🔗 Share this article

British American Tobacco has been accused of “utter hypocrisy” for opposing anti-smoking regulations in Africa which are already enforced in the UK.

Campaign in Zambia

Correspondence acquired by reporters sent from the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the nation's political leaders requests proposals to prohibit tobacco marketing and promotional activities to be canceled or deferred.

The company is attempting changes to a proposed legislation that include lowering the suggested dimensions of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on scented cigarette varieties, and diminished punishments for any businesses disregarding the new laws.

Activist commentary

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

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

The campaigner stated the letter was understood to have been copied to various ministerial offices and was in circulating through public interest organizations.

Global industry interference concerns

The situation emerges alongside broader worries about corporate intervention with public health regulations. Recently, WHO officials issued a warning that the smoking product companies was escalating campaigns to dilute worldwide restrictions.

“Evidence exists of business advocacy everywhere. Tobacco company fingerprints are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, delayed regulations in Zambia and even a compromised resolution at the UN summit conference,” said Jorge Alday.

Possible outcomes

“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 tobacco control bill going through Zambia’s parliament includes regulations surpassing UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and mandating that pictorial cautions cover 75% of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Through correspondence, the company recommends this be decreased to 30% or 50% “within the WHO-FCTC suggested parameters”, deferred for no less than twelve months after the bill passes.

Global health authorities specifically advises a caution must occupy at least fifty percent of the front of a pack “and seek to occupy as much of the principal display areas as possible”. In the UK, warnings need to encompass sixty-five percent of a packet’s front and back.

Flavored tobacco discussion

The company seeks the removal of broad restrictions on flavored cigarette varieties, suggesting that it would push consumers toward “black market” products. The company proposes restricting fewer varieties of “flavours based on desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Each flavored smoking item have been banned in the UK since 2020.

The pending regulation proposes sanctions for different infractions “ranging from a percentage of annual turnover to a decade in prison”.

Business explanation

In the letter, the managing director of British American Tobacco Zambia states the firm is “committed to good corporate behaviour” and “endorses the aims of governments to lower tobacco use and the related medical consequences” but asserts that “specific rules can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The campaigner argued 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 reality that numerous similar measures were present in the UK, where the company maintains its main office, was “utter hypocrisy itself”, he commented.

“We reside in a global village. When I cultivate smoking products in my back yard and collect the yield and distribute the goods – and my children do not consume tobacco, but my community's youth consumes … to enrich myself and all the subsequent offspring while my neighbour’s children are dying … is in itself complete moral bankruptcy.”

Public health laws in the Britain or other nations had failed to shutter businesses, the advocate mentioned. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. Measures simply defend the people.”

Formal company response

The corporate communicator stated: “The corporation runs its operations according with applicable local laws. Moreover, the corporation engages in the nation's lawmaking procedures in line with the relevant frameworks which allow for interested party involvement in policymaking.”

The company was “not opposed to regulation”, the spokesperson stated, mentioning that young individuals should be safeguarded against access to tobacco and nicotine.

“We support progressive regulation to achieve intended public health goals, while acknowledging the spectrum of rights and obligations on corporations, customers and associated groups,” the spokesperson stated, noting that BAT’s proposals “reflect the realities of the local commercial environment and cigarette sector, which encompasses increasing amounts of black market activity”.

The country's office of business, commercial affairs and industrial development was approached for comment.