🔗 Share this article

British American Tobacco has been accused of “utter hypocrisy” for opposing anti-smoking regulations in Africa which are already enforced in the UK.

African regulatory opposition

Documents seen by journalists originating from the corporation's branch in Zambia to the country’s government ministers demands plans to ban tobacco marketing and promotional activities to be scrapped or postponed.

The corporation is pursuing amendments to a proposed legislation that include lowering the recommended coverage of visual health alerts on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on scented cigarette varieties, and diminished punishments for any companies violating the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“If I was a politician, I would say that they enable the defense of the British people and perpetuate the death of the Zambian people,” stated the health advocate.

More than 7,000 Zambians a year succumb to tobacco-related illnesses, according to global health agency statistics.

The campaigner stated the letter was known to have been circulated to various ministerial offices and was in distribution within civil society groups.

Global industry interference concerns

It comes amid expanded apprehension about industry interference with medical guidelines. Last month, global health authorities sounded an alarm that the cigarette manufacturers was escalating campaigns to undermine international regulations.

“We see evidence of business advocacy everywhere. Corporate signatures are on postponed duty hikes in Indonesia, stalled legislation in Zambia and even a weakened declaration at the UN high-level meeting,” commented the corporate monitoring director.

Likely impacts

“Should anti-smoking legislation fails to be approved because of this letter, the price could be paid in lives of people who might potentially stop smoking.”

The anti-smoking legislation progressing through Zambia’s parliament includes proposals to go further UK legislation by also applying to e-cigarettes, and stipulating that graphic health warnings cover three-quarters of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Through correspondence, BAT suggests this be lowered to thirty to fifty percent “according to global guideline limits”, delayed for at least one year after the law is enacted.

Global health authorities specifically advises a warning should cover at least 50% of the front of a pack “and seek to occupy as much of the principal display areas as possible”. In the UK, warnings need to encompass 65% of a cigarette pack surfaces.

Flavor restrictions debate

The corporation requests the elimination of comprehensive limitations on flavoured tobacco products, claiming that it would drive users to “black market” products. The corporation recommends restricting fewer varieties of “scents derived from desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Every scented tobacco product have been outlawed across the UK since 2020.

The proposed legislation suggests penalties 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 says the firm is “committed to responsible corporate conduct” and “backs the goals of governments to decrease cigarette consumption and the connected wellbeing effects” but asserts that “some regulations can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Campaigner rebuttal

The advocate stated the corporation's recommended amendments 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 numerous similar measures operated within the UK, where BAT is headquartered, was “complete contradiction”, he stated.

“We live in a international community. When I cultivate smoking products in my property 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 failure.”

Public health laws in the UK or elsewhere had failed to shutter businesses, the campaigner stated. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. Measures simply defend the people.”

Formal company response

The corporate communicator commented: “The corporation runs its business in compliance with current country statutes. Further, the corporation engages in the country’s legislative process in line with the relevant frameworks which provide for relevant group engagement in regulation development.”

The company was “not resisting legislation”, the spokesperson stated, noting that underage people should be shielded from acquiring smoking products and nicotine.

“We advocate for progressive regulation to realize planned public health goals, while acknowledging the spectrum of rights and obligations on businesses, users and involved parties,” the spokesperson stated, adding that the corporation's recommendations “reflect the realities of the African nation's economy and tobacco industry, which encompasses growing volumes of illegal commerce”.

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