Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stated that it received a 35% increase in complaints of noise pollution, when figures for this year thus far are compared to 2018. By any stretch of the imagination, that is a substantial increase. That’s reflective of what may be deemed an ineffective approach to curbing this societal menace.
Over time, there have been numerous complaints, and gauging from some who pleaded their cases in the media, this scourge continues unabated. Interestingly, the Director of the EPA is reported to have stated that many people stopped complaining, given their perception of not getting a response.
For many, it is not a perception; in reality, their complaints are ignored. Despite the pain, suffering, and gross inconvenience many are forced to endure, the Director must be commended for bringing officially into the public domain that seeming lack of a response, even though branded as a perception. He has elevated, through the influence of his office, what many believe and experienced. In so doing, he may have deliberately brought some level of pressure upon those, including his officers and the Police, who are entrusted to enforce the laws.
Too often, when complaints are called in to Police stations, and when the call is actually answered, the response is either permission has been granted until midnight, in some cases 2:00 am, or they will “check on it”. Very often, the latter was a means of consoling, and never really materialised.
Part of the problem basically lies in the former: permission. Many have argued over the criteria used to allow a few to inconvenience residents within the village or villages. Among those affected in every instance are babies, children preparing for school or examinations, the elderly, and the sick. Medical experts have documented the serious effects of noise on people who are exposed to high decibels of sound, and especially how telling it is on an ongoing basis.
The inconsiderate bombarding of others with loud music by bar operators and bar-b-que promoters has seemingly become an unfortunate fixture within many villages. Village days are often promoted without the consent of villagers. To make matters worse, there are reports of alleged collusion with the Police and the operators/ promoters, thereby facilitating this hazard.
Having expended much effort for intervention, and having been unsuccessful, wary residents are naturally forced to stop complaining. Some may posit that’s how it’s designed deliberately, to allow the flow of believed benefits from the alleged collusion. How else can one explain permission being granted for bar-b-ques, street limes, and village days — which blare music — to be promoted unabated?
How else can one similarly explain established and makeshift bars — that are brazenly polluting with noise — operating unhindered? How else can one explain that the approved midnight timeline is actually 3:00am or 4:00 am? How else can one explain the glaring lack of meaningful intervention in all those instances?
That, in many ways, sums up the plight of the affected residents, and the magnitude of the problem.
It’s worthy to note, and may be even ironic, that the EPA Director’s comments referenced were made when he addressed a noise management training for Police officers. The Public Security Minister reportedly took the opportunity at the training to highlight the prevalence of noise pollution, and alluded to victims not following through after reports are made; i.e. a reluctance to appear in court.
Aside from alleged collusion, therein lies probably the biggest hindrance to curbing the endemic noise crisis.
Maybe there is need to relook at the legal requirements in the context that if the Police were to independently, promptly and professionally respond to complaints, verify them, and take statements from complainants, the need for an actual presence could be obviated.
While a credible argument can be made that such a proposal could encourage collusion at another level, the possibility for legal resolution could increase. This considers that the Police are equipped with testers to check the level of noise, and that the Minister reportedly said it may be better to enforce the law by taking away the equipment of those caught in the act. Any justification of the latter seemingly negates the presence of a complainant in court; same as the testers.
What remains very worrying is that, despite the utterances of the EPA and the Minister, some establishments which are not soundproofed, even within the City, continue to unleash a torrent of noise pollution on residents craving for relief.
Reportedly many, if not all, of these establishments, appear to have strong connections, which allow them to operate untouched. In those instances, complaints will be ignored at the expense of the health and wellbeing of the affected residents. That causes the rhetoric from the authorities to be rendered useless. It cannot be just about soundproofing. Many cases, like music carts, bar-b-ques, limes, vehicles and small village shops, are a big part of the problem, which is seemingly compounded by a reluctance to enforce the law allegedly on the grounds of self-interest. That probably explains the 35% increase in complaints, as against a decrease, which should be the primary goal.
