🔗 Share this article

British American Tobacco has been accused of “utter hypocrisy” for campaigning against anti-smoking regulations in Africa that are already in place in the UK.

Campaign in Zambia

Correspondence acquired by reporters dispatched by the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the country’s government ministers asks for proposals to prohibit tobacco marketing and promotional activities to be canceled or deferred.

The company is attempting amendments to a pending law that include reductions in the recommended coverage of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the elimination of limitations on flavored smoking items, and watered-down penalties for any companies violating the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“If I was a politician, I would say that they enable the defense of the British people and sustain the fatalities of the Zambian people,” stated Master Chimbala.

More than 7,000 Zambians a year pass away from tobacco-related illnesses, according to global health agency statistics.

The campaigner stated the letter was understood to have been copied to multiple official agencies and was in circulation among civil society groups.

Global industry interference concerns

This occurs during expanded apprehension about corporate intervention with medical guidelines. Last month, international health experts sounded an alarm that the smoking product companies was increasing attempts to undermine international regulations.

“We see evidence of industry lobbying everywhere. Manufacturer hallmarks are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, stalled legislation in Zambia and even a compromised resolution at the UN summit conference,” commented the corporate monitoring director.

Likely impacts

“Should anti-smoking legislation doesn't get enacted because of this letter, the price could be paid in individuals' health who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The anti-smoking legislation going through Zambia’s parliament includes proposals to go further UK legislation by including provisions for e-cigarettes, and requiring that pictorial cautions cover three-quarters of product packaging.

Business countermeasures

Through correspondence, the company recommends this be reduced to 30% or 50% “according to global suggested parameters”, delayed for at least 12 months after the law is enacted.

Global health authorities in fact recommends a warning should cover at least half of the cigarette package face “and seek to occupy as much of the main visible surfaces as possible”. Across the United Kingdom, warnings are required to occupy nearly two-thirds of a packet’s front and back.

Scented product controversy

The company seeks the withdrawal of extensive controls on flavoured tobacco products, arguing that it would lead smokers to “illegally traded” products. The corporation recommends restricting fewer varieties 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 proposed legislation proposes sanctions for different infractions “varying from a percentage of annual turnover to ten-year jail sentences”.

Company justification

Via documentation, the managing director of the African subsidiary states the company is dedicated to good corporate behaviour” and “supports the objectives of governments to lower tobacco use and the connected wellbeing effects” but maintains that “certain measures can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The advocate stated the company's suggested modifications would “weaken this legislation so much that the required influence for it to produce permanent improvement in society will not be achieved”.

The reality that many such provisions operated within the UK, where the corporation is based, was “total double standard”, he commented.

“We live in a connected world. If I plant tobacco in my back yard and collect the yield and distribute the goods – and my offspring don't use tobacco, but my neighbor's family uses … to enrich myself and all the subsequent offspring while my community's youth are dying … is in itself total emotional bankruptcy.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the Britain or other nations had not caused companies to close, Chimbala said. “Regulations don't close the industry. Measures simply defend the people.”

Formal company response

The corporate communicator commented: “The company operates its activities following with relevant national regulations. Moreover, the firm contributes in the country’s legislative process in line with the appropriate structures which allow for relevant group engagement in legislation creation.”

The corporation remained “not against rules”, the spokesperson stated, adding that underage people should be shielded from obtaining cigarettes and nicotine.

“We advocate for progressive regulation to accomplish desired public health goals, while acknowledging the spectrum of entitlements and duties on corporations, customers and associated groups,” the representative explained, mentioning that the company's suggestions “represent the situation of the African nation's economy and tobacco industry, which includes rising levels of illegal commerce”.

The country's office of trade, commerce and industry was approached for comment.