COP-4 overcomes industry efforts, delivers progress on global tobacco control

This is the COP-4 closing press release of the Framework Convention Alliance (fctc.org)

PUNTA DEL ESTE, Uruguay, Nov. 20, 2010 – The fourth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the global tobacco treaty ended Saturday with major achievements for public health in the face of unprecedented efforts by the tobacco industry to block progress in reducing the millions of lives lost annually to tobacco-related diseases.

The 172 Parties to the treaty, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), rebuffed a months-long, global industry campaign and approved guidelines on tobacco flavourings and additives (Articles 9 & 10). This occurred despite the industry’s efforts to paint the guidelines as a ban on certain varieties of tobacco that would put the livelihoods of millions of farmers in jeopardy, particularly in the developing world. Instead, COP delegates endorsed the guidelines’ aim of limiting flavourings that are used by tobacco companies to attract young smokers.

The COP also voted to create a working group that will draft guidelines on tobacco taxation. Tobacco tax increases are the single most effective short-term measure to reduce tobacco consumption, but are often blocked by lack of awareness in finance ministries of the added revenue (and public health gains) to be made.

“Despite a slow start by this COP, the decisions taken by the sovereign states that negotiated the treaty this week demonstrate a willingness to protect the health of the citizens of the world rather than the interests of the tobacco industry,” said Laurent Huber, Director of the Framework Convention Alliance (FCA), an alliance of more than 350 civil society organisations worldwide.

During the COP, industry-linked farmers’ groups erected a tent across from the conference centre, from where they continued their misinformation campaign about the guidelines on tobacco flavours. Industry representatives also infiltrated a number of Parties’ delegations.

“Credit must be given to host Uruguay, a small country that has stood up to a powerful adversary in the tobacco industry, for setting the tone of this COP. But we know the industry will not relent and will lobby very hard, at COP-5 or COP-6, against the adoption of strong and effective guidelines on tobacco taxation,” Huber added.

Friday’s decisions followed the adoption by the COP on Thursday of the Punta del Este Declaration, a vote of support for Uruguay, which has been forced to defend its ground-breaking tobacco control measures – including graphic warnings that cover 80 percent of tobacco packages – against a complaint by tobacco industry giant Philip Morris International at the World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).

The Declaration affirmed the right of sovereign states to adopt public health measures that affect the use of tobacco industry trademarks. It reaffirmed that tobacco packaging and labelling measures set out in the FCTC and its guidelines do not violate international trade and investment agreements.

Other important developments during the COP included a decision to continue negotiations on an illicit trade protocol and to initiate work on supporting Parties to deal with liability (Article. 19), as well as improvements to the FCTC reporting system. Guidelines on education, communication, training and public awareness (Art. 12) and cessation measures (Art. 14) were also approved.

A final decision on the COP budget was still pending Saturday morning; however, there were encouraging signs, said Huber, including a creative solution to make up a looming US$600,000 deficit.

“FCA urges Parties to adopt the same creative approach to funding the COP as they exhibited in earlier decisions this week. The lives of millions of people worldwide are at stake,” he added.

For further information contact FCA Communications Manager Marty Logan, in Punta del Este: tel from abroad: +598 99 705263, within Uruguay - 099 705263, or loganm@fctc.org

Health And Fitness For All Ages - Trafford

Health And Fitness For All Ages - Trafford

By Elpidio Dorotheo

• Published: January, 2008
• Format: Perfect Bound Softcover (B/W)
• ISBN: 9781412092487

Good health and a productive life are the most precious gifts that a person can ever expect to be blessed with by a loving Creator. Since the creation of man, there have been countless times when we could have chosen to live in good health and survive the onslaughts of time without much of the wear and tear that comes with aging. But many times we take a careless detour that often proves detrimental to our lives.

Make no mistake this is not an ordinary "learn and live well book." Each page depicts the author's meticulous attention to all ages by offering concrete advice and practical steps on how to start and maintain health and fitness through progressive exercise, proper supplementation and the adoption of an open positive outlook. This will afford one to look at life with adequate courage and determination to live well. These are the bare mechanics of survival in human existence.

So pervasive these days are the fear of growing old, catching an incurable disease or losing one's health through careless living. The thought of being helplessly overwhelmed by such situations can be intimidating but reading this book will be a tremendous resource for everyone who desires to survive and excel.

The beauty of this book is that it appeals to every age and promises to help those who would help themselves without any personal reservations in order to achieve positive power in their lives.

The chapters that deal with the ABC's of Health and Fitness serve the needs of everyone Through the Ages. Included also are the Nuts and Bolts of Exercise which are necessary to attain the level of fitness fitted to one's age. Additional steps of lighter exercise or Aerobics round up the Sections to Fitness and Healthful Living.

About the author:

Born in the Philippines, Elpidio S. Dorotheo is a man driven by an unselfish mission. He envisions the earth populated by healthy and fit people, of all ages, leading productive lives free from the stresses and bombardment of micro and macro chaotic waves that warp lives and the best of intentions. However, resigned to reality and its shortcomings, he remains determined to effect an improvement somehow in the lives of others.

In his youth, he had the blessings and support of a doting father who believed unconditionally in the positive benefits of physical culture. Encouraged, he delved deeply into the nature of bodybuilding and started sweating it out, committedly to build his own personal health and strength.

During World War II, he persevered in his bodybuilding regimen. At 16-years of age, he joined the resistance movement and was assigned to the signal platoon which saw him lugging communication equipment across mountains and forests. It was also this time that he had the good fortune of getting acquainted with the then future "Mr. America," Steve Reeves, who encouraged him to persevere in his weight training, so both of them could one day win the "Mr. America" and "Mr. Philippines" physique titles, respectively. Sure enough, Steve earned his coveted title of "Mr. America" in 1947. Five years later, the author garnered wide media coverage when he won the "Mr. Philippines" title.

During these celebrity stages, he decided to share his physical blessings with everyone who wanted to survive in this world actually adapting health priorities for themselves and encouraging others to join in the physical culture way of life.

Armed with adequate credits of Physical Education in college and a completed Physical Culture Course from England, he opened a health club and offered physical training home services. Among his clients were the children of Philippine President Marcos, a World Bowling Cup champion, senators, bank presidents, company executives, champion basketball and golf teams. To open up the minds of readers to the advantages of living, eating and exercising along healthy lines, he wrote numerous articles and a column on health and fitness.

