🔗 Share this article

Critics have charged British American Tobacco with “utter hypocrisy” for opposing anti-smoking regulations in Africa which are already enforced in the UK.

Zambian lobbying efforts

Documents seen by journalists originating from the corporation's branch in Zambia to the nation's political leaders demands proposals to prohibit tobacco marketing and promotional activities to be scrapped or postponed.

The tobacco firm seeks changes to a proposed legislation that include lowering the recommended coverage of visual health alerts on cigarette packaging, the withdrawal of controls on flavored smoking items, and watered-down penalties for any companies violating the new laws.

Anti-tobacco campaigner response

“Were I in government, I would say that they permit the protection of the British people and perpetuate the death of the Zambian people,” said the health advocate.

More than 7,000 Zambians a year die from smoking-associated diseases, according to WHO calculations.

The campaigner stated the letter was believed to have been distributed to various ministerial offices and was in circulating through civil society groups.

International corporate influence worries

The situation emerges alongside broader worries about industry interference with public health regulations. Recently, WHO officials raised concerns that the tobacco industry was intensifying efforts to dilute worldwide restrictions.

“There is proof of industry lobbying globally. Manufacturer hallmarks are on postponed duty hikes in Indonesia, halted laws in Zambia and even a compromised resolution at the UN summit conference,” stated the tobacco industry watchdog.

Potential consequences

“If a tobacco control measure fails to be approved because of this letter, the consequences may be suffered in individuals' health who might potentially stop smoking.”

The tobacco control bill progressing through Zambia’s parliament includes measures that exceed UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and stipulating that graphic health warnings cover three-quarters of product packaging.

Business countermeasures

Via documentation, the company recommends this be lowered to 30% or 50% “according to global suggested parameters”, postponed for minimum twelve months after the bill passes.

Global health authorities in fact recommends a warning should cover at least half of the cigarette package face “and seek to occupy as much of the main visible surfaces as possible”. Within Britain, warnings need to encompass sixty-five percent of a cigarette pack surfaces.

Scented product controversy

The corporation requests the withdrawal of extensive controls on scented smoking items, suggesting that it would drive users to “illicitly sold” products. It suggests restricting fewer varieties of “scents derived from desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. All flavoured cigarettes have been prohibited in Britain since 2020.

The proposed legislation proposes sanctions for multiple violations “varying from a percentage of annual turnover to a decade in prison”.

Company justification

Via documentation, the managing director of the Zambian branch claims the firm is “committed to good corporate behaviour” and “backs the goals of governments to lower tobacco use and the connected wellbeing effects” but claims that “some regulations can have undesirable and unforeseen outcomes.”

Critic response

The advocate stated BAT’s proposed changes would “dilute these regulations so much that the required influence for it to cause long-term change in society will not be achieved”.

The fact that numerous similar measures operated within the UK, where the corporation is based, was “complete contradiction”, he said.

“We exist in a connected world. If I plant tobacco in my back yard and harvest that and distribute the goods – and my children do not consume tobacco, but my neighbour’s children do … to enrich myself and all the future family lines while my neighbor's family are succumbing … is in itself complete moral failure.”

Tobacco control legislation in the United Kingdom or other countries had not caused companies to close, the campaigner stated. “Legislation never shuts down the industry. Measures simply defend the people.”

Formal company response

The corporate communicator commented: “The corporation runs its operations according with applicable local laws. Further, the company participates in the state's regulatory development in line with the relevant frameworks which enable interested party involvement in regulation development.”

The company was “not against rules”, the spokesperson stated, noting that minors should be protected from obtaining cigarettes and nicotine.

“We champion developing rules to realize planned population health targets, while recognizing the range of privileges and responsibilities on corporations, customers and associated groups,” the spokesperson stated, adding that the company's suggestions “reflect the realities of the African nation's economy and cigarette sector, which involves growing volumes of illegal commerce”.

Zambia’s department of trade, commerce and industry was contacted for response.