Malaysia: Throw Them In Prison

Source from:  Tobacco Reporter 03/20/2019

Errant smokers who are issued a RM250 summons for flouting the no-tobacco-smoking rule in Malaysia’s eateries risk paying up to RM10,000 if they are hauled before a court, according to a story in The Star quoting the deputy health minister Dr. Lee Boon Chye.

Smokers who were issued summonses from July 1 would be hit with the maximum RM250 fine, he said.

However, offenders who failed to settle the summons would be hauled before a court.

“The courts can impose a maximum sentence of RM10,000 or two years’ jail,” the deputy minister said when replying a supplementary question during Question and Answer time in the Dewan Rakyat (lower house of Parliament) yesterday.

At the same time, Lee added that the ministry would consider expanding the smoking ban to cover other areas.

“There are some countries which have banned smoking in cities altogether, only allowing it in specific areas,” he said.

Lee assured lawmakers that the Government was committed to implementing the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which Malaysia had ratified in 2005.

However, he said that implementation of the FCTC protocols would be done in stages, including one that would require cigarettes to be sold only in standardized packaging.

“Plain cigarette packaging was proposed by the Health Ministry under the previous administration,” Lee was quoted as saying.

“The proposal was withdrawn following resistance and objections.”  Enditem

India:  Delhi High Court Says Ban On Sale Of E-Cigarettes And Vapes
Hindustan Times

The Delhi High Court has stayed an order of the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) banning the sale, manufacture, distribution, trade, import and advertisement of e-cigarettes and vapes.

Justice Vibhu Bakhru said on Monday that prima facie these products do not fall within the definition of a “drug”.

“…..the Court is, prima facie, of the view that the products do not fall within the definition of a “drug”, as defined under section 3 (b) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940,” the court said.

“If the product in question is not a drug, respondent no 1 (DHGS), would not have the jurisdiction to issue the impugned circular. In this view, the impugned communication and impugned circular are stayed, till the next date of hearing,” it said.

The court’s decision comes on a plea by Litejoy International Private Limited, which through one of its directors Lokesh Jain had challenged the February 22 order of the DGHS to ban e-cigarettes and similar such projects.

Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Sandeep Sethi contended that vaping device is not akin to a cigarette and has been internationally recognised as a healthier alternative to traditional tobacco smoking.

Sethi said that the use of such a device is not just an alternative effective nicotine delivery system but is universally marketed and sold as a substitute for traditional tobacco cigarettes. These devices enable cigarette smokers to switch to safer methods of nicotine consumption without the overreaching harmful impact of cigarettes, he said.  Enditem