🔗 Share this article

British American Tobacco has been accused of “total contradiction” for campaigning against tobacco control measures in Africa that currently exist in the UK.

Campaign in Zambia

Documents seen by journalists dispatched by the corporation's branch in Zambia to the nation's political leaders requests proposals to prohibit tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be abandoned or delayed.

The tobacco firm seeks amendments to a proposed legislation that include decreasing the suggested dimensions of visual health alerts on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on flavoured tobacco products, and reduced sanctions 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 sustain the fatalities of the Zambian people,” said Master Chimbala.

Over seven thousand citizens a year pass away from tobacco-related illnesses, according to WHO calculations.

The advocate mentioned the letter was known to have been circulated to various ministerial offices and was in distribution within civil society groups.

Worldwide lobbying patterns

The situation emerges alongside expanded apprehension about corporate intervention with public health regulations. In recent weeks, global health authorities sounded an alarm that the cigarette manufacturers was intensifying efforts to weaken global control measures.

“There is proof of industry lobbying worldwide. Manufacturer hallmarks are on postponed duty hikes in Indonesia, delayed regulations in Zambia and even a compromised resolution at the UN summit conference,” stated the corporate monitoring director.

Possible outcomes

“If a tobacco control measure doesn't get enacted because of this letter, the price could be paid in lives of people who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The tobacco control bill going through Zambia’s parliament includes regulations surpassing UK legislation by also applying to e-cigarettes, and mandating that visual health alerts cover seventy-five percent of product packaging.

Company alternative suggestions

In the letter, BAT suggests this be reduced to less than half “within the WHO-FCTC guideline limits”, deferred for no less than 12 months after the law is enacted.

The WHO in fact recommends a warning should cover at least fifty percent of the cigarette package face “and attempt to encompass as much of the principal display areas as possible”. In the UK, warnings need to encompass sixty-five percent of a product container sides.

Scented product controversy

The company seeks the withdrawal of extensive controls on flavored cigarette varieties, arguing that it would lead smokers to “black market” products. It suggests prohibiting a smaller list of “flavours based on desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Every scented tobacco product have been prohibited in Britain since 2020.

The draft bill suggests penalties for various offences “varying from a percentage of annual turnover to a decade in prison”.

Corporate defense

In the letter, the corporate leader of the Zambian branch states the company is dedicated to good corporate behaviour” and “endorses the aims of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the associated health impact” but maintains that “specific rules can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Critic response

The advocate stated the corporation's recommended amendments would “undermine this law so much that the impact needed for it to produce permanent improvement in society will not be achieved”.

The reality that multiple comparable regulations were present in the UK, where the corporation is based, was “complete contradiction”, he stated.

“We reside in a international community. When I cultivate smoking products in my property and collect the yield and market the products – and my offspring don't use tobacco, but my neighbour’s children do … to benefit personally and all the future family lines while my neighbour’s children are perishing … is in itself total emotional failure.”

Public health laws in the UK or elsewhere had failed to shutter businesses, the campaigner stated. “Legislation never shuts down the industry. It only protects the people.”

Formal company response

The corporate communicator said: “The corporation runs its business in compliance with relevant national regulations. Further, the company participates in the nation's lawmaking procedures in line with the appropriate structures which provide for relevant group engagement in policymaking.”

The company was “not against rules”, they said, adding that underage people should be safeguarded against acquiring smoking products 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,” the representative explained, mentioning that the company's suggestions “mirror the circumstances of the local commercial environment and cigarette sector, which includes increasing amounts of illicit trade”.

Zambia’s department of trade, commerce and industry was approached for comment.