MAPUSA
Four nightclubs in the Anjuna–Vagator belt, which were sealed in mid-December for failing to comply with mandatory safety norms following the deadly Birch fire incident, continue to operate despite senior fire officials maintaining that no fire safety No Objection Certificates (NOCs) have been issued to them.
The clubs – Salud, Mayan Beach Club, Diaz and Café CO2 – were among six establishments sealed by the government-appointed Joint Enforcement and Monitoring Committee (JEMC) after inspections revealed serious violations of safety regulations.
The action was projected as part of the State’s crackdown on illegalities in nightclubs operating under restaurant trade licences.
However, within a little over a week of being sealed – and just days before the peak end-of-year tourism rush culminating on December 31 – four of the six clubs resumed operations. Only Clara and Goya remain shut.
The sudden reopening of the clubs, despite unresolved safety issues, has raised serious questions about the government’s resolve to enforce compliance and whether the post-Birch enforcement drive was merely cosmetic.
Fire NOCs still not issued
Officials from the Directorate of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) have categorically stated that mandatory fire NOCs were not issued to the clubs that reopened.
“Fire NOCs have not been issued to at least three of these clubs. I am not sure about the fourth. Café CO2 was instructed to install water sprinklers, smoke detection systems and comply with other safety measures,” a senior DFES officer said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
While the official confirmed that Café CO2 has since complied with the fire safety instructions, he clarified that no fire NOC has been issued to the club so far.
Café CO2 had earlier been sealed for operating without a DFES NOC and for issues related to structural stability. Salud and Mayan Beach Club were also found to be operating without fire safety clearance, while Diaz had its fire NOC revoked after DFES inspections revealed inadequate and outdated fire prevention systems requiring urgent upgradation.
JEMC distances itself from reopening
Members of the Joint Enforcement and Monitoring Committee have distanced themselves from the decision to allow the clubs to resume business.
“Our mandate was to identify shortcomings and, where required, shut down the establishments. We do not know how the four nightclubs reopened or whether they complied with the required NOCs and permissions. That responsibility lies with the respective departments,” a JEMC member stated.
This admission underscores a glaring lack of coordination between enforcement agencies and raises doubts over the process through which the clubs were permitted to reopen.
Eyewash or enforcement?
The sequence of events – sealing nightclubs amid public outrage following the Birch tragedy, suspending a few officials, and then quietly allowing clubs to reopen ahead of the peak season – has led many to question whether the government is genuinely committed to tackling illegalities in the nightlife sector.
The episode has reinforced concerns of a systemic rot where politicians are seen to wield influence without direct involvement, while enforcement officials are left to face accountability when tragedies occur.
As clubs continue to operate without confirmed safety clearances, the larger question remains unanswered: Was the post-Birch crackdown a sincere attempt at reform, or merely an eyewash designed to deflect public anger?
Political pressure alleged
Even as fire officials deny issuing clearances, certain political leaders have publicly defended the reopening of the clubs, claiming that they had complied with all necessary protocols.
The contradiction between official records and political statements has fuelled speculation of political interference, with allegations that authorities were asked to “look the other way” to ensure clubs could cash in on the lucrative New Year tourism boom.