In the Philippines, he served as one of two Undersecretaries of Youth and Sports, was also a Second Vice-President of the Philippine Amateur Athletic Federation (PAAF) as well as President of the Philippine Weightlifting Association and Running Clubs Association of the Philippines (RUNCAP) and a Bureau Member of the International Weightlifting and Physical Culture Federation.

In 1970 in Columbus, Ohio, he was one of seven international judges who voted for Arnold Schwarzenegger, of Austria as "Mr. World." In 1974, he was awarded the International Weightlifting Federation's highest award, the "Gold Medal of Service."

In defense of the PICTURE-BASED HEALTH WARNING LAW

Sunday, September 28, 2008
Tobacco control advocate Ulysses Dorotheo, MD
In defense of the PICTURE-BASED HEALTH WARNING LAW
By Perry Gil S. Mallari Reporter

The Philippines is in violation of an international treaty much of the world has been wise enough to heed. And with each day that we fail to comply more Filipinos spiral into addiction, die of debilitating diseases and cripple the economy. In September 5, 2005, the Philippines became a signatory to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the world’s first global health treaty signed by over a hundred nations.

As a party to this agreement, the Philippines is bound to implement its full measure come September 2008 including the passing of the Picture-Based Health Warning Law. The said bill when enacted would oblige tobacco companies to put graphic health warnings on cigarette packs.

The passing of the Picture-Based Health Warning Law is now stalled in the Lower House of Congress. Ulysses Dorotheo, MD, senior policy adviser of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Alliance, Philippines (FCAP), expresses his concern on the implications of the treaty violation both on public health and the country’s international reputation.

Strong opposition

Dorotheo blames the strong opposition by a number of lawmakers in the Lower House for the delay of the passage of the Picture-Based Health Warning Law. He narrates that trouble began after three public hearings when the Health Committee decided to put up a technical working group (TWG) to appease the two camps of lawmakers debating on the bill. “At that time, the goal of the TWG was to arrive at a consensus and determine revisions if there are any but what happened was there was no discussion of the law from the very beginning, the northern block of lawmakers was just there to kill the bill,” he bemoans.

Dorotheo named two congressmen—Rep. Eric Singson of Ilocos Sur and Rep. Vincent Crisologo of the First District of Quezon City—as the lawmakers who are foremost in opposing the Picture-Based Health Warning Law. “Their contention was that our six million tobacco farmers and their families in the Ilocos region would go hungry if the graphic health warning law was passed,” he points out.

Counterargument

Dorotheo admits that the number was quite sizeable so FCAP decided to determine the validity of the argument. “We went to the Ilocos region and talked to the farmers there and we found out that that was not the case. They are already starving and many are neck-deep in debts,” he relates. Dorotheo adds that a lot of farmers they interviewed were willing to shift from tobacco farming to cultivating other crops if only they have the technical know-how and resources. The reason behind this, the physician explains, is that cultivating tobacco is a very labor-intensive chore, “It usually involves the whole family from dusk till dawn robbing them of a quality life.”

Dorotheo reveals that a number of party-list organizations have already exerted efforts to help the impoverished tobacco farmers to make the shift from tobacco farming to cultivating alternative crops but their funds were not released until now. “I don’t know what these lawmakers opposing the graphic health warning bill are doing to address this problem,” he intones. Based on the FCAP’s investigation, Dorotheo is adamant that there is no correlation at all between the passage of the Picture-Based Health Warning Law and the economic condition of Filipino tobacco farmers.

Dorotheo says that 23 countries and territories in the Asian region including Thailand, Singapore, Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan and Hong Kong have already required the graphic health warning law. “Many of these states have lots of tobacco farmers but none of them suffered economically because their countries implemented the picture-based health warning bill,” he stresses.

Regardless of the impact of the graphic health warning law implementation on local tobacco farmers, two facts are undeniable:

1. The tobacco industry does not benefit the common farmer beyond meager sustenance. Despite centuries of trade and the great wealth accrued by cigarette companies, tobacco farmers remain poor.

According to the Solidarity of Peasants Against Exploitation (Stop-Ex) in August of this year, former tobacco farmers in La Union have successfully farmed corn for the last five years and could harvest and earn more with technical assistance from the government. With tobacco farming, traders charge high interest rates and control the buying price as a loan condition.

2. The cost to the national economy in lost man-hours, health expenses and mortality far outweigh any benefit the tobacco industry may produce.

According to the World Health Organization’s Smoking Statistics of 2002, “About 200,000 Filipino men will develop smoking-related diseases in their productive years of age. To provide health care for these sick men and to cover the loss in productivity, it was estimated that it would cost Filipino taxpayers some P43 billion… Every year, there are about 20,000 smoking-related deaths in the country… Tobacco use will drain nearly 20 percent of the household income of smokers’ families.”

Plan of actions

Dorotheo announces that FCAP is currently gathering support from other public sectors like environmental and urban poor groups to rescue the Picture-Based Health Warning Law. “This is for the good of everybody because it’s all about informing the public and the consumers of the lethal dangers of smoking,” he says, continuing, “The citizens must also do their part by writing their lawmakers, their priests and their business leaders on their concern regarding the issue.”

While the Picture-Based Health Warning Law was given a hard time in the Lower House, Dorotheo believes that it would sail smoothly in the Senate. “The two authors of the bill are Sen. Aquilino Pimentel and Sen. Pia Cayetano, the doctor says, adding, “The other senators say they want some clarifications but express no opposition to the law unlike some lawmakers in the Lower House.”

The intrepid physician emphasizes that there is really no rationalization for opposing the graphic health warning bill because it’s pro-health, pro-poor and pro-Filipino. “The lawmakers who are opposing this law are therefore anti-health, anti-poor and anti-Filipino,” he explains.

Dorotheo intones that there is one intervention that can pull out the Picture-Based Health Warning Law from the quagmire fast and that is if President Gloria Arroyo certifies the bill as urgent. “That would put more weight on the law,” Doroteo narrates spiritedly.

While violation of the FCTC treaty would not result in harsh sanctions like trade embargo, such act leads to the erosion of national pride and international shame. Dorotheo relates that the Philippines was among the countries that developed the guidelines for the FCTC. “The Philippines then made strong recommendations to shift from text-based health warning to picture-based health warning on cigarette packs and now we are not following it. On an international level, this will put our country to shame,” Dorotheo cautions.

