🔗 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.

Zambian lobbying efforts

A letter obtained by media sent from the company’s subsidiary in Zambia to the nation's political leaders asks for plans to ban tobacco marketing and promotional activities to be scrapped or postponed.

The company is attempting modifications of a draft bill that include lowering the proposed size of visual health alerts on cigarette packaging, the withdrawal of controls on flavoured tobacco products, and diminished punishments for any companies violating the new laws.

Activist commentary

“As an elected official, I would say that they enable the defense of the British people and sustain the fatalities of the Zambian people,” commented Master Chimbala.

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

Chimbala said the letter was known to have been circulated to multiple official agencies and was in distribution within civil society groups.

Global industry interference concerns

The situation emerges alongside wider concerns about business sector influence with health policies. Recently, WHO officials issued a warning that the smoking product companies was escalating campaigns to weaken global control measures.

“Evidence exists of business advocacy everywhere. Manufacturer hallmarks are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, delayed regulations in Zambia and even a diluted statement at the UN high-level meeting,” commented Jorge Alday.

Possible outcomes

“Should anti-smoking legislation doesn't get enacted because of this letter, the consequences may be suffered in human lives who might possibly give up cigarettes.”

The public health measure progressing through Zambia’s parliament includes measures that exceed UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and stipulating that graphic health warnings cover seventy-five percent of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Through correspondence, the corporation proposes this be reduced to 30% or 50% “within the WHO-FCTC guideline limits”, deferred for no less than 12 months after the law is enacted.

The WHO specifically advises a warning should cover at least fifty percent of the cigarette package face “and attempt to encompass as much of the main visible surfaces as possible”. In the UK, warnings are required to occupy sixty-five percent of a cigarette pack surfaces.

Flavor restrictions debate

The corporation requests the withdrawal of extensive controls on flavoured tobacco products, suggesting that it would drive users to “black market” products. It suggests banning a limited selection of “flavours based on desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Each flavored smoking item have been outlawed across the UK since 2020.

The pending regulation proposes sanctions for various offences “varying from a portion of yearly revenue to ten-year jail sentences”.

Business explanation

Through correspondence, the managing director of the African subsidiary claims the company is dedicated to responsible corporate conduct” and “endorses the aims of governments to reduce smoking incidence and the related medical consequences” but maintains that “some regulations can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The campaigner argued BAT’s proposed changes would “dilute these regulations so much that the necessary effect for it to produce permanent improvement in society will not be achieved”.

The circumstance that many such provisions were present in the UK, where the company maintains its main office, was “complete contradiction”, he said.

“We live in a international community. If I plant tobacco in my property and gather the crop and market the products – and my family members avoid tobacco, but my neighbour’s children do … to enrich myself and all the generations of my children while my neighbour’s children are succumbing … is in itself total emotional collapse.”

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 company representative said: “The company operates its activities following with current country statutes. Additionally, the firm contributes in the nation's lawmaking procedures in line with the suitable systems which provide for stakeholder participation in regulation development.”

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

“We support progressive regulation to realize planned community wellbeing objectives, while acknowledging the spectrum of rights and obligations on corporations, customers and associated groups,” the spokesperson stated, noting that BAT’s proposals “mirror the circumstances of the African nation's economy and smoking product business, which includes increasing amounts of illicit trade”.

Zambia’s department of business, commercial affairs and industrial development was contacted for response.