🔗 Share this article

Critics have charged British American Tobacco with “complete double standards” for lobbying against anti-smoking regulations in Africa that are already in place in the UK.

Campaign in Zambia

A letter obtained by media sent from the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the country’s government ministers asks for measures restricting tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be canceled or deferred.

The tobacco firm seeks amendments to a draft bill that include reductions in the proposed size of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the withdrawal of controls on scented cigarette varieties, and watered-down penalties for any firms breaking the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“As an elected official, I would say that they enable the defense of the British people and continue the mortality of the Zambian people,” said the health advocate.

Over seven thousand citizens a year pass away from smoking-associated diseases, according to World Health Organization estimates.

The advocate mentioned the letter was known to have been circulated to various ministerial offices and was in circulating through public interest organizations.

Global industry interference concerns

This occurs during broader worries about corporate intervention with medical guidelines. In recent weeks, international health experts issued a warning that the smoking product companies was increasing attempts to undermine international regulations.

“Evidence exists of industry lobbying everywhere. Corporate signatures are on postponed duty hikes in Indonesia, halted laws in Zambia and even a diluted statement at the UN summit conference,” stated Jorge Alday.

Potential consequences

“Should anti-smoking legislation isn’t passed because of this letter, the consequences may be suffered in human lives who might potentially stop smoking.”

The tobacco control bill going through Zambia’s parliament includes measures that exceed UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and requiring that pictorial cautions cover 75% of product packaging.

Business countermeasures

Via documentation, BAT suggests this be lowered to 30% or 50% “within the WHO-FCTC suggested parameters”, delayed for at least one year after the legislation is approved.

International experts in fact recommends a alert needs to encompass at least 50% of the front of a pack “and attempt to encompass as much of the principal display areas as possible”. In the UK, warnings are required to occupy sixty-five percent of a packet’s front and back.

Flavored tobacco discussion

BAT asks for the elimination of comprehensive limitations on scented smoking items, claiming that it would push consumers toward “black market” products. It suggests banning a limited selection of “tastes inspired by desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. All flavoured cigarettes have been prohibited in Britain since 2020.

The pending regulation suggests penalties for multiple violations “extending from a fraction of annual sales to ten-year jail sentences”.

Company justification

In the letter, the company executive of British American Tobacco Zambia says the firm is “committed to good corporate behaviour” and “backs the goals of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the related medical consequences” but maintains that “specific rules can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The advocate stated BAT’s proposed changes would “dilute these regulations so much that the required influence for it to produce permanent improvement in society will not be achieved”.

The fact that multiple comparable regulations existed in the UK, where the corporation is based, was “complete contradiction”, he stated.

“We live in a connected world. If I plant tobacco in my back yard and collect the yield and market the products – and my children do not consume tobacco, but my neighbour’s children do … to enrich myself and all the subsequent offspring while my neighbor's family are dying … is in itself complete moral bankruptcy.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the United Kingdom or other countries had not resulted in corporate closures, the campaigner stated. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. They merely safeguard the people.”

Formal company response

The company representative said: “The corporation runs its activities following with relevant national regulations. Additionally, the firm contributes in the country’s legislative process in line with the appropriate structures which enable relevant group engagement in policymaking.”

The company was “not opposed to regulation”, they said, adding that young individuals should be protected from obtaining cigarettes and nicotine.

“We support progressive regulation to realize planned population health targets, while accepting the variety of entitlements and duties on industry, consumers and related stakeholders,” the spokesperson stated, mentioning that the company's suggestions “represent the situation of the local commercial environment and tobacco industry, which includes increasing amounts of illicit trade”.

The nation's ministry of trade, commerce and industry was solicited for statement.