🔗 Share this article

Critics have charged British American Tobacco with “complete double standards” for opposing tobacco control measures in Africa which are already enforced in the UK.

African regulatory opposition

Correspondence acquired by reporters sent from the company’s subsidiary in Zambia to the country’s government ministers demands proposals to prohibit tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be canceled or deferred.

The tobacco firm seeks modifications of a proposed legislation that include reductions in the recommended coverage of pictorial cautions on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on scented cigarette varieties, and diminished punishments for any companies violating the new laws.

Health advocate reaction

“As an elected official, I would say that they enable the defense of the British people and perpetuate the death of the Zambian people,” stated the anti-tobacco campaigner.

Thousands of residents a year succumb to cigarette-linked health conditions, according to World Health Organization estimates.

The campaigner stated the letter was believed to have been distributed to multiple official agencies and was in circulation among public interest organizations.

Global industry interference concerns

The situation emerges alongside expanded apprehension about corporate intervention with health policies. Last month, global health authorities issued a warning that the smoking product companies was escalating campaigns to undermine international regulations.

“We see evidence of business advocacy everywhere. Tobacco company fingerprints are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, delayed regulations in Zambia and even a diluted statement at the UN international gathering,” said the tobacco industry watchdog.

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 proposals to go further UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and requiring that pictorial cautions cover three-quarters of product packaging.

Business countermeasures

In the letter, BAT suggests this be reduced to less than half “according to global suggested parameters”, deferred for no less than one year after the legislation is approved.

The WHO in fact recommends a caution must occupy at least 50% of the product container front “and attempt to encompass as much of the principal display areas as possible”. Within Britain, warnings are required to occupy 65% of a cigarette pack surfaces.

Flavor restrictions debate

The corporation requests the withdrawal of extensive controls on flavored cigarette varieties, arguing that it would push consumers toward “illegally traded” products. It suggests banning a limited selection of “flavours based on desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Every scented tobacco product have been banned in the UK since 2020.

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

Corporate defense

Through correspondence, the corporate leader of British American Tobacco Zambia claims the firm is “committed to responsible corporate conduct” and “backs the goals of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the related medical consequences” but claims that “specific rules can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Critic response

The advocate stated BAT’s proposed changes would “weaken this legislation so much that the impact needed for it to create lasting transformation in society will not be achieved”.

The reality that multiple comparable regulations existed in the UK, where BAT is headquartered, was “complete contradiction”, he commented.

“We live in a connected world. When I cultivate smoking products in my back yard and gather the crop and distribute the goods – and my family members avoid tobacco, but my community's youth consumes … to benefit personally and all the future family lines while my neighbour’s children are succumbing … is in itself complete moral bankruptcy.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the United Kingdom or other countries had failed to shutter businesses, the campaigner stated. “Legislation never shuts down the industry. Measures simply defend the people.”

Formal company response

The corporate communicator commented: “The company operates its operations according with current country statutes. Further, the firm contributes in the country’s legislative process in line with the appropriate structures which enable stakeholder participation in regulation development.”

The corporation remained “not opposed to regulation”, the spokesperson stated, adding that minors should be shielded from acquiring smoking products and nicotine.

“We advocate for evolving legislation to accomplish desired community wellbeing objectives, while recognizing the range of entitlements and duties on corporations, customers and associated groups,” they said, noting that the company's suggestions “represent the situation of the local commercial environment and cigarette sector, which includes growing volumes of illegal commerce”.

The country's office of trade, commerce and industry was contacted for response.