An advocate, plain and simple

Dorotheo, who started as an FCTC volunteer in 2001, credits his parents as his main inspiration in being a stern tobacco control advocate. “They are both religious and have a heart for the poor,” he beams. During his early practice as a physician, he witnessed firsthand how tobacco made the poor poorer after they contracted tobacco-related illnesses such as lung cancer and emphysema. Dorotheo also noticed the scarcity of physicians involved in tobacco control advocacy. This, he took as a challenge to carry on the fight against the evils of tobacco.

From being an FCTC volunteer, Dorotheo eventually became one of the founding members of FCAP, the organization highly instrumental in the country’s ratification of the FCTC treaty. Currently, the FCAP is headed by two women doctors—Marilyn Lorenzo, MD, as president and Maricar Limpin, MD, as executive director. Dorotheo relates that the FCAP will continue to exist even when the Picture-Based Health Warning Law is passed, “It also has a watchdog function,” he clarifies.

To convey the dire circumstances of stalling the graphic health warning bill, the FCAP has set up “death clocks” on various locations in the country. It displays a countdown stating that for every day that passed without the bill being passed, the Philippines lost 240 Filipinos to tobacco-related diseases. “That’s 10 lives every hour,” stresses Dorotheo, concluding, “That’s a grim reminder not only to our policy makers but to our whole country as well.”

Online at: http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2008/sep/28/yehey/weekend/20080928week1.html

Business World: The tobacco industry unmasked

Opinion

Posted on 08:29 PM, November 14, 2010

Yellow Pad -- By Ulysses Dorotheo

The tobacco industry unmasked

In dealing with tobacco and its health, social, economic, and environmental harms, governments should be guided by the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This is an evidence-based treaty that reaffirms the right of all people to the highest standard of health. It is a response to the globalization of the tobacco epidemic, which claims 5.4 million lives each year.

One hundred seventy-one countries (including the Philippines) ratified the treaty in 2005, and is thus now part of the law of the land (superseding the Tobacco Regulation Act of 2003, orRepublic Act 9211). Under this treaty, the Philippines committed to a range of measures to curb tobacco use.

Recently, the Philippine Aromatic Tobacco Development Association, Inc. (PATDA) wrote President Aquino, with an attached petition from the very newly formed PhilTobacco Growers Association Inc. (PTGA). Such letter would have readers incorrectly believe that our tobacco farmers and the Philippine tobacco industry will be "obliterated" by the government’s fulfillment of its obligations under the WHO FCTC, particularly at the coming fourth session of Conference of the Parties (COP4) in Uruguay on Nov. 15-20, 2010. Philip Morris and the Philippine Tobacco Institute also support this myth.

The tobacco industry prides itself on paying approximately P25-30 billion in excise taxes. But such taxes are low, and such revenues have been eroded by inflation and other weaknesses in the current sin tax law.

Yearly, tobacco-related diseases claim at least 90,000 Filipino lives and cost our country P281-461 billion in health care expenditures and productivity losses. Reducing these significant losses requires principled and unwavering political leadership from the Aquino administration. We offer these facts in response to some of the misinformation being spread by the tobacco industry.

1. Contrary to PATDA and PTGA claims, the WHO FCTC has the welfare of tobacco farmers and workers in mind. Under Articles 17 and 18, the treaty requires parties to promote economically viable alternative livelihoods for farmers and workers and to protect the environment and the health of persons in tobacco cultivation and manufacture. The Article 17 and 18 technical working group, which includes tobacco-growing countries, was mandated to prepare a report on these matters; this progress report will be considered at COP4.

2. The COP4 agenda includes the adoption of draft guidelines to assist parties in implementing Articles 9 and 10 of the WHO FCTC (Regulation of Contents of Tobacco Products and Tobacco Product Disclosures). The PATDA letter misleads when it says the proposed draft guidelines include a "ban on all kinds of ingredients in the manufacture of cigarettes...." The guidelines recommend that parties "prohibit or restrict" ingredients, such as candy or fruit flavors, that help make tobacco products attractive and encourage their use, especially among young people. The draft guidelines are not explicit on the kind of prohibition or restriction that the parties may apply on tobacco product ingredients. They are recommendatory, and each party has flexibility on which tobacco product ingredients to prohibit or restrict, taking into account the national situation and other appropriate circumstances.

3. PTGA claims there is a need to protect the livelihood of more than 2.7 million tobacco farmers and their families (PATDA refers to "millions" of Filipino farmers). While tobacco control advocates fight to protect the health of 92 billion Filipinos, we also champion the tobacco farmers’ welfare, in contrast to exploitation by tobacco leaf traders and tobacco companies. Thus we urge President Aquino to order a review of RA 7171 to see if this law has truly improved the lives of our tobacco farmers in Region I. Or if it has only benefited the region’s politicians who receive 15% of the tobacco excise tax. For example, according to the Commission on Audit, the Ilocos Sur tobacco excise tax share under RA 7171 funded several highly questionable projects costing over 1.3 billion pesos. Even without tobacco control, our tobacco farmers are already destitute. Let us learn from countries that are dependent on tobacco growing for foreign exchange, such as Malawi and Zimbabwe (who are not parties to the FCTC); they have remained poor and continue to suffer economic woes.

According to the National Tobacco Administration, there were 43,500 tobacco farmers in 2009. At an average of five members per household, the number of tobacco farmers and their families would thus total 217,500. Since modern cigarette manufacturing is almost completely mechanized, we imagine that the few million claimed to be tobacco industry workers belong to the marketing, distribution, and retail sectors, and hence are not solely dependent on the industry for their livelihood. Where are the "millions" claimed by PATDA and PTGA?

4. While it may be good to protect the stakeholders of most industries, the tobacco industry is unlike any another. It makes and sells a product that kills half of all its regular users; causes widespread human addiction, disease, and disability; poisons and destroys the environment; and negatively impacts families and national economies. Therefore it is ridiculous and illogical for PATDA to request that the delegation to COP4 be composed of representatives who will protect the industry’s interests. Among others, such action would violate Article 5.3 of the treaty, which requires parties to protect its public health policies from commercial and other vested interests of the industry.

We therefore appeal to President Aquino to protect all Filipinos from the many health, social, economic, and environmental harms of tobacco use and the interference of the tobacco industry.

Dr. Dorotheo is a public health advocate with 10 years of experience in tobacco control, including participation in the development of the WHO FCTC and meetings of the Conference of Parties to the treaty. He is currently the project director for the Southeast Asia Initiative on Tobacco Tax of the Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA). He may be contacted at ulysses@seatca.org.

