CHCHAPTER 6
Insulating Public Health Policies from Industry Interference
Back to top

Chapter List

Chapter 6

Insulating Public Health Policies from Industry Interference

The tobacco industry is not like any other business. Despite selling a highly addictive and inherently defective product that kills up to two thirds of its consumers, it continues to escape commensurately stringent regulation of its business and products by interfering at all levels of tobacco control policy development and implementation. Through both overt and covert means, the industry uses its massive resources to deter and thwart governments' efforts from implementing effective tobacco control measures and protecting public health policies. Tobacco industry interference remains a major problem in the ASEAN region as in other parts of the world.

The tobacco industry employs an extensive range of unethical and intentionally orchestrated tactics and strategies, at both the country level and internationally, to directly and indirectly challenge, defeat, discredit, dilute, obstruct, delay and circumvent implementation of effective tobacco control measures. These include political lobbying to manipulate and hijack the political and legislative process through drafting and distributing industry-friendly legislation, providing incentives to government officials and politicians to take a pro-industry position, and hiring former prominent government officials or appointing them to be tobacco industry spokespersons or board members. Other tactics include intimidating governments and individuals with litigation or threat of legal suit, mobilizing front groups to advance its cause, and making false claims and spreading half-truths and misinformation through position papers, news items, posters, and paid ads.

Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC requires Parties, when setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control, to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law. By unanimously adopting the WHO FCTC Article 5.3 Guidelines at the third session of the Conference of the Parties (COP3) in 2008, Parties to the treaty formally recognized the irreconcilable conflict between the tobacco industry's interests and public health policy interests.

Within ASEAN, eight countries (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand) have taken concrete steps to protect their public health policies from tobacco industry interference by developing a policy, guidelines, or a code of conduct to prevent unnecessary interactions with the industry and ensure transparency of any interactions that do occur, while Malaysia and Vietnam still have to institute similar preventive measures in line with the Article 5.3 Guidelines. Only Brunei, Philippines and Singapore introduce a whole-of-government code of conduct or policy that prohibits unnecessary government interactions with the tobacco industry.

Regardless of such actions taken, there has been increasing industry interference in many countries, and this is expected to continue into the future. Hence there remains much room to institute or strengthen mechanisms at the highest levels to prevent or reduce such industry interference in tobacco control.

Implementation of FCTC Article 5.3 in ASEAN

Implementation of FCTC Article 5.3 in ASEANClick to enlarge

Tobacco companies' timeline of public deception

For decades, the tobacco industry has deceived the public for purposes of gaining more profit.

1950s

Harms of smokingConcealed evidence that cigarettes cause cancer while marketing products as safe

1960s

Addictiveness of smoking and nicotineConcealed evidence that cigarettes are highly addictive and in the 90s, swore under oath to deny it

1970s

Link of smoking to cancerSpent enormous amount of resources on disinformation campaigns and propaganda to negate and deflect the science clearly linking smoking to cancer

1980s

Harms of secoundhand smokeHired 'independent' scientists to support industry studies and questioned smoke-free policies

1990s

Dangers of tobacco's youth smoking prevention campaignsAimed programs not at reducing youth smoking but at harnessing “positive feelings” for tobacco companies

2000s

Benefits of smoking “light” and “mild” Misled the public that products are safer, use light/mild cigarettes to leverage on smoker's health concern to increase sales, and even designed new products that increase nicotine intake

Supporting WHO FCTC Falsely claimed that it is supportive of the WHO FCTC but in its internal documents, called the measures compliant with FCTC as “extreme”

Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control (GGTC)

The Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control was designated by the FCTC Secretariat to serve as the Knowledge Hub for Article 5.3 to support implementation of the Convention's obligation on protecting against tobacco industry. In 2019, the Knowledge Hub for Article 5.3 (GGTC) provided technical support to at least 12 countries in 8 regions to advance Article 5.3 implementation: Setting up Tobacco Industry Observatories and disseminating tools to counter tobacco industry tactics.

ggtc

Monitoring center

Monitoring center
Monitoring center
quick fact box

International Organizations such as the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) WHO, United Nations (UN) and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and UNESCO, have adopted or developed policies to be consistent with or to support the Implementation of WHO FCTC Article 5.3. It aims to address tobacco industry interference, and have the legal personality and medium to influence governments and international bodies.

