🔗 Share this article

Critics have charged British American Tobacco with “complete double standards” for opposing tobacco control measures in Africa which are already enforced in the UK.

African regulatory opposition

A letter obtained by media dispatched by the corporation's branch in Zambia to the African officials asks for proposals to prohibit tobacco marketing and promotional activities to be canceled or deferred.

The corporation is pursuing amendments to a pending law that include lowering 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.

Health advocate reaction

“Were I in government, I would say that they allow the safeguarding of the British people and sustain the fatalities of the Zambian people,” commented the anti-tobacco campaigner.

Thousands of residents a year pass away from cigarette-linked health conditions, according to WHO calculations.

Chimbala said the letter was understood to have been copied to various ministerial offices and was in circulating through public interest organizations.

Worldwide lobbying patterns

It comes amid wider concerns about business sector influence with medical guidelines. In recent weeks, WHO officials sounded an alarm that the smoking product companies was escalating campaigns to weaken global control measures.

“Evidence exists of business advocacy globally. Corporate signatures are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, stalled legislation in Zambia and even a weakened declaration at the UN international gathering,” commented Jorge Alday.

Potential consequences

“If a tobacco control measure fails to be approved because of this letter, the cost might be borne in individuals' health who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The anti-smoking legislation being considered by Zambia’s parliament includes proposals to go further UK legislation by including provisions for e-cigarettes, and mandating that pictorial cautions cover three-quarters of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Through correspondence, BAT suggests this be decreased to thirty to fifty percent “within the WHO-FCTC recommended threshold”, deferred for no less than twelve months after the legislation is approved.

The WHO actually suggests a warning should cover at least fifty percent of the front of a pack “and attempt to encompass as much of the primary showing sections as possible”. Across the United Kingdom, warnings need to encompass 65% of a product container sides.

Flavored tobacco discussion

The company seeks the withdrawal of extensive controls on flavored cigarette varieties, suggesting that it would lead smokers to “black market” products. It suggests restricting fewer varieties of “scents derived from desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Every scented tobacco product have been prohibited in Britain since 2020.

The draft bill recommends punishments for multiple violations “ranging from a percentage of annual turnover to a decade in prison”.

Business explanation

Through correspondence, the managing director of the African subsidiary claims the company is dedicated to good corporate behaviour” and “supports the objectives of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the associated health impact” but asserts that “some regulations can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The campaigner argued the company's suggested modifications would “dilute these regulations so much that the necessary effect for it to produce permanent improvement in society will not be achieved”.

The reality that multiple comparable regulations operated within the UK, where the company maintains its main office, was “utter hypocrisy itself”, he said.

“We live in a international community. If I plant tobacco in my back yard and gather the crop and distribute the goods – and my family members avoid tobacco, but my neighbour’s children do … to enrich myself and all the generations of my children while my neighbor's family are succumbing … is in itself complete moral bankruptcy.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the United Kingdom or other countries had not caused companies to close, Chimbala said. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. They merely safeguard the people.”

Formal company response

The company representative said: “The corporation runs its operations according with current country statutes. Moreover, the firm contributes in the state's regulatory development in line with the relevant frameworks which enable interested party involvement in legislation creation.”

The firm positioned itself as “not resisting legislation”, they said, mentioning that young individuals should be shielded from acquiring smoking products and nicotine.

“We support progressive regulation to accomplish desired population health targets, while accepting the variety of privileges and responsibilities on industry, consumers and related stakeholders,” the representative explained, adding that the corporation's recommendations “reflect the realities of the Zambian market and tobacco industry, which involves rising levels of illicit trade”.

The country's office of trade, commerce and industry was contacted for response.