Published online at:

http://www.bworldonline.com/main/content.php?id=21157

Related articles

• "World health officials debate new tobacco controls" and related posts (health.am)

Philip Morris: double standards as usual

Knowing how hard tobacco companies like Philip Morris are fighting to prevent the placement of pictorial warnings on cigarette packs in the Philippines, one can easily see that the article below is plainly PROPAGANDA for the company. Nowhere in the article is mentioned that this is NOT a Philip Morris initiative, or that the graphic warnings are required by Mexican law (hence PM is forced to comply).


This reminds me of how PM is also fighting the plain packaging initiative of the Australian government, how Philip Morris, British American Tobacco, and Imperial Tobacco paid millions of dollars to a PR agency, the Civic Group, which told them to launch a campaign hidden under a third party like a retailers association.  Thus was born the industry front group, the Alliance of Australian Retailers.  See the link at the end for more details on this other true story!  

Philip Morris-Mexico to warn about smoking dangers
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS September 24, 2010, 11:23AM ET
source: http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9IEC4O80.htm

MEXICO CITY

Philip Morris-Mexico said it will start distributing cigarette packets with new, more graphic warning labels as required by an agreement with the country's health department.

The company, an affiliate of Philip Morris International Inc., said all of its cigarette packets will carry messages that warn about the dangers of smoking and the effects of second hand smoke.

Philip Morris said in a statement Thursday that starting Saturday cigarette packets from all of its 13 brands made at the company's two Mexico plants and sold all over the country will carry the new images and labels.

Mexican health authorities said there are 10.9 million smokers in Mexico and estimate half of them will die from smoking-related illnesses.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Leaks reveal Big Tobaccos $5M blitz (theage.com.au)

Sigareth?

Here's a cool comic strip "created by Titane Laurent for VISA Mauritius to promote having big graphic health warnings on cigarette packs".

See the whole comic strip at http://sigareth1.blogspot.com/

Don't be onion-skinned. Think about one tobacco-related death every 6 seconds.

Some weeks ago, President Aquino appointed Atty. Mabel Mamba to the board of PCSO.  For those who are in the tobacco control community, we know her as a spokesperson of the tobacco industry, particularly as the Government Relations Manager of Philip Morris Philippines, though she apparently had resigned earlier this year, as evidenced from the notes below. 

Given her (past?) relationship with Philip Morris, it is quite obvious that her appointment to the PCSO board seems contrary to the vision and mission of PCSO, that is to uplift the quality of life of the Filipino people by providing medical and health services to the disadvantaged sectors of society through a professional workforce with integrity, competence, a deep sense of accountability and transparency in all its official transactions (http://www.pcso.gov.ph/vision-mission.html).  It is also in violation of Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), to which the Philippines and 168 other countries are Parties.  Article 5.3 is a general obligation and states: "In setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control, Parties shall act to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law."

Thus Atty. Debby Sy, a staunch tobacco control advocate, wrote a private e-mail to other public health advocates to alert them to this situation.  How a private email ended up in the hands of Atty. Mamba is anybody's guess, but it did, and she was apparently "shocked, offended and upset" when she read it.  In response, she wrote a note on her Facebook page appended with a verbatim pasting of Debby's e-mail.  I have taken the liberty of pasting her note below (including Debby's e-mail), interspersed with my own comments.

Please take time to read up to comment #19.
--------------------------------------------------------

ASK FIRST

by Mabel P. Villarica-Mamba on Wednesday, July 28, 2010 at 7:49pm

I was appointed Member of the Board of Directors of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) by President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III on July 19, 2010. This is the fourth position I held in government.

After passing the bar, I ran for Vice Mayor of Marilao, Bulacan. It was my first time to participate in the election as a candidate although my family has been in public service since Marilao became an independent Municipality. I won by a large margin and I would have ran for higher office the following election. However, I got married in 1997 and relocated to Cagayan.

In 1998, President Joseph Ejercito Estrada appointed me Presidential Adviser on Youth Affairs. One of the programs we conceptualized which received numerous international awards and made a huge impact on high school student leaders was the “Responsible Students for Active Governance”, an inter-active leadership training workshop given to all public secondary student government officers nationwide. I was appointed concurrent Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the National Youth Commission (NYC) in 2000 and served until the expiration of my 3-year term in 2003.

[Dr. Yul's comment #1: What do these previous government appointments mean?  These came before her partnership and employment with Philip Morris.  Do they remove the fact that for a long time, she represented the interests of a large, well-resourced, and vile tobacco company, which is primarily a purveyor of disease, disability, and death among Filipinos?]

When I was elected as the first and so far only female National President of the Junior Chamber International Philippines (Philippine Jaycees), I embarked on various projects and activities which sought to give a face and a voice to the more than 200 JC chapters all over Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. Under my term, we distributed more than 1,000 shallow tube wells to provide potable water to public schools all over the country. Together with PHINMA, we implemented a project to benefit prisoners in provincial, city and municipal jails by providing their basic necessities, livelihood training and counselling. We also partnered with Philip Morris Philippines Manufacturing Inc. (PMPMI) on the Youth Smoking Prevention (YSP) Program in cooperation with the Sangguniang Kabataan National Federation. All projects received major awards in international JC conferences.

[Dr. Yul's comment #2: If she did such a great job, why does she feel the need to emphasize being the "first and so far only female National President of the Junior Chamber International Philippines (Philippine Jaycees)"?  Tooting her own horn...? See below re YSP.]

I was invited to join PMPMI when my term in the NYC ended. PMPMI was looking for a consultant familiar with the tobacco growing areas and Cagayan is one of the leading producers of burley tobacco. Moreover, I got to know more about the company and its principles because of our YSP Program. It sponsored the YSP program, including television advertisements and JC Creed and Prayer billboards, without requiring its company name and products to be acknowledged or included.

[Dr. Yul's comment #3: I believe Philip Morris targeted Mamba because she is a bright lawyer with community standing.  They are always on the lookout to hire bright and upcoming professionals, particularly lawyers, as well as people who are looked upon as community leaders, so that their company will appear to be a "socially responsible" company in spite of the many harms that it causes through its manufacture, promotions, and sales of cigarettes.]

