🔗 Share this article

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

Campaign in Zambia

A letter obtained by media dispatched by the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the African officials asks for proposals to prohibit tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be abandoned or delayed.

The company is attempting amendments to a draft bill that include reductions in the suggested dimensions of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on flavoured tobacco products, and reduced sanctions for any companies violating the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“As an elected official, I would say that they enable the defense of the British people and continue the mortality of the Zambian people,” said Master Chimbala.

Over seven thousand citizens a year die from tobacco-related illnesses, according to global health agency statistics.

The campaigner stated the letter was believed to have been distributed to several government departments and was in circulation among community advocacy networks.

Worldwide lobbying patterns

This occurs during wider concerns about industry interference with medical guidelines. Recently, global health authorities raised concerns that the tobacco industry was escalating campaigns to undermine international regulations.

“We see evidence of corporate influence globally. Tobacco company fingerprints are on postponed duty hikes in Indonesia, delayed regulations in Zambia and even a diluted statement at the UN high-level meeting,” said Jorge Alday.

Possible outcomes

“Should anti-smoking legislation fails to be approved because of this letter, the price could be paid in individuals' health who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The public health measure going through Zambia’s parliament includes regulations surpassing UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and mandating that visual health alerts cover seventy-five percent of product packaging.

Company alternative suggestions

Via documentation, the company recommends this be reduced to less than half “within the WHO-FCTC guideline limits”, delayed for at least one year after the law is enacted.

Global health authorities actually suggests a caution must occupy at least fifty percent of the product container front “and attempt to encompass as much of the principal display areas as possible”. Within Britain, warnings must cover sixty-five percent of a cigarette pack surfaces.

Flavored tobacco discussion

The corporation requests the elimination of comprehensive limitations on flavored cigarette varieties, claiming that it would drive users to “illicitly sold” products. The corporation recommends prohibiting a smaller list of “flavours based on desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. All flavoured cigarettes have been prohibited in Britain since 2020.

The draft bill recommends punishments for different infractions “ranging from a portion of yearly revenue to ten-year jail sentences”.

Corporate defense

In the letter, the managing director of the African subsidiary states the corporation is focused on good corporate behaviour” and “backs the goals of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the related medical consequences” but asserts that “specific rules can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The advocate stated BAT’s proposed changes would “dilute these regulations so much that the impact needed for it to produce permanent improvement in society will not be achieved”.

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

“We reside in a international community. When I cultivate smoking products in my property 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 subsequent offspring while my neighbor's family are dying … is in itself complete moral failure.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the Britain or other nations had failed to shutter businesses, the advocate mentioned. “Regulations don't close the industry. They merely safeguard the people.”

Formal company response

A BAT Zambia spokesperson commented: “The corporation runs its business in compliance with relevant national regulations. Additionally, the company participates in the nation's lawmaking procedures in line with the appropriate structures which enable stakeholder participation in policymaking.”

The corporation remained “not opposed to regulation”, the representative commented, noting that young individuals should be protected from access to tobacco and nicotine.

“We advocate for evolving legislation to accomplish desired public health goals, while acknowledging the spectrum of rights and obligations on industry, consumers and related stakeholders,” the representative explained, noting that the company's suggestions “reflect the realities of the local commercial environment and cigarette sector, which encompasses growing volumes of illegal commerce”.

Zambia’s department of business, commercial affairs and industrial development was approached for comment.