Globally, there are 36 countries have adopted good practices and measures to prevent tobacco industry interference in the development and implementation of public health policies with respect to tobacco control in accordance with the recommendations provided by the Article 5.3 Guidelines.

No Smoking Sign

Implementation of FCTC Article 5.3 in ASEAN

Industry interference in policy development

The tobacco industry (TI) works to defeat, dilute, and delay effective tobacco control policy. They participate in different stages of policy development in order to undermine any stringent measure a government may propose.

brunei

Brunei

cambodia

Cambodia

myanmar

Myanmar

thailand

Thailand

thumbs up Brunei, Cambodia, and Thailand do not accept or endorse policy or legislative drafts by or in collaboration with the tobacco industry, nor invite the tobacco industry to sit at meetings where policies are decided.

thumbs up Brunei, Cambodia, Myanmar, and Thailand do not allow the TI to sit in inter-ministerial or committee meetings on implementing the FCTC.

Industry-related CSR activities

Tobacco companies are re-branding themselves as “socially responsible” and a “legitimate partner” for social and development causes. They use corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities to circumvent laws regulating the industry, and as a strategy to gain access to elected officials who are empowered to approve and implement tobacco control policies. The industry engages with non-health government sectors such as sports, education, environment, welfare and development, and law enforcement to whitewash its business agenda and dissociate its corporate image from the health harms caused by the products it manufactures and sells.

brunei

Brunei

cambodia

Cambodia

lao pdr

Lao PDR

myanmar

Myanmar

singapore

Singapore

thailand

Thailand

vietnam

Vietnam

thumbs up Among ASEAN countries, only Brunei, Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Thailand have banned all tobacco-related CSR activities, while Cambodia, Singapore, and Vietnam have banned the publicity of these activities.

Benefits to the tobacco industry

Except in Brunei and Vietnam, the tobacco industry continues to receive benefits in a variety of ways in most countries because their governments still associate economic value in the tobacco industry's business portfolio. Because of this preconception, the tobacco industry gains political capital to influence policies to its advantage.

cambodia

Cambodia

indonesia

Indonesia

malaysia

Malaysia

thailand

Thailand

thumbs down Cambodia deferred the adoption of the Joint Prakas between the MOF and MOH to implement the Tobacco Control Law's penalties (fines).

thumbs down Indonesia cancelled the scheduled 2019 tobacco tax increases and revoked the tobacco excise simplification roadmap.

thumbs down Malaysia deferred tax increases for 2019, introduction of standardized packaging, imposing retail licenses for tobacco product sellers, and banning all ENDS and electronic non-nicotine delivery system (ENNDS)) pending since 2016.

thumbs down Thailand deferred to 2021 the excise tax increase from 20% to 40% scheduled in 2019.

Forms of unnecessary interaction

Unnecessary interactions between government personnel and the tobacco industry still occur. With the exception of Brunei, all countries have documentation of such interactions that include senior government officials attending social functions with or accepting assistance and offers of partnerships from the tobacco industry.

cambodia

Cambodia

indonesia

Indonesia

lao pdr

Lao PDR

malaysia

Malaysia

philippines

Philippines

thailand

Thailand

vietnam

Vietnam

Attending social functions and junkets

thumbs down Malaysia Deputy Minister of International Trade and Industry attended an event by the American Malaysian Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) - PMI was a major sponsor.

thumbs down During the 74th UN General Assembly, the US-ASEAN Business Council (US-ABC) (PMI sits on its Board) and the US Chamber of Commerce held separate dinner receptions for the Prime Minister of Malaysia and Thailand together with their entourage of high-level officials.

thumbs down A group of Philippines legislators, including the chairs of the Committee on Health and Committee on Trade and Industry in the House of Representatives, went on a study tour to the UK. They met a Member of Parliament, David Amess who is a supporter of PMI's “Unsmoke Your World” campaign: and visited an IQOS shop escorted by PMFTC's Manager of Fiscal and Government Relations.

thumbs down In Vietnam, anniversary celebrations of Vinataba and other tobacco companies are attended by senior officials from the MOIT, Central Communist Party, and Commission for the Management of State Capital at Enterprises.