[Dr. Yul's comment #4: Tobacco companies are really experts at spinning their Youth Smoking Prevention (YSP) programs, because they are able to fool many people into thinking that these are genuine efforts at preventing youth smoking.  Think about it though: if these YSP programs are really successful, then there will be no future smokers, and tobacco companies like Philip Morris would go out of business!  See my other blog entry regarding the truth about Philip Morris's (and other tobacco companies') YSP program.]

From being a consultant, I was asked to formally join the company in 2004 as Community Relations Manager. I was later promoted to Government Relations Manager in 2006 although I still continued to manage some of our community development projects. Despite the fact that there are a lot of career growth opportunities at PMPMI, I resigned on March 22, 2010 to work full-time on my husband’s campaign. I also felt that I have to devote more time to my family, especially so that our kids are in the formative age. Our eldest son is about to enter Grade 1 and we have a 1.8 year old toddler.

I will always be proud of my 7-year stay at PMPMI. PM is a responsible company although anti-smoking advocates may disagree with me. It has always conducted its affairs within the bounds of the law and its company policies are often stricter than the government’s. It informs the public about the risks and dangers of smoking, and has definite positions on various issues that are levelled against it.

[Dr. Yul's comment #5: Atty. Mamba "will always be proud" of her work with PMPMI.  Can we take this to mean that she will always defend this company and its actions?  If so, then her relationship with the company has not really ended, has it? Her succeeding sentences already show her defending the "legitimacy" of the company.]

[Dr. Yul's comment #6: Philip Morris has not always conducted its affairs with the bounds of the law.  It has been brought to court in the EU and USA and been found guilty in the US federal court on charges of cigarette smuggling and racketeering. In 2004, Philip Morris agreed to pay US$ 1.25 billion in exchange for the dropping of money laundering and smuggling charges against the company.  Sure, it didn't admit liability, but why pay such a big amount if you're innocent?  And what about the famous 1998 US Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) that Philip Morris and other US tobacco companies agreed to?]

[Dr. Yul's comment #7: Since when did a tobacco company like Philip Morris support regulatory policies that are stricter than the government's? As a result of the US MSA, millions of internal industry documents from Philip Morris and other companies have been made available to the public, and these show that Philip Morris has and will continue to fight government regulation with all its resources. Very recently, Philip Morris brought the Philippine Department of Health to court to stop DOH from implementing its order requiring tobacco companies to print pictorial health information on its packs.  Also this year, Philip Morris has sued the government of Uruguay over its law requiring large pictorial warnings. (Note: Over 35 countries and jurisdictions now require pictorial warnings on cigarette packs.) All over the world, Philip Morris also continues to fight bans on smoking in public, bans on advertising, tobacco tax increases, as well as a whole range of other evidence-based government regulatory efforts which are included in the WHO FCTC.  Philip Morris is always careful to say that it supports "sensible regulation," but it appears that its own interpretation of what is "sensible" is often not what is good for public health but only what is good for the company's profits.  Of course, the company has "definite positions on various issues that are levelled against it." What company would not come out with "positions" when it is being assailed for the devastating health, social, economic, and environmental harms of its product?]

[Dr. Yul's comment #8: Does Philip Morris really inform the public about the risks and dangers of smoking?  I sincerely doubt that.  The internal documents from the US MSA show that companies like Philip Morris publicly denied for many years the many health harms of smoking, despite knowing about these harms for decades.  And aren't health warnings placed to inform smokers about the harms of smoking, and doesn't Philip Morris have a long history of fighting health warnings?  See: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/12/suppl_3/iii13.full for an excellent analysis of how tobacco companies including Philip Morris fought health warning regulations for many years in Australia.  If Philip Morris was sincere about informing the public about the dangers of smoking, it should say "stop smoking" instead of "smoking is an adult choice".  Isn't Philip Morris saying it's okay to smoke as long as you're 18 years old or older?  It's like saying "Here's poison.  Take it if you like.  We only sell it."] 

While I maintain my friendship with the wonderful people I met in the company, I no longer have any ties with PMPMI or with any tobacco company or agency. If there is any remaining link with the tobacco industry, it is the fact that there are tobacco farms in some municipalities of Cagayan, including my husband’s hometown of Tuao. Our farms are planted with rice and corn as far as we are concerned. We are not engaged in any business that has to do with tobacco or cigarettes.

[Dr. Yul's comment #9: Hmm. Sure, technically, on paper, that sounds right, but see comment #5 above. What if PMPMI asks Atty. Mamba to help form a PMPMI-PCSO partnership, in violation of the WHO FCTC, as well as the joint memorandum circular issued by the Civil Service Commission and DOH prohibiting such a partnership?  Have those ties really been cut?]

Ever since we were very young, my father has made sure that my brothers and I know about our family and how it kept the family’s name clean and bereft of any controversy. When I married into the Mamba family, I found out that they also never took advantage of their position or got entangled in corruption. Because of these, my husband and I are starting to educate our own children to be upright, honest and responsible Filipinos.

[Dr. Yul's comment #10: My parents, God-fearing Catholics, also raised us to be upright, honest, and responsible Filipinos.  We can hope then that "upright, honest, and responsible Filipinos" will realize that companies like Philip Morris are only taking advantage of Filipinos in order to make a profit.]

I was, thus, shocked, offended and upset when I was given a hard copy of an e-mail sent by Debby Sy entitled “Pa-forward sa network ni PNoy”. She unfairly criticized the President by alleging that he appointed a representative of the tobacco industry to the PCSO, a government owned and controlled corporation that provides funds to the government’s health programs. She went further on to say that my appointment violates the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control’s provision prohibiting tobacco industry’s interference in government.

[Dr. Yul's comment #11: Atty. Mamba shouldn't be so thin-skinned.  She chose to work for Philip Morris; she should accept the criticism that comes with such a decision.  Furthermore, Debby Sy's email does not make a personal attack on her but rather laments the conflict of interest arising from the appointment of a (former) tobacco industry executive to a health-related government agency.]

[Dr. Yul's comment #12: Was Debby Sy unfairly criticizing the President? I've read her email several times, and I don't think she was.]

According to Debby Sy, ‘Atty Mamba, the PM Government Relations Mgr, is known in the tobacco control community as one who uses her network to defeat 100% Smoke Free initiatives in the local government level. She is the one who clinched the deal between Philip Morris and DOST last year to make it appear that they have a "partnership."

