🔗 Share this article

The tobacco company stands accused of “total contradiction” for opposing anti-smoking regulations in Africa that currently exist in the UK.

Zambian lobbying efforts

A letter obtained by media originating from the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the nation's political leaders asks for measures restricting tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be scrapped or postponed.

The company is attempting changes to a pending law that include reductions in the proposed size of visual health alerts on cigarette packaging, the withdrawal of controls on flavoured tobacco products, and watered-down penalties for any companies violating the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“Were I in government, I would say that they permit the protection of the British people and perpetuate the death of the Zambian people,” commented Master Chimbala.

Thousands of residents a year die from cigarette-linked health conditions, according to World Health Organization estimates.

Chimbala said the letter was understood to have been copied to several government departments and was in circulation among community advocacy networks.

Global industry interference concerns

The situation emerges alongside expanded apprehension about business sector influence with medical guidelines. Last month, WHO officials issued a warning that the cigarette manufacturers was increasing attempts to undermine international regulations.

“We see evidence of industry lobbying globally. Manufacturer hallmarks are on postponed duty hikes in Indonesia, delayed regulations in Zambia and even a weakened declaration at the UN summit conference,” said the tobacco industry watchdog.

Likely impacts

“If a tobacco control measure doesn't get enacted because of this letter, the price could be paid in individuals' health who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The anti-smoking legislation progressing through Zambia’s parliament includes proposals to go further UK legislation by including provisions for e-cigarettes, and mandating that pictorial cautions cover seventy-five percent of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Via documentation, the company recommends this be decreased to 30% or 50% “within the WHO-FCTC recommended threshold”, postponed for minimum twelve months after the law is enacted.

Global health authorities actually suggests a alert needs to encompass at least fifty percent of the product container front “and attempt to encompass as much of the principal display areas as possible”. In the UK, warnings need to encompass nearly two-thirds of a product container sides.

Scented product controversy

The corporation requests the withdrawal of extensive controls on flavoured tobacco products, suggesting that it would drive users to “illicitly sold” products. The corporation recommends prohibiting a smaller list of “flavours based on desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Each flavored smoking item have been prohibited in Britain since 2020.

The proposed legislation suggests penalties for various offences “varying from a fraction of annual sales to ten-year jail sentences”.

Corporate defense

Via documentation, the corporate leader of the African subsidiary says the company is dedicated to responsible corporate conduct” and “backs the goals of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the connected wellbeing effects” but claims that “specific rules can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Activist reaction

The campaigner argued BAT’s proposed changes would “undermine this law so much that the impact needed for it to produce permanent improvement in society will not be achieved”.

The fact that numerous similar measures operated within the UK, where the corporation is based, was “utter hypocrisy itself”, he said.

“We reside in a connected world. If I plant tobacco in my property and gather the crop and market the products – and my offspring don't use tobacco, but my neighbor's family uses … to profit individually and all the subsequent offspring while my community's youth are perishing … is in itself complete moral bankruptcy.”

Tobacco control legislation in the UK or elsewhere had not resulted in corporate closures, Chimbala said. “Legislation never shuts down the industry. Measures simply defend the people.”

Official corporate statement

The company representative said: “The corporation runs its operations according with applicable local laws. Further, the firm contributes in the nation's lawmaking procedures in line with the suitable systems which allow for stakeholder participation in policymaking.”

The firm positioned itself as “not opposed to regulation”, the representative commented, mentioning that minors should be safeguarded against obtaining cigarettes and nicotine.

“We support evolving legislation to accomplish desired public health goals, while acknowledging the spectrum of privileges and responsibilities on corporations, customers and associated groups,” the spokesperson stated, noting that the corporation's recommendations “represent the situation of the local commercial environment and smoking product business, which includes rising levels of illicit trade”.

The nation's ministry of business, commercial affairs and industrial development was contacted for response.