🔗 Share this article

Critics have charged British American Tobacco with “utter hypocrisy” for campaigning against tobacco control measures in Africa which are already enforced in the UK.

African regulatory opposition

Correspondence acquired by reporters dispatched by the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the country’s government ministers asks for measures restricting tobacco marketing and promotional activities to be abandoned or delayed.

The corporation is pursuing changes to a proposed legislation that include decreasing the recommended coverage of pictorial cautions on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on scented cigarette varieties, 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 continue the mortality of the Zambian people,” commented the anti-tobacco campaigner.

Thousands of residents a year die from tobacco-related illnesses, according to World Health Organization estimates.

The campaigner stated the letter was believed to have been distributed to various ministerial offices and was in circulating through civil society groups.

Global industry interference concerns

The situation emerges alongside wider concerns about corporate intervention with health policies. Last month, global health authorities issued a warning that the tobacco industry was escalating campaigns to dilute worldwide restrictions.

“There is proof 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 international gathering,” stated Jorge Alday.

Possible outcomes

“When public health regulation fails to be approved because of this letter, the cost might be borne in lives of people who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The tobacco control bill progressing through Zambia’s parliament includes regulations surpassing UK legislation by including provisions for e-cigarettes, and mandating that graphic health warnings cover 75% of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

In the letter, BAT suggests this be reduced to 30% or 50% “according to global guideline limits”, postponed for minimum twelve months after the legislation is approved.

Global health authorities specifically advises a caution must occupy at least 50% of the product container front “and aim to cover as much of the main visible surfaces as possible”. In the UK, warnings are required to occupy sixty-five percent of a product container sides.

Flavored tobacco discussion

The corporation requests the withdrawal of extensive controls on flavoured tobacco products, arguing that it would push consumers toward “illegally traded” products. It suggests restricting fewer varieties of “scents derived from desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Each flavored smoking item have been banned in the UK since 2020.

The proposed legislation suggests penalties for multiple violations “varying from a percentage of annual turnover to a decade in prison”.

Business explanation

Through correspondence, the corporate leader of the African subsidiary states the company is dedicated to responsible corporate conduct” and “endorses the aims of governments to decrease cigarette consumption and the associated health impact” but claims that “specific rules can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Critic response

The campaigner argued BAT’s proposed changes would “dilute these regulations so much that the necessary effect for it to cause long-term change in society will not be achieved”.

The fact that multiple comparable regulations were present in the UK, where the corporation is based, was “total double standard”, he commented.

“We reside in a connected world. When I cultivate smoking products in my garden and gather the crop and sell it out – and my family members avoid tobacco, but my neighbour’s children do … to profit individually and all the future family lines while my neighbour’s children are perishing … is in itself complete moral failure.”

Public health laws in the United Kingdom or other countries had not resulted in corporate closures, Chimbala said. “Regulations don't close the industry. It only protects the people.”

Formal company response

The company representative commented: “BAT Zambia conducts its business in compliance with relevant national regulations. Moreover, the corporation engages in the nation's lawmaking procedures in line with the relevant frameworks which provide for interested party involvement in legislation creation.”

The firm positioned itself as “not against rules”, the representative commented, adding that minors should be shielded from access to tobacco and nicotine.

“We advocate for progressive regulation to achieve intended public health goals, while accepting the variety of rights and obligations on businesses, users and involved parties,” they said, noting that BAT’s proposals “reflect the realities of the African nation's economy and tobacco industry, which involves rising levels of black market activity”.

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