I have some friends in the tobacco control community such as Atty. Theodore Te and Atty. Rudy Quimbo, the former Chief of Staff of the original anti-smoking advocate, Sen. Juan Flavier. Like Debby Sy, I am also a graduate of the University of the Philippines. Teddy and Rudy can attest to who and what I am. I can easily make friends, I am good with names and faces, and I value and treasure friendships. Because of my affiliations, the government positions I have held in the past, my family’s and my husband’s political history and my work in the private sector, I had a chance to meet people from all over the country and around the world.

[Dr. Yul's comment #13: Good for you, Atty. Mamba. I'm also a UP graduate. So was Marcos.]

I do not believe that I am the only friendly person in the entire country whom the tobacco control community would single out to have a network that can defeat her organizations’ multi-million dollar funded projects. There are more than 3,000 municipalities, almost 80 cities and around 79 provinces (plus or minus a few here and there) in the Philippines. Further, the local chief executives and local legislative councils are elected officials. How can I, even with my charm and wit (ehem-ehem), defeat the anti-tobacco community? Who am I to dictate upon the local government units? I can only present the company’s position, if and when allowed, but the decision to pass or not to pass an ordinance is not within my control.

[Dr. Yul's comment #14: Doesn't being a Philip Morris Community Relations Manager and then Government Relations Manager require fostering vast networks as part of the job?  Anyway, I also don't believe that Atty. Mamba is the "only friendly [sic] person in the entire country" to be singled out by the tobacco control community.  That is because, unlike multi-million dollar transnational tobacco companies (and Philip Morris is the biggest one of them all), tobacco control advocates do not have money to waste on a single individual (some NGOs and individuals even have no money but depend on voluntary contributions).  Tobacco corporations, however, have millions/billions of dollars to spend on campaigns that include lunches and dinners with politicians and media practitioners, promotions of the company's so-called CSR, crafting sophisticated plans to circumvent tobacco advertising bans, visiting local chief executives to defeat smoke-free local legislation, etc.  I dare Philip Morris to publicly disclose how much they spend on advertising, promotions, sponsorships, CSR, and lobbying.  True, Atty. Mamba's "charm and wit" will not defeat the tobacco control community (we've been around long enough not to be fooled, and while we do not have millions like Philip Morris, we have the truth and public good on our side), but coupled with the distorted views the company presents to local government councils, they could unduly influence local government officials, who are not familiar with the many disguises and tactics employed by the industry.  For an overview and more info about tobacco industry interference, see: http://tobaccofreecenter.org/industry_watch/facts.]

With respect to the DOST (Department of Science and Technology), Debby Sy is again gravely mistaken. Our only partnership with DOST is limited to doing a research on possible uses of used cigarette butts. Since cigarette butts is said to be one of the leading polluters in the world, we designed a project which includes collection of used cigarette butts, recycling and education. DOST conducted tests to analyze the materials that make up the cigarette butt and what can be done with it. There is another project involving grants to health research in the provinces but it is not in partnership with DOST, but with some Regional Health Research and Development Consortia outside Metro-Manila.

[Dr. Yul's comment #15: Debby Sy talked about a PMPMI-DOST partnership, and Atty. Mamba confirmed it.  How can Debby Sy be "gravely mistaken"?  Additionally, the best way to deal with cigarette butts (which indeed are the #1 polluters of coastlines and other environments) is to encourage smokers to quit smoking.  This is why Philip Morris is looking into "recycling, education, etc.", because it wants to deceive the government and the public into thinking that these are the proper solutions and that it is being a "responsible" company.  This is the same for health research.  Why else would a company that is the cause of so much disease and death want to support health research?  Because it wants people to think it is "responsible".  The truth is that smoking, promoted by Philip Morris, is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 Filipinos every hour and 5.4 million deaths worldwide every year.]

Early in Debby Sy’s discussion, she avers that “I am sure PNoy, an advocate of anti-corruption, did not intend any of these violations, nor did he intend to be associated with an industry that has historically, even globally, been associated with corrupt officials. And that as soon as he realizes this, he would revoke the appointment of Atty Mamba.” If I understand Debby Sy’s argument correctly, she seems to be saying that the President should revoke my appointment because I am connected with PMPMI which belongs to an industry that she alleges is associated with corrupt officials. Where is the logic here?

Actually, I do not even have to expound on my discussion. It would have been enough to defeat (yet again?) her entire argument by simply saying that I am not the Government Relations Manager of PMPMI since March 22, 2010. After all, the whole point of her malicious, baseless and poorly researched e-mail is that I am an employee of PMPMI and therefore, I should not be appointed.

[Dr. Yul's comment #16: Technically, Atty. Mamba appears to be correct, having resigned from PMPMI in March 2010.  But as I said above, does her resignation mean that she will no longer promote the interests of Philip Morris? How can we be sure?]

[Dr. Yul's comment #17: Atty. Mamba is missing the point of Debby Sy's email, which is the issue of conflict of interest on the part of a government official, who had (?) ties to a tobacco company.  There is a basis.  And is Atty. Mamba sure the email was sent with malice?  Is this a real accusation, or simply a venting of seeming frustration? See comments #18 and 19 below.]

One does not have to be a lawyer to know that before we assume anything, ask first. How hard is it to do?

[Dr. Yul's comment #18: What if I, a non-lawyer, had wanted to write such an email?  Who would I ask?]

Unfortunately for Debby Sy, she failed to ask. And unfortunately for me, I am having sleepless nights, anxiety attacks and unproductive working hours due to Debby Sy’s recklessness (or is it intentional on her part to besmirch my reputation?). This is even made much worse when a certain Anna Leah posted Debby Sy’s e-mail on her Facebook Account. Now, it is not only the President’s network that is being misled by Debby Sy. It also includes Anna Leah’s Facebook friends, and who know who else’s, and on which social networking site.

Dean Marvic Leonen and I have a common friend, Atty. Kenneth Benedicto. Kenneth is a good friend from the Jaycees. He suggested I add Dean Leonen as a friend on Facebook. I did not and I just let Dean Leonen’s picture and name stay in the list of suggested friends for so many months. At that time, a group of UP Law Students filed a case against PMPMI. I believed it was improper to add him as a friend because it might be misunderstood that I was trying to get him on the side of PMPMI. I never post anything about PMPMI’s positions on my Facebook account but I do not want to be misinterpreted of improper behavior. It was only when Dean Leonen himself added me as a friend that I clicked on the confirm button. I thought that this cannot be taken against me anymore even if I was a PMPMI employee when I made the confirmation. My profile includes my employment history.

