🔗 Share this article

The tobacco company stands accused of “complete double standards” for opposing tobacco control measures in Africa that are already in place in the UK.

Campaign in Zambia

Documents seen by journalists sent from the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the nation's political leaders asks for measures restricting tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be canceled or deferred.

The corporation is pursuing amendments to a draft bill that include lowering the suggested dimensions of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the elimination of limitations on flavored smoking items, and diminished punishments for any firms breaking the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“As an elected official, I would say that they allow the safeguarding of the British people and continue the mortality of the Zambian people,” commented Master Chimbala.

Thousands of residents a year die from tobacco-related illnesses, according to WHO calculations.

The campaigner stated the letter was understood to have been copied to multiple official agencies and was in distribution within civil society groups.

International corporate influence worries

It comes amid expanded apprehension about corporate intervention with medical guidelines. In recent weeks, WHO officials raised concerns that the smoking product companies was increasing attempts to dilute worldwide restrictions.

“Evidence exists of business advocacy everywhere. Manufacturer hallmarks are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, stalled legislation in Zambia and even a diluted statement at the UN summit conference,” said the tobacco industry watchdog.

Potential consequences

“Should anti-smoking legislation fails to be approved because of this letter, the cost might be borne in human lives who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The anti-smoking legislation going through Zambia’s parliament includes measures that exceed UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and requiring that graphic health warnings cover three-quarters of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Via documentation, BAT suggests this be lowered to thirty to fifty percent “according to global recommended threshold”, deferred for no less than one year after the bill passes.

Global health authorities in fact recommends a warning should cover at least half of the cigarette package face “and seek to occupy as much of the principal display areas as possible”. In the UK, warnings need to encompass nearly two-thirds of a cigarette pack surfaces.

Flavor restrictions debate

BAT asks for the removal of broad restrictions on scented smoking items, suggesting that it would drive users to “black market” products. The corporation recommends prohibiting a smaller list of “tastes inspired by desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Each flavored smoking item have been banned in the UK since 2020.

The proposed legislation suggests penalties for multiple violations “varying from a percentage of annual turnover to 10 years’ imprisonment”.

Corporate defense

Through correspondence, the company executive of British American Tobacco Zambia claims the firm is “committed to good corporate behaviour” and “endorses the aims of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the related medical consequences” but claims that “some regulations can have negative and unanticipated results.”

Critic response

Chimbala said the company's suggested modifications would “undermine this law so much that the necessary effect for it to cause long-term change in society will not be achieved”.

The fact that numerous similar measures were present in the UK, where the corporation is based, was “complete contradiction”, he said.

“We exist in a international community. When I cultivate smoking products in my property and collect the yield and sell it out – and my offspring don't use tobacco, but my community's youth consumes … to profit individually and all the generations of my children while my neighbour’s children are perishing … is in itself total emotional failure.”

Tobacco control legislation in the Britain or other nations had failed to shutter businesses, the advocate mentioned. “Legislation never shuts down the industry. They merely safeguard the people.”

Formal company response

The company representative stated: “The corporation runs its operations according with applicable local laws. Additionally, the company participates in the state's regulatory development in line with the appropriate structures which allow for relevant group engagement in regulation development.”

The firm positioned itself as “not opposed to regulation”, the representative commented, adding that underage people should be protected from acquiring smoking products and nicotine.

“We support developing rules to accomplish desired public health goals, while recognizing the range of rights and obligations on industry, consumers and related stakeholders,” the representative explained, adding that the company's suggestions “represent the situation of the African nation's economy and smoking product business, which includes rising levels of illegal commerce”.

Zambia’s department of business, commercial affairs and industrial development was solicited for statement.