🔗 Share this article

British American Tobacco has been accused of “complete double standards” for lobbying against anti-smoking regulations in Africa that are already in place in the UK.

Zambian lobbying efforts

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

The company is attempting modifications of a draft bill that include decreasing the recommended coverage of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on flavored smoking items, and diminished punishments for any firms breaking the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“If I was a politician, I would say that they permit the protection of the British people and perpetuate the death of the Zambian people,” commented Master Chimbala.

Over seven thousand citizens a year succumb to smoking-associated diseases, according to global health agency statistics.

Chimbala said the letter was known to have been circulated to several government departments and was in distribution within community advocacy networks.

International corporate influence worries

It comes amid broader worries about business sector influence with public health regulations. In recent weeks, WHO officials raised concerns that the tobacco industry was intensifying efforts to weaken global control measures.

“There is proof of corporate influence worldwide. Corporate signatures are on postponed duty hikes in Indonesia, halted laws in Zambia and even a diluted statement at the UN high-level meeting,” stated Jorge Alday.

Likely impacts

“Should anti-smoking legislation fails to be approved because of this letter, the consequences may be suffered in lives of people who might potentially stop smoking.”

The public health measure progressing through 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 reduced to 30% or 50% “within the WHO-FCTC guideline limits”, delayed for at least 12 months after the legislation is approved.

Global health authorities actually suggests a alert needs to encompass at least 50% of the cigarette package face “and seek to occupy as much of the main visible surfaces as possible”. In the UK, warnings are required to occupy nearly two-thirds of a product container sides.

Flavored tobacco discussion

The company seeks the elimination of comprehensive limitations on scented smoking items, suggesting that it would push consumers toward “black market” products. It suggests prohibiting a smaller list of “flavours based on desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. All flavoured cigarettes have been banned in the UK since 2020.

The pending regulation recommends punishments for multiple violations “extending from a fraction of annual sales to 10 years’ imprisonment”.

Company justification

Through correspondence, the corporate leader of British American Tobacco Zambia says the firm is “committed to good corporate behaviour” and “endorses the aims of governments to decrease cigarette consumption and the connected wellbeing effects” but maintains that “certain measures can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Critic response

The advocate stated the corporation's recommended amendments would “dilute these regulations so much that the impact needed for it to cause long-term change in society will not be achieved”.

The circumstance that numerous similar measures operated within the UK, where the company maintains its main office, was “complete contradiction”, he commented.

“We live in a connected world. Should I grow cigarettes in my back yard and gather the crop and sell it out – and my offspring don't use tobacco, but my neighbor's family uses … to enrich myself and all the future family lines while my neighbor's family are dying … is in itself complete moral bankruptcy.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the UK or elsewhere had not caused companies to close, the campaigner stated. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. They merely safeguard the people.”

Formal company response

The company representative commented: “The company operates its activities following with current country statutes. Additionally, the firm contributes in the state's regulatory development in line with the appropriate structures which provide for interested party involvement in regulation development.”

The corporation remained “not resisting legislation”, the representative commented, adding that underage people should be safeguarded against obtaining cigarettes and nicotine.

“We advocate for progressive regulation to realize planned public health goals, while acknowledging the spectrum of privileges and responsibilities on industry, consumers and related stakeholders,” the spokesperson stated, mentioning that the corporation's recommendations “mirror the circumstances of the African nation's economy and tobacco industry, which involves rising levels of black market activity”.

The country's office of economic activities and commercial operations was contacted for response.