🔗 Share this article

The tobacco company stands accused of “utter hypocrisy” for opposing tobacco control measures in Africa that currently exist in the UK.

Zambian lobbying efforts

A letter obtained by media sent from the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the African officials demands proposals to prohibit tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be abandoned or delayed.

The tobacco firm seeks amendments to a draft bill that include lowering the recommended coverage of pictorial cautions on cigarette packaging, the withdrawal of controls on flavored smoking items, and watered-down penalties for any firms breaking the new laws.

Health advocate reaction

“Were I in government, I would say that they allow the safeguarding of the British people and continue the mortality of the Zambian people,” commented Master Chimbala.

Over seven thousand citizens a year die from tobacco-related illnesses, according to World Health Organization estimates.

The campaigner stated the letter was believed to have been distributed to various ministerial offices and was in distribution within public interest organizations.

International corporate influence worries

This occurs during wider concerns about business sector influence with public health regulations. Last month, WHO officials issued a warning that the smoking product companies was escalating campaigns to dilute worldwide restrictions.

“Evidence exists of business advocacy globally. Manufacturer hallmarks are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, stalled legislation in Zambia and even a compromised resolution at the UN international gathering,” stated the tobacco industry watchdog.

Possible outcomes

“When public health regulation isn’t passed because of this letter, the consequences may be suffered in lives of people who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The tobacco control bill going through Zambia’s parliament includes proposals to go further UK legislation by including provisions for e-cigarettes, and requiring that visual health alerts cover seventy-five percent of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

In the letter, the corporation proposes this be reduced to thirty to fifty percent “following international guideline limits”, deferred for no less than one year after the legislation is approved.

Global health authorities specifically advises a warning should cover at least 50% of the cigarette package face “and aim to cover as much of the primary showing sections as possible”. In the UK, warnings must cover 65% of a packet’s front and back.

Scented product controversy

The company seeks the withdrawal of extensive controls on scented smoking items, claiming that it would lead smokers to “illegally traded” products. The company proposes prohibiting a smaller list of “flavours based on desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. All flavoured cigarettes have been prohibited in Britain since 2020.

The proposed legislation recommends punishments for multiple violations “varying from a portion of yearly revenue to 10 years’ imprisonment”.

Corporate defense

In the letter, the company executive of the Zambian branch states the company is dedicated to responsible corporate conduct” and “backs the goals of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the associated health impact” but asserts that “certain measures can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Activist reaction

Chimbala said the company's suggested modifications 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 operated within the UK, where the corporation is based, was “utter hypocrisy itself”, he commented.

“We live in a connected world. When I cultivate smoking products 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 benefit personally and all the generations of my children while my community's youth are succumbing … is in itself total emotional bankruptcy.”

Public health laws in the UK or elsewhere had not resulted in corporate closures, the campaigner stated. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. They merely safeguard the people.”

Formal company response

A BAT Zambia spokesperson stated: “The corporation runs its operations according with relevant national regulations. Moreover, the corporation engages in the state's regulatory development in line with the appropriate structures which provide for interested party involvement in regulation development.”

The firm positioned itself as “not against rules”, the representative commented, noting that young individuals should be shielded from access to tobacco and nicotine.

“We support developing rules to realize planned community wellbeing objectives, 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 increasing amounts of illicit trade”.

The country's office of economic activities and commercial operations was solicited for statement.