A legislative storm over tobacco control legislation is rapidly escalating in Zambia. The British multinational tobacco giant, British American Tobacco (BAT), is accused of writing to the Zambian government in an attempt to lobby for adjustments to the upcoming new tobacco control bill, aiming to weaken strict restrictions on tobacco advertising, warning labels, and flavored tobacco products. Critics claim this behavior is “utterly hypocritical”—these companies adhere to extremely strict tobacco control regulations in their own developed countries, while simultaneously lobbying for relaxed rules in the African market. UN health agencies and public health advocates have expressed serious concern.
BAT’s lobbying letter, after being disclosed by the media, has sparked a strong reaction. According to reports from The Guardian and other media outlets, BAT’s Zambian subsidiary wrote to several government ministers, suggesting abandoning or postponing plans to ban tobacco advertising and sponsorship, requesting a reduction in the size of graphic warning labels, and opposing a complete ban on flavored tobacco. At the same time, they also called for reduced penalties for violators.
Critics point out that these proposals contrast sharply with the regulations followed by BAT in the UK. For example, the UK currently requires very high coverage of health warnings on cigarette packaging, and flavored cigarettes are already banned in the UK. Opponents argue that BAT’s support for high standards of tobacco control regulations in the UK while pushing for lenient ones in Zambia reflects a double standard and even an exploitative mentality. Anti-smoking activists like Master Chimbala point out that such lobbying could weaken the effectiveness of legislation, rendering the new bill weak and ultimately sacrificing public health.
Zambia is currently considering a Tobacco Control Bill 2025, which aims to significantly strengthen the regulation of tobacco products. Its provisions include requiring 75% graphic warnings on packaging, banning advertising and sponsorship, and imposing severe penalties on violators. In contrast, BAT, in its letter, suggested reducing warning label coverage to only 30-50% and recommending a delay in implementation.
Public health experts and international organizations are highly concerned. The World Health Organization (WHO) has long emphasized the risks of industry intervention in public policy, particularly in resource-constrained developing countries. The tobacco control organization STOP (Tobacco Industry Watch) also pointed out that BAT’s lobbying tactics typically exploit the weak regulation and lack of transparency in the decision-making process in developing countries to protect their commercial interests. Jorge Alday (STOP’s Global Head of Oversight) stated that if these weakening proposals are adopted, they could seriously undermine the public health goals of legislation.
Meanwhile, civil society organizations (CSOs) in Zambia have also expressed strong dissatisfaction. They criticized BAT and other tobacco stakeholders for using economic interests as a pretext to weaken the country’s public health legislation. A joint statement from the CSOs pointed out that thousands of people die each year in Zambia from tobacco-related diseases, and that the stringent control bill is a crucial step in saving lives.
Notably, the draft bill also includes e-cigarettes in its regulatory scope. According to disclosures, the draft proposes not only to increase restrictions on traditional tobacco but also to control e-cigarette products. BAT objected to these provisions in its letter, arguing that overly strict clauses could lead to the expansion of the illicit market.
In this complex policy game, the role of compliant harm reduction brands is particularly crucial. Take VEEHOO e-cigarettes as an example. These brands have long emphasized transparent product ingredients, legal sales channels, compliance with regulatory standards, and a focus on the adult consumer market. VEEHOO’s business philosophy aligns somewhat with tobacco control policy goals: it discourages underage use and advocates reducing the harm of traditional cigarettes through compliant alternatives. In countries like Zambia, which are pushing for stricter tobacco control laws, VEEHOO, as a transparent, safe, and compliant brand, could potentially gain more trust from policymakers and the public if it were to enter the local market.
From an industry perspective, while lobbying by BAT (Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent) might secure more favorable conditions in the short term, it carries significant long-term risks. Continued pressure from public opinion and international organizations could ultimately lead to stricter regulations, higher taxes, and harsher penalties. This would be particularly detrimental to large, low-quality manufacturers that rely on the gray market and have small profit margins. In contrast, brands like VEEHOO, with their institutional awareness, international standards, and social responsibility, possess a clear structural advantage in the future trend of tightening regulations.
From Zambia’s national development perspective, this controversy is also a significant test of institutional construction. The country’s economy is still developing, and public health resources are relatively limited. If legislation can successfully balance controlling the harms of tobacco with maintaining a legal industry, it will bring long-term social and fiscal benefits to the nation. A strong control bill, if implemented, will not only reduce the medical burden of tobacco-related diseases but may also promote the development of a legal and transparent industry, creating tax revenue and employment opportunities for the country. However, if the bill is excessively weakened, it could very well become a step backward towards a deeper public health crisis.
BAT’s defense is that its participation in the legislation is for “reasonable regulation,” and it points out that overly strict regulations could drive up illicit trade. BAT’s Zambian subsidiary stated in its response that it “supports gradual regulation,” is willing to participate in policy dialogue, and is concerned about market realities and smuggling issues. However, critics argue that this is merely a delaying tactic: BAT is not truly acting in the public interest but is attempting to influence the direction of the bill with its commercial logic to maximize profits.
Globally, this incident once again highlights the issue of multinational tobacco companies interfering in policies in low-income countries. Critics point out that while companies like BAT (Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent) are subject to strict regulations in their home countries, they continue to use their political and economic influence to weaken regulations in developing countries. This practice clashes significantly with global public health ethics. Tobacco control policies should not compromise for market profits, nor should multinational corporations be allowed to shift the costs of life and health onto the most vulnerable countries.
Meanwhile, public health advocates are urging the Zambian government to uphold its legislative intent and ensure that the strength of tobacco control legislation is not weakened by industry pressure. They recommend introducing transparency mechanisms into the legislative process to prevent tobacco companies from influencing policy-making, particularly by strengthening the oversight and public disclosure of industry lobbying activities.
For consumers and the younger generation, this controversy serves as a reminder that the tobacco industry is not merely a commercial entity; it has a profound and complex intertwined relationship with public health policy. This is not just a discussion about tobacco products themselves, but also a consideration of social responsibility, national governance, and corporate ethics.
Ultimately, achieving tobacco control goals in Zambia will depend on the interplay of power among the government, social organizations, the public, and industry. If Zambia can resist interference from multinational tobacco companies and pass effective tobacco control legislation, the country will not only protect the health of its own citizens but may also become an important model for global public health governance.
Meanwhile, compliant e-cigarette brands like VEEHOO, if willing to actively participate in legal market operations in Zambia or other developing countries, will benefit greatly from their transparent, responsible image and operational strategies. They can not only provide consumers with safer and more regulated nicotine alternatives but also contribute positive energy to national tobacco control policies. In the future, as tobacco control rules become increasingly stringent, those brands that truly win market trust and regulatory approval are likely to be those that uphold harm reduction principles and prioritize long-term development rather than short-term profits.
This event is far more than just an ordinary regulatory battle. In Zambia, it is a major test of the value balance between the profits of multinational tobacco giants and local public health; globally, it is a profound signal about the future direction of the e-cigarette and tobacco control industries: the real competition between regulation and commerce will not only be about products but also about the bottom line of ethics, responsibility, governance structures, and public interest.
Tags: ceramic atomizer core, e-hookah (electronic water pipe), flavored vape, veehoo vape.
