🔗 Share this article ‘Total contradiction’: Tobacco giant opposed regulations in Africa that are mandatory in UK Critics have charged British American Tobacco with “complete double standards” for opposing tobacco control measures in Africa that are already in place in the UK. African regulatory opposition Correspondence acquired by reporters 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 abandoned or delayed. The tobacco firm seeks amendments to a pending law that include decreasing the recommended coverage of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging, the withdrawal of controls on scented cigarette varieties, and watered-down penalties for any companies violating the new laws. Activist commentary “As an elected official, 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 pass away from tobacco-related illnesses, according to World Health Organization estimates. The campaigner stated the letter was known to have been circulated to several government departments and was in distribution within civil society groups. Worldwide lobbying patterns The situation emerges alongside broader worries about business sector influence with medical guidelines. Recently, WHO officials raised concerns that the tobacco industry was increasing attempts to dilute worldwide restrictions. “We see evidence of business advocacy everywhere. Tobacco company fingerprints are on deferred levy rises in Indonesia, delayed regulations in Zambia and even a diluted statement at the UN high-level meeting,” said the corporate monitoring director. Possible outcomes “Should anti-smoking legislation fails to be approved because of this letter, the price could be paid in human lives who might potentially stop smoking.” The tobacco control bill progressing through Zambia’s parliament includes regulations surpassing UK legislation by extending coverage to e-cigarettes, and stipulating that graphic health warnings cover seventy-five percent of product packaging. Corporate counter-proposals Via documentation, the corporation proposes this be reduced to less than half “within the WHO-FCTC recommended threshold”, delayed for at least 12 months after the bill passes. International experts actually suggests a alert needs to encompass at least half of the cigarette package face “and attempt to encompass as much of the main visible surfaces as possible”. Across the United Kingdom, warnings must cover 65% of a product container sides. Flavor restrictions debate The corporation requests the withdrawal of extensive controls on scented smoking items, suggesting that it would drive users to “illegally traded” products. The company proposes restricting fewer varieties of “tastes inspired by desserts, candy, energy drinks, soft drinks and alcohol drinks”. All flavoured cigarettes have been outlawed across the UK since 2020. The pending regulation suggests penalties for different infractions “ranging from a portion of yearly revenue to 10 years’ imprisonment”. Company justification Via documentation, the company executive of the African subsidiary states the firm is “committed to good corporate behaviour” and “supports the objectives of governments to decrease cigarette consumption and the connected wellbeing effects” but claims that “certain measures can have negative and unanticipated results.” Activist reaction The campaigner argued the corporation's recommended amendments would “weaken this legislation so much that the required influence for it to cause long-term change in society will not be achieved”. The reality that many such provisions operated within the UK, where BAT is headquartered, was “total double standard”, he commented. “We live in a connected world. Should I grow cigarettes in my back yard and collect the yield and market the products – and my children do not consume tobacco, but my community's youth consumes … to profit individually and all the future family lines while my neighbour’s children are perishing … is in itself total emotional bankruptcy.” Tobacco control legislation in the United Kingdom or other countries had not resulted in corporate closures, the campaigner stated. “Laws don't eliminate the industry. They merely safeguard the people.” Official corporate statement The corporate communicator commented: “The company operates its activities following with current country statutes. Further, the firm contributes in the country’s legislative process in line with the suitable systems which allow for relevant group engagement in policymaking.” The firm positioned itself as “not against rules”, the spokesperson stated, mentioning that underage people should be protected from access to tobacco and nicotine. “We champion progressive regulation to accomplish desired public health goals, while acknowledging the spectrum of entitlements and duties on corporations, customers and associated groups,” the representative explained, mentioning that the corporation's recommendations “mirror the circumstances of the local commercial environment and cigarette sector, which involves increasing amounts of illicit trade”. The country's office of economic activities and commercial operations was contacted for response.