🔗 Share this article

Critics have charged British American Tobacco with “total contradiction” for campaigning against anti-smoking regulations in Africa that currently exist in the UK.

Campaign in Zambia

Correspondence acquired by reporters originating from the company’s subsidiary in Zambia to the nation's political leaders demands measures restricting tobacco advertising and sponsorship to be scrapped or postponed.

The corporation is pursuing changes to a pending law that include decreasing the recommended coverage of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the elimination of limitations on flavoured tobacco products, and watered-down penalties 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,” stated the health advocate.

More than 7,000 Zambians a year die from cigarette-linked health conditions, according to global health agency statistics.

Chimbala said the letter was believed to have been distributed to multiple official agencies and was in circulating through public interest organizations.

Worldwide lobbying patterns

The situation emerges alongside broader worries about corporate intervention with health policies. Recently, WHO officials raised concerns that the smoking product companies was increasing attempts to dilute worldwide restrictions.

“There is proof of business advocacy everywhere. Manufacturer hallmarks are on deferred levy rises in Indonesia, halted laws in Zambia and even a weakened declaration at the UN summit conference,” stated the corporate monitoring director.

Possible outcomes

“If a tobacco control measure isn’t passed because of this letter, the consequences may be suffered in human lives who might possibly give up cigarettes.”

The anti-smoking legislation progressing through Zambia’s parliament includes proposals to go further UK legislation by including provisions for e-cigarettes, and mandating that pictorial cautions cover seventy-five percent of product packaging.

Corporate counter-proposals

Via documentation, the corporation proposes this be lowered to less than half “within the WHO-FCTC guideline limits”, deferred for no less than 12 months after the bill passes.

Global health authorities in fact recommends a warning should cover at least fifty percent of the product container front “and aim to cover as much of the main visible surfaces as possible”. In the UK, warnings need to encompass nearly two-thirds of a product container sides.

Scented product controversy

The corporation requests the elimination of comprehensive limitations on flavoured tobacco products, claiming that it would push consumers toward “black market” products. The corporation recommends prohibiting a smaller list of “tastes inspired by desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. Every scented tobacco product have been prohibited in Britain since 2020.

The draft bill proposes sanctions for multiple violations “varying from a portion of yearly revenue to a decade in prison”.

Corporate defense

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 asserts that “certain measures can have unwelcome and unexpected consequences.”

Activist reaction

The advocate stated BAT’s proposed changes would “undermine this law so much that the impact needed for it to cause long-term change in society will not be achieved”.

The fact that multiple comparable regulations operated within the UK, where BAT is headquartered, was “total double standard”, he commented.

“We live in a global village. Should I grow cigarettes in my garden and harvest that and distribute the goods – and my children do not consume tobacco, but my neighbor's family uses … to benefit personally and all the future family lines while my neighbour’s children are perishing … is in itself absolute spiritual collapse.”

Tobacco control legislation in the Britain or other nations had not resulted in corporate closures, the campaigner stated. “Legislation never shuts down the industry. It only protects the people.”

Formal company response

The company representative commented: “The corporation runs its activities following with current country statutes. Further, the firm contributes in the country’s legislative process in line with the suitable systems which provide for relevant group engagement in policymaking.”

The company was “not resisting legislation”, the representative commented, noting that underage people should be protected from access to tobacco and nicotine.

“We advocate for developing rules to achieve intended population health targets, while accepting the variety of rights and obligations on corporations, customers and associated groups,” they said, noting that the company's suggestions “represent the situation of the Zambian market and smoking product business, which involves growing volumes of illegal commerce”.

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