[Dr. Yul's comment #19: I can't speak for Debby Sy, but I would never have thought to look up Atty. Mamba (or any other tobacco industry executive) on Facebook! And unfortunately, it seems that her FB page is the only place on the internet where anyone might see that she stopped working for PMPMI last March.  Anyone else who was not a friend of Atty. Mamba would have come to the same conclusion that she was still working for PMPMI as its Government Relations Manager.]

I have informed Dr. Jaime Montoya of the DOST about Debby Sy’s e-mail, as well as Teddy, Atty. Jay-jay Disini, Atty. Lindeza Rogero-Gavino, Atty. Glenda Biazon and Atty. Rowie Morales. Teddy asked me if I want to talk to her. I declined. I told Teddy that I do not want to be difficult but Debby Sy wrote and spread her e-mail before she even bothered to ask. How sure am I that she won’t concoct a different story about our meeting, if I agree to meet with her.

[Dr. Yul's comment #20: Interesting, since it is tobacco companies like Philip Morris that have a reputation for spinning half-truths out of the whole truth.  This is why tobacco control advocates worldwide refuse to meet with tobacco executives outside of a public hearing.  This is also why the Article 5.3 of the FCTC calls for protection of public health policies from the commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry.] 

I hope that her network will find out what she has done to me and my family. I am still not sure if I will file a case against her. This is serious business which can potentially ruin her career, both as a lawyer and as an anti-smoking activist. I do not want to do this to a fellow female lawyer. That is why I am taking the time to ASK FIRST my lawyer-BFFs .

[Dr. Yul's comment #19: It's very easy to claim emotional and psychological distress (sleepless nights, anxiety attacks and unproductive working hours), but since I do not know Atty. Mamba and her family, I can't comment on the veracity of the claim.  But what about the emotional and psychological distress brought about by more than just a single email?  I'm talking about putting oneself in the shoes of the wife or child of a smoker who is suffering from emphysema or lung cancer, or is debilitated from a heart attack or stroke brought about by smoking cigarettes made by Philip Morris?  It's not just the thought of the high cost of his medications, the debts incurred to pay his hospital bill, or the loss of income when the family breadwinner dies...it's the loss of a husband, father, and brother.  Multiply that by the thousands and millions every year.  That's what we should be distressed about.]

Here is Debby Sy's letter:

What is worse than Philip Morris offering help to PNoy..... is PNoy appointing the Philip Morris (PM) Government Relations Manager to the Board of Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO)!

Appointing such a prominent person from the tobacco industry to a government post that provides funds for health programs, violates the treaty obligation to protect public health policies from the vested interests of the tobacco industry(Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC).

It also violates the principle behind the recent issuance of the Civil Service Commission to protect the government from tobacco industry interference in order to promote transparency and integrity in government.

I am sure PNoy, an advocate of anti-corruption, did not intend any of these violations, nor did he intend to be associated with an industry that has historically, even globally, been associated with corrupt officials. And that as soon as he realizes this, he would revoke the appointment of Atty Mamba.

In the past months, the government has been clear about its position against tobacco industry interference. Early this year, the DOH warned government agencies of the dangers and conflict of interest of "partnering with or receiving contributions from the tobacco industry." Early this month, the CSC-DOH Joint Memo to Protect the Bureaucracy from Tobacco Industry Interference took effect. The DOH Memo on the same topic has also been in effect since last month. Both Orders, consistent with Article 5.3 of the FCTC, prohibit government personnel from interacting with the tobacco industry unless strictly necessary for its regulation or control.

The tobacco industry on the other hand, has been clear about its position against the government. Philip Morris and Fortune Tobacco sued the government for issuing an order to require that Tobacco Industry to place Graphic Health Information on cigarette packs to promote the right to health information. These cigarette companies also threatened to sue local governments which try to implement laws to promote the right to health.

So I am almost certain that PNoy did not mean to ignore the government position to protect the bureaucracy against tobacco industry interference by promoting a high ranking tobacco industry official to a government position. He may have just overlooked Atty Mamba's credentials.

Atty Mamba, the PM Government Relations Mgr, is known in the tobacco control community as one who uses her network to defeat 100% Smoke Free initiatives in the local government level. She is the one who clinched the deal between Philip Morris and DOST last year to make it appear that they have a "partnership."

By definition, "tobacco industry" is one who works to further the interests of the tobacco industry and this includes Atty Mamba. This appointment exposes public officials and employees to possible violation of the CSC Memo by forcing them to deal with this member of the tobacco industry.

Because of the nature of PCSOs work in the health field ( providing funds for health programs), there is apparent conflict of interest and bad taste in putting an official known to be from an industry responsible for death/diseases in the said agency.

The Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) is the principal government agency for raising and providing funds for health programs, medical assistance and services, and charities of national character.

We need to take immediate action on this to have the appointment revoked. I hope someone can start a petition or send a letter to PNoy...

Best,

debby 

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gov't agencies told not to accept gifts from tobacco firms (business.inquirer.net)
• "Filipino girls among biggest smokers in the world - WHO" and related posts (thepinoy.net)

Youth are targets of tobacco companies

This is copied from

http://www.preda.org/main/archives/2010/r10081801.html

Youth Are Prime Target of Killer Cigarettes  

(republishing, copying, no restrictions)
By: Father Shay Cullen

Cigarette Smoking can cause cancer in the neck.

It’s when the frightening desperate gasping for breath fills the house and the fifty-five year Pedro Galmanan, father of five, struggles to suck oxygen into his lungs to stay alive and his children realize the terrible effects cigarette smoking has on their father.

His addiction to cigarettes cost him his job, drove the family into poverty and his withdrawal symptoms were an agony to witness. They now watch their father slowly die wheezing as the emphysema consumes his life.

Tobacco is a killer, a poison of mind and body, its addicting and destructive of families. Besides causing cancer, especially lung cancer, and other diseases such as cardiovascular, pulmonary, metabolic diseases, the smoke causes heath problems to bystanders too.

In the Philippines, it is estimated that cigarette smoking kills as many as 250 people a day, 90,000 a year. The greatest evil is that tobacco companies are targeting the youth and succeeding in addicting them in their thousands every year.

The tobacco industry must recruit new young smokers and addict them for life to continue its profit making business since it is aggressively killing off its customer base with its poison product. The dead have to be replaced with the living. In Indonesia alone cigarette smoking kills as many as 400,000 people a year and costs the nation billions of dollars in health costs.

