🔗 Share this article

British American Tobacco has been accused of “complete double standards” for opposing anti-smoking regulations in Africa that currently exist in the UK.

African regulatory opposition

Correspondence acquired by reporters dispatched by the firm's affiliate in Zambia to the country’s government ministers demands plans to ban tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be canceled or deferred.

The company is attempting amendments to a draft bill that include decreasing the proposed size of pictorial cautions on cigarette packaging, the removal of restrictions on scented cigarette varieties, and diminished punishments for any firms breaking the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“If I was a politician, I would say that they allow the safeguarding of the British people and perpetuate the death of the Zambian people,” said Master Chimbala.

Over seven thousand citizens a year die from tobacco-related illnesses, according to WHO calculations.

The advocate mentioned the letter was known to have been circulated to multiple official agencies and was in circulating through public interest organizations.

Global industry interference concerns

This occurs during expanded apprehension about industry interference with health policies. Recently, international health experts issued a warning that the smoking product companies was increasing attempts to weaken global control measures.

“There is proof of industry lobbying everywhere. Corporate signatures are on postponed duty hikes in Indonesia, halted laws in Zambia and even a weakened declaration at the UN international gathering,” said the corporate monitoring director.

Likely impacts

“Should anti-smoking legislation fails to be approved because of this letter, the consequences may be suffered in human lives who might otherwise quit smoking.”

The tobacco control bill 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 75% of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Through correspondence, the corporation proposes this be decreased to thirty to fifty percent “according to global recommended threshold”, deferred for no less than 12 months after the bill passes.

The WHO actually suggests a warning should cover at least 50% of the front of a pack “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 scented smoking items, arguing that it would push consumers toward “illegally traded” products. It suggests 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 pending regulation suggests penalties for different infractions “ranging from a percentage of annual turnover to 10 years’ imprisonment”.

Business explanation

In the letter, the corporate leader of the African subsidiary says the firm is “committed to good corporate behaviour” and “endorses the aims of governments to lower tobacco use and the associated health impact” but asserts that “certain measures can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Critic response

Chimbala said BAT’s proposed changes would “weaken this legislation so much that the required influence for it to cause long-term change in society will not be achieved”.

The fact that multiple comparable regulations operated within the UK, where the company maintains its main office, was “utter hypocrisy itself”, he stated.

“We exist in a global village. If I plant tobacco in my garden and harvest that and distribute the goods – and my children do not consume tobacco, but my community's youth consumes … to enrich myself and all the future family lines while my community's youth are perishing … is in itself complete moral collapse.”

Anti-smoking regulations in the Britain or other nations had not resulted in corporate closures, the campaigner stated. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. They merely safeguard the people.”

Formal company response

The corporate communicator said: “The company operates its activities following with relevant national regulations. Additionally, the firm contributes in the state's regulatory development in line with the relevant frameworks which enable interested party involvement in policymaking.”

The company was “not against rules”, they said, mentioning that underage people should be safeguarded against acquiring smoking products and nicotine.

“We support developing rules to realize planned public health goals, while recognizing the range of rights and obligations on industry, consumers and related stakeholders,” they said, adding that the company's suggestions “represent the situation of the African nation's economy and tobacco industry, which involves increasing amounts of illegal commerce”.

Zambia’s department of trade, commerce and industry was approached for comment.