Batsa Fumes Over Access to Smokers

Source from:  Business Report (za) 12/07/2009

British American Tobacco South Africa (Batsa) has attacked the National Council Against Smoking for issuing a statement that was "deliberately mischievous, provocative and misleading" regarding a constitutional challenge launched by the company against certain provisions of the recently promulgated Tobacco Products Control Amendment Act. Batsa has filed an application before the North Gauteng High Court to have the legislation amended to allow one-to-one communication with its consenting adult smokers. The ban came into operation last August. The company said: "This is a matter between Bat South Africa and the Department of Health and we believe that sensationalising the issue in the media will not help to reach an amicable solution. To the contrary, it will only serve to further mislead the public." The council said that if the prohibition of one-to-one communication was declared unconstitutional, "such a contorted interpretation would expressly disregard the direct intentions of Parliament". Parliament amended the act to outlaw the "smoking parties" organised by the industry, said the council. The purpose of the "smoking parties" was not to convey accurate, factual information about tobacco products such as the price, but to make smoking appear social, cool, fun and an exciting experience, and so increase sales. "Increased sales meant increased death and disease," said the council. It said one-to-one communication would mean that the industry would be able to use techniques known as viral or guerrilla marketing to target teenagers. "The section being challenged was specifically designed to protect youth from advertising campaigns designed to get them to start smoking or to smoke more," said the council. Batsa said that it had not taken any legal action anywhere in the world in relation to tobacco advertising bans. It had in fact accepted and complied with the law in all cases. "This constitutional challenge in the South African High Court is an attempt to defend our rights as a manufacturer of a legal product to be able to communicate with our existing adult consumers. We do not and will not at any time in the future under any circumstances market to children. Smoking is risky and we agree that the sale and consumption of tobacco products must be regulated and, in particular, we support the ban of tobacco products to the under-aged." Batsa said one-to-one communication, which was the issue it was challenging, did not refer to parties or any other events. It was the one remaining avenue of communication which enabled consenting adult consumers of its products to receive information from the company about a product or brand they had chosen to purchase. "In our court application, we have recommended that the Department of Health regulates how we conduct this information," it said. Salim Young, a legal director at Batsa, said: "We have on various occasions engaged with various regulators, including the Department of Health, on this matter in an attempt to avert any legal action. Our preference is still to resolve the matter amicably and through negotiation, but at this stage we have no option but to litigate." Batsa said it supported and was committed to sensible and enforceable tobacco regulation, and there were a number of provisions in the legislation that it supported. The SA Medical Association also joined the fray by supporting the council. It hoped the courts, such as their international counterparts, would issue a ruling that protected the broader public interest, especially in view of the fact that the right to health was enshrined in the constitution. Enditem