MAPUSA
With the 10 pm music cut-off at weddings triggering political backlash and public anger across Goa, Goa State Pollution Control Board chairman Levinson Martins has defended strict enforcement of the noise rules, saying he is only a regulator bound to implement the law as it exists. In an interview with The Goan, Martins said the rule is 25 years old, applies equally to all events and that any relaxation must come from policymakers, not enforcement agencies. Excerpts:
---
THE GOAN (TG): There has been a sudden stress on enforcing the 10 pm deadline for music. Why now? Does this deadline apply strictly to weddings as well, which have unofficially enjoyed some leeway in the past?
LEVINSON MARTINS (LM): The rule is not new at all. The 10 pm deadline comes from the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, framed by the central government. It has been in place for the last 25 years. There is no controversy about the rule itself.
What happens at weddings with a certain understanding is a different matter. As a regulator, I am concerned only with enforcing the law as it exists.
TG: Many feel that 10 pm is too early, especially for a tourism-oriented State like Goa. Do you think a different solution is needed here?
LM: I cannot comment on that. I am not a policy-maker. I am a regulator, and I have to go strictly by the law. I do not make the rules.
TG: Should there be leniency for cultural, religious and social events, including weddings?
LM: The law applies to all events. Every event has to end by 10 pm. If the rule is changed tomorrow, I will enforce the changed rule. Until then, I must follow the existing one.
TG: There is a public perception that private functions are targeted more strictly, while commercial establishments continue playing music overnight.
LM: That perception is not correct. Action has already been taken against violators. So far, action has been initiated against 50 units. 38 commercial establishments are under monitoring. Nearly Rs 20 lakh has been collected by way of fines from violators. This is a continuous process.
TG: How effective are the sound monitoring stations? Can they be manipulated by establishment owners?
LM: The monitoring stations are installed and maintained by our staff. Establishment owners cannot shift or manipulate them. The data is visible to us at the control centre.
TG: Despite these measures, loud music continues late into the night and sometimes even into the next day along the coastal belt.
LM: Whenever complaints are received, they are logged at our control room and immediately forwarded to the police. Under the Noise Pollution Act, the police and the deputy collectors are the designated authorities for enforcement on the ground.
TG: What, according to you, are the weak links in enforcing noise pollution rules?
LM: We are enforcing exactly what has been directed by the court. There are no weak links as far as our role is concerned. Directions have been issued to the police, the collectors and to us, and we are doing what we are mandated to do.
TG: Often, when enforcement fails, departments tend to shift blame. Will there be more accountability going forward?
LM: We are not blaming anyone. We are doing our work. We have set up a 24x7 monitoring cell and a helpline number has been shared with the public. We will streamline the system further.
TG: So, what needs to change to resolve this issue?
LM: Any change has to come from policymakers. I am an enforcer. I have to go by the law as it stands.
TG: How serious is the GSPCB about the 10 pm clampdown?
LM: I am neither serious nor liberal. I am simply following the law. When complaints are received, we forward them to the police, and we also take action if decibel levels exceed permissible limits. If the law changes tomorrow, I will enforce that law.
