‘Total contradiction’: Tobacco giant opposed regulations in Africa which are law in UK

The tobacco company stands accused of “total contradiction” for lobbying against tobacco control measures in Africa that are already in place in the UK.

Campaign in Zambia

A letter obtained by media originating from the company’s subsidiary in Zambia to the nation's political leaders asks for plans to ban tobacco marketing and promotional activities to be canceled or deferred.

The corporation is pursuing changes to a pending law that include decreasing the recommended coverage of visual health alerts on cigarette packaging, the elimination of limitations on scented cigarette varieties, and diminished punishments for any businesses disregarding the new laws.

Health advocate reaction

“As an elected official, I would say that they allow the safeguarding of the British people and sustain the fatalities of the Zambian people,” said the health advocate.

More than 7,000 Zambians a year die from smoking-associated diseases, according to World Health Organization estimates.

The campaigner stated the letter was understood to have been copied to multiple official agencies and was in circulating through community advocacy networks.

International corporate influence worries

The situation emerges alongside wider concerns about industry interference with public health regulations. In recent weeks, WHO officials sounded an alarm that the cigarette manufacturers was escalating campaigns to dilute worldwide restrictions.

“Evidence exists of corporate influence globally. Corporate signatures are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, stalled legislation in Zambia and even a compromised resolution at the UN summit conference,” said Jorge Alday.

Likely impacts

“When public health regulation doesn't get enacted because of this letter, the cost might be borne in human lives who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The public health measure progressing through Zambia’s parliament includes measures that exceed UK legislation by including provisions for e-cigarettes, and requiring that visual health alerts cover 75% of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Through correspondence, the company recommends this be decreased to less than half “following international guideline limits”, deferred for no less than twelve months after the bill passes.

International experts actually suggests a caution must occupy at least 50% 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 nearly two-thirds of a product container sides.

Scented product controversy

The corporation requests the removal of broad restrictions on scented smoking items, suggesting that it would lead smokers to “illicitly sold” products. The company proposes banning a limited selection 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 different infractions “varying from a portion of yearly revenue to 10 years’ imprisonment”.

Company justification

Through correspondence, the managing director of the Zambian branch claims the company is dedicated to ethical business practices” and “endorses the aims of governments to lower tobacco use and the connected wellbeing effects” but claims that “some regulations can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Activist reaction

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

The reality that multiple comparable regulations were present in the UK, where BAT is headquartered, was “total double standard”, he commented.

“We reside in a international community. When I cultivate smoking products in my back yard and collect the yield and market the products – and my offspring don't use tobacco, but my neighbor's family uses … to profit individually and all the future family lines while my neighbour’s children are succumbing … is in itself complete moral failure.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the UK or elsewhere had failed to shutter businesses, the campaigner stated. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. They merely safeguard the people.”

Formal company response

The corporate communicator said: “The corporation runs its operations according with applicable local laws. Moreover, the firm contributes in the state's regulatory development in line with the suitable systems which allow for interested party involvement in regulation development.”

The company was “not resisting legislation”, they said, noting that underage people should be shielded from obtaining cigarettes and nicotine.

“We support evolving legislation to realize planned public health goals, while acknowledging the spectrum of entitlements and duties on businesses, users and involved parties,” they said, noting that the corporation's recommendations “reflect the realities of the African nation's economy and cigarette sector, which encompasses increasing amounts of black market activity”.

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