Accepting assistance and offers of partnerships

thumbs down Cambodia Minister of Information met with the Chair of China Huaxin Group to discuss a tobacco farming investment worth USD 2 billion.

thumbs down Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines, and Vietnam have accepted assistance from the tobacco industry to conduct anti-smuggling activities in the country.

Greater transparency needed

Most governments have no procedures in place for the disclosure of meetings and interactions with the tobacco industry or about entities, affiliates organizations and individuals acting on the industry's behalf such as lobbyists. While the tobacco industry can communicate with the government regarding its business, systematic recordkeeping to document what transpires or how the industry's agenda might impact policy (such as when the meetings take place, their purposes, or the contents and outcomes of such meetings) remains lacking.

malaysia

Malaysia

myanmar

Myanmar

philippines

Philippines

thailand

Thailand

vietnam

Vietnam

thumbs up thumbs down The Philippines' Joint Memorandum Circular (JMC) 2010 requires government departments to report on their interaction with the industry; however, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) does not have full information about meetings of other agencies with the tobacco industry. For example, while there are social media sightings and anecdotal information of different interactions between the tobacco industry and government agencies, the CSC reports that it has not received any documents or disclosure of any meetings or interactions as required by the JMC.

thumbs down Governments of Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam continue to interact (either in closed-door meetings or open interactions in) with the tobacco industry; however, details of these interactions are not accessible or made transparent to the public.

thumbs up There are certain domestic laws/regulations in all countries that require the tobacco industry to register aspects of its business operations (such as manufacturing, trading, revenues) in order to operate. For example, in Myanmar, a Special Goods Tax Law requires all manufacturing facilities and distribution chains to register with the government, while in the Philippines, corporate and business entities are also required to register with the BIR and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to operate.

myanmar

Myanmar

philippines

Philippines

thumbs up There are certain domestic laws/regulations in all countries that require the tobacco industry to register aspects of its business operations (such as manufacturing, trading, revenues) in order to operate. For example, in Myanmar, a Special Goods Tax Law requires all manufacturing facilities and distribution chains to register with the government, while in the Philippines, corporate and business entities are also required to register with the BIR and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to operate.

Conflicts of interest

brunei

Brunei

lao pdr

Lao PDR

vietnam

Vietnam

thumbs up One way the tobacco industry gains influence with governments is by subscribing to a patronage system - exchanging contributions for candidates, parties, and their election campaigns for political support. Brunei prohibits political contributions from the tobacco industry and political campaigns do not take place in Lao PDR and Vietnam because of their unitary/single party governments.

philippines

Philippines

thailand

Thailand

thumbs down In the Philippines (through individuals including industry representatives) and Thailand (with certain monetary limits) the tobacco industry is still allowed to give political contributions.

cambodia

Cambodia

indonesia

Indonesia

lao pdr

Lao PDR

philippines

Philippines

thailand

Thailand

vietnam

Vietnam

thumbs down Another way the tobacco industry influences public policy and creates conflict of interest situations is through the “revolving door”, where politicians or civil servants take up jobs as lobbyists or consultants in the area of their former public service or where former private sector employees accept government positions that regulate the sector they were once a part of. Revolving doors may undermine trust in governments because of the potential for real or perceived conflicts of interests regarding matters of the state.

