Goa. While accountability is essential, it should not take a tragedy to reveal gaps in monitoring, licensing and compliance.
Goa’s tourism sector is its pride and its lifeline. That makes safety non negotiable. Yet too often, regulations are treated as formalities and enforcement becomes active only when something goes horribly wrong. This cycle must end. A state that depends on tourism cannot afford episodic governance. It needs steady, unwavering oversight, not bursts of action triggered by public outrage.
The Anjuna fire is more than a tragic incident. It is a warning that safety cannot wait for another disaster. Prevention must become the rule, not the reaction.
