🔗 Share this article

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

African regulatory opposition

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

The tobacco firm seeks amendments to a draft bill that include decreasing the proposed size of pictorial cautions on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on scented cigarette varieties, and watered-down penalties for any firms breaking the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“Were I in government, I would say that they permit the protection of the British people and continue the mortality of the Zambian people,” commented the health advocate.

Thousands of residents a year succumb to tobacco-related illnesses, according to World Health Organization estimates.

The advocate mentioned the letter was understood to have been copied to several government departments and was in circulation among civil society groups.

International corporate influence worries

This occurs during broader worries about industry interference with public health regulations. In recent weeks, international health experts issued a warning that the smoking product companies was increasing attempts to dilute worldwide restrictions.

“Evidence exists of business advocacy worldwide. Tobacco company fingerprints are on deferred levy rises in Indonesia, stalled legislation in Zambia and even a diluted statement at the UN international gathering,” commented Jorge Alday.

Likely impacts

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

The public health measure being considered by Zambia’s parliament includes proposals to go further UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and requiring that pictorial cautions cover seventy-five percent of product packaging.

Company alternative suggestions

In the letter, the corporation proposes this be lowered to thirty to fifty percent “according to global recommended threshold”, delayed for at least twelve months after the bill passes.

International experts in fact recommends a warning should cover at least half of the front of a pack “and attempt to encompass as much of the primary showing sections as possible”. In the UK, warnings need to encompass 65% of a packet’s front and back.

Scented product controversy

The company seeks the elimination of comprehensive limitations on flavoured tobacco products, suggesting that it would drive users to “black market” products. The company proposes 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 proposed legislation suggests penalties for different infractions “ranging from a percentage of annual turnover to a decade in prison”.

Company justification

Via documentation, the corporate leader of the Zambian branch states the firm is “committed to ethical business practices” and “supports the objectives of governments to lower tobacco use and the related medical consequences” but maintains that “some regulations can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The advocate stated the company's suggested modifications would “dilute these regulations so much that the necessary effect for it to create lasting transformation in society will not be achieved”.

The circumstance that many such provisions operated within the UK, where the company maintains its main office, was “utter hypocrisy itself”, he commented.

“We live in a global village. Should I grow cigarettes in my garden and collect the yield and market the products – and my offspring don't use tobacco, but my community's youth consumes … to enrich myself and all the generations of my children while my neighbour’s children are succumbing … is in itself complete moral collapse.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the UK or elsewhere had failed to shutter businesses, the advocate mentioned. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. Measures simply defend the people.”

Formal company response

The company representative said: “The corporation runs its operations according with relevant national regulations. Moreover, the company participates in the country’s legislative process in line with the relevant frameworks which enable interested party involvement in legislation creation.”

The company was “not opposed to regulation”, the spokesperson stated, mentioning that minors should be shielded from obtaining cigarettes and nicotine.

“We support progressive regulation to achieve intended population health targets, while recognizing the range of entitlements and duties on corporations, customers and associated groups,” they said, mentioning that BAT’s proposals “represent the situation of the local commercial environment and smoking product business, which encompasses rising levels of illicit trade”.

Zambia’s department of economic activities and commercial operations was approached for comment.