Country Current/ former public service/ private sector employees Position/part of
Cambodia President of the LYP Group (owner of cigarette company Hero King) Senator
Indonesia Director of Beverage Industry, Tobacco Products and Refresher Materials, and the Head of Data and Information Center Indonesian Cigarette Manufacturers' Association (GAPPRI)
Lao PDR Vice Minister of Ministry of Industry and Commerce (MOIC), MOF and MOIC representatives Chair of the LTL Board Board of Management
Philippines Former Chief Justice and former Governor of the Philippine Central Bank Board of Trustees of Tan Yan Kee Foundation
Thailand CEO of Tobacco Authority of Thailand (TOAT) Government official
Vietnam Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT) officials Vinataba

Preventive measures

Article 5.3 details guidelines to protect against interference, not only by the tobacco industry but also by entities working in its behalf. Two elements are essential for achieving this outcome: a) governments need information about the industry's activities and practices to ensure transparency and accountability; and b) a code of conduct for the bureaucracy prescribing the standards they should comply with in their interactions with the tobacco industry or its representatives.

brunei

Brunei

cambodia

Cambodia

indonesia

Indonesia

malaysia

Malaysia

myanmar

Myanmar

philippines

Philippines

thailand

Thailand

vietnam

Vietnam

thumbs up Brunei, Philippines, and Thailand are leading the way in implementing a code of conduct for the bureaucracy prescribing the standards they should comply with in their interactions with the tobacco industry or its representatives.

thumbs up thumbs down Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam require the tobacco industry to submit information on tobacco production, manufacture, market share, and revenues; however, they are not required to provide information on marketing expenditures, expenses on lobbying, philanthropy, and political contributions.

Country Preventive measures limited to issuing authority Position/part of
Brunei Prime Minister Circular (code of conduct) - Prohibition of involvement of the tobacco industry and smoking in government premises
Prevention of Corruption Act*
Cambodia Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sport Circular on ban all forms of partnerships with tobacco industry among educational facilities including ban the use, advertisement, and display and sale of tobacco and alcohol products within campuses of public and private educational facilities Law on Anti-Corruption*
Indonesia Ministry of Health Guidelines for Managing Conflicts of Interest with the Tobacco Industry within the Health Ministry Ministry of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reforms Guidelines for Managing Conflict of Interest*
Several anti-corruption laws*
Lao PDR Ministry of Health Tobacco Control Code of Conduct between Government Health Sector and Tobacco Industry Law on Anti-corruption*
Malaysia Anti-corruption Commission Act*
Myanmar Ministry of Health and Sports Guidelines on contact with cigar and tobacco product manufacturer, distributor, seller or related person Anti-corruption Code of Ethics for Companies and Corporate Bodies*
philippines

Philippines

thailand

Thailand

vietnam

Vietnam

* Not specific to the tobacco industry.
Country Preventive measures limited to issuing authority Position/part of
Philippines Department of Education (DepEd) Order No. 6, s. 2012 - guidelines against tobacco industry interference

Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Memorandum (30 April 2012) - reiterates the JMC

Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Memorandum Order No. 16-2012 - restricts interactions with the tobacco industry

Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Memorandum (24 May 2013) - directs compliance with the JMC

Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) Memorandum (20 August 2013) - amends the Code of Conduct to include protection against tobacco industry interference

Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) Administrative Order No. 11-2019 - guidelines against tobacco industry interference

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Advisory No. 2019-501 - reminds public physicians to follow the JMC and avoid interaction with the tobacco and electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) industry
Senator
Thailand Ministry of Public Health Guidelines on Interaction with Tobacco Entrepreneurs and Related Persons Office of Civil Service Commission Regulation

Several anti-corruption laws*
Vietnam Ministry of Health Official Letter to other ministries, mass organizations, and the people's committees of the provinces and municipality on non-cooperation with Smoke-free World Foundation funded by PMI

Anti-corruption Law*
quick fact box

Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW) and its relationship with the tobacco industry.

In 2017, Philip Morris International (PMI) announced its financial support (USD 960 million for 12 years) for the establishment of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW), whose purported goal is to “eliminate smoking.” This wholly PMI-funded foundation presents itself as a tobacco control organization, but, unsurprisingly, its definition of “smoke-free” is fully aligned with PMI's “smokefree future” -- not eliminating tobacco use but switching smokers to so-called less harmful alternatives like electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS, also known as e-cigarettes).

For more detailed information