🔗 Share this article

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

Campaign in Zambia

Correspondence acquired by reporters dispatched by the corporation's branch in Zambia to the country’s government ministers asks for measures restricting tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be abandoned or delayed.

The company is attempting changes to a draft bill that include decreasing the recommended coverage of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on scented cigarette varieties, and reduced sanctions for any companies violating the new laws.

Health advocate reaction

“If I was a politician, I would say that they allow the safeguarding of the British people and continue the mortality of the Zambian people,” said the health advocate.

More than 7,000 Zambians a year pass away from cigarette-linked health conditions, according to WHO calculations.

The campaigner stated the letter was known to have been circulated to various ministerial offices and was in distribution within community advocacy networks.

International corporate influence worries

This occurs during wider concerns about corporate intervention with health policies. Last month, WHO officials raised concerns that the cigarette manufacturers was intensifying efforts to undermine international regulations.

“Evidence exists of business advocacy globally. Corporate signatures are on delayed tax increases in Indonesia, delayed regulations in Zambia and even a compromised resolution at the UN international gathering,” commented the corporate monitoring director.

Potential consequences

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

The tobacco control bill going through Zambia’s parliament includes proposals to go further UK legislation by also applying to e-cigarettes, and requiring that graphic health warnings cover three-quarters of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Via documentation, the corporation proposes this be reduced to 30% or 50% “following international suggested parameters”, delayed for at least 12 months after the bill passes.

The WHO specifically advises a warning should cover at least fifty percent of the front of a pack “and attempt to encompass as much of the primary showing sections as possible”. Across the United Kingdom, warnings need to encompass sixty-five percent of a packet’s front and back.

Flavored tobacco discussion

The company seeks the elimination of comprehensive limitations on scented smoking items, claiming that it would lead smokers to “illegally traded” products. It suggests restricting fewer varieties of “tastes inspired by desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Each flavored smoking item have been banned in the UK since 2020.

The draft bill proposes sanctions for different infractions “varying from a percentage of annual turnover to ten-year jail sentences”.

Business explanation

In the letter, the corporate leader of the African subsidiary claims the corporation is focused on ethical business practices” and “supports the objectives of governments to decrease cigarette consumption and the associated health impact” but asserts that “some regulations can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The campaigner argued BAT’s proposed changes would “weaken this legislation so much that the necessary effect for it to create lasting transformation in society will not be achieved”.

The reality that many such provisions existed in the UK, where BAT is headquartered, was “utter hypocrisy itself”, he said.

“We exist in a international community. Should I grow cigarettes in my garden and collect the yield and market the products – and my family members avoid tobacco, but my neighbor's family uses … to benefit personally and all the generations of my children while my neighbor's family are dying … is in itself total emotional bankruptcy.”

Tobacco control legislation in the United Kingdom or other countries had not caused companies to close, Chimbala said. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. It only protects the people.”

Formal company response

A BAT Zambia spokesperson commented: “The corporation runs its operations according with current country statutes. Further, the firm contributes in the state's regulatory development in line with the suitable systems which allow for relevant group engagement in legislation creation.”

The company was “not against rules”, they said, noting that young individuals should be shielded from access to tobacco and nicotine.

“We support evolving legislation to accomplish desired population health targets, while accepting the variety of privileges and responsibilities on businesses, users and involved parties,” the representative explained, adding that BAT’s proposals “represent the situation of the Zambian market and cigarette sector, which includes rising levels of illegal commerce”.

Zambia’s department of economic activities and commercial operations was solicited for statement.