The Philippine tobacco industry, whose interests are represented by the Philippine Tobacco Institute (PTI) are a powerful and influential lobbying body. Members and supporters include the Philippines’ biggest tobacco firm, Lucio Tan’s Philip Morris-Fortune Tobacco Corporation, and other corporations like the Anglo-American Tobacco Corporation, La Suerte Cigar and Cigarette Manufacturing Inc., and Mighty Tobacco Corporation.

As the name suggests they have mighty influence in the Philippine congress and allegedly donate to politicians. Influential lobbyists allegedly manipulated the congress to water down the stronger provisions of the proposed anti-smoking law (RA 9211 passed in 2003), with words that they can now use to their advantage to prevent stronger health warnings on cigarette packs such as graphic pictures.

The newly appointed Department of Health (DOH) Secretary Enrique T. Ona has vowed to implement the departments order (AO 2010-13) issued by the previous health secretary Esperanza Cabral to have the tobacco companies print graphic images on their cigarette packs as health warnings as they do on there export packs as required by Singapore and Thai law.

The DOH order was immediately and aggressively opposed by the tobacco lobby led by the president of the Philippine Tobacco Institute Rodolfo Salanga. He warned Secretary Cabral that such images would be illegal under RA 9211. But he has been shown to be incorrect since the present law only forbids additional text, not pictures, to be added to the pack.

The graphic images have the most powerful deterrent effect on youth. It is one of the recommendations of the World Health Organization’s framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) which demands the 168 signatories, like the Philippines, to “implement large, rotating health warnings on all tobacco packaging and labeling”. Already 38 countries have implemented the picture-based warnings and the 27 member European Union has recommended each member to implement it.

Fortune Tobacco Company headed by the tycoon Lucio Tan won a preliminary injunction against the health department to stop the implementation of the order that was issued May 24, 2010 to place the picture-warnings on the packs. Judge Reyes of Marikina ruled last July 1, in favor of the company.

The power and influence for the tobacco industry worldwide is well known and actively opposes every restriction that will save people from smoking related ill-health. These tactics are so well known that the WHO convention against smoking had this to say to nations who are party to the convention: “In setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control, Parties shall act to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law.” WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Article 5.3

There is a battle out there in the world, in every country where cigarettes are sold and millions of victims are facing the possibility of a very painful and agonizing death from smoking related diseases. We have to do all we can to stop the promotion and sale of killer cigarettes.

email: preda @ info . com . ph , www.preda.org

NIGERIA: Tobacco Companies Are In A Losing Battle, Say Govt...

Quotable quote: "I did researches on history of the product and its liabilities, the litigation in US, the discoveries, the misrepresentations, and the fraud. I doubt if there’s anyone out there who will start where I started, review what I have reviewed, arrive where I am now, and will not be outraged. The only reaction I consider appropriate is outrage."

Tobacco Companies Are In A Losing Battle, Say Govt Lawyers
- Fisayo Soyombo

Source: The Guardian Nigeria

or nigerianationaltobaccocontrolbill.blogspot.com

THE resolve of the Federal Government to seek legal redress against tobacco companies, for targeting children and underage smokers and overburdening the health system, continues with a suit that is still in its preliminary stage after two years. While government has demanded compensation of £22 billion for expenses on tobacco-related diseases, concerned companies have maintained that the figure is unjustifiable and other allegations are unproven.

But government lawyer, Babatunde Irukera of SimmonsCooper Partners, describes tobacco as an anomaly because “it doesn’t comply with the general product-liability theory of liability, which mandates a company to take responsibility for injuries that arise from the use of its product when it is used in the manner and for the purpose it was set out to be used.”

“Tobacco is the only product I know, that, used exactly the way it was designed to be and for the purpose for which it was designed, causes injury or fatality. I wanted to know why consumers were interested in using a product, which they know serves no other purpose other than to injure or kill? I wanted to know why manufacturers would not modify a product designed in this manner. So, I did researches on history of the product and its liabilities, the litigation in US, the discoveries, the misrepresentations, and the fraud. I doubt if there’s anyone out there who will start where I started, review what I have reviewed, arrive where I am now, and will not be outraged. The only reaction I consider appropriate is outrage, even from defence counsels.”

But there are arguments that tobacco smoking is a matter of choice, and as such, the whole noise about cigarette is unnecessary. He disagrees: “It is not a matter of choice, for the vast majority of smokers. There is a very common Latin theory of law, which means voluntariness should not result in injury. You cannot make a choice to voluntarily accept to do something and then hold someone else responsible for the resulting injury. But that’s just the way it looks upfront. As you go a little further down, you see that choice is a matter of entire control.

“In making a choice, you must exercise control over the entire factors and dynamics of the choice-making process. But that doesn’t happen in the smoking game, because as a matter of law, a minor is incapable of making choice, because of the way minors think and the kind of choices they would make. That is why they can’t vote, because we don’t think that they have the capacity to exercise choice in a manner that is consistent with appropriate life expectation. So, the tobacco companies target these minors, who are not in a position to look at something from a risk analysis standpoint. So, if you can get a minor to smoke, the question of whether they are making a choice on what is dangerous or not does not occur.”

So, when minors become adults and are aware of the dangers, why don’t they quit? “The business model of tobacco companies,” Irukera explains, “is to target minors and addict them in such a way that it becomes a dependency issue. So, even when minors become adults, they are dependent. So, in all of these, the element of choice is completely eliminated.

“But one last thing about choice is that you make a mistake to think that the only person who is at risk of injury is the smoker. What about other people in public places, or family members, whose exposure to tobacco smoke makes them no less susceptible to serious diseases or death, than the smoker. And the argument may arise that it is in his home. I haven’t seen anywhere in our laws where a man can take prerogative of the right to kill his child. Or, where a woman, exercising her prerogative, chooses to become pregnant, yet under law loses that prerogative to determine whether to abort that child or not. So that whole question of choice is a contrived defence by the industry.”

IRUKERA would have none of claims by Catherine Armstrong, BAT’s spokesperson in London, that government’s £22 demand for tobacco-induced expenses “does not add up.” “The question I would have loved Mrs. Armstrong to answer is how £22billion in profit adds up to five million people dying annually. You know, there are certain situations you are in, and you know frankly that silence is just better than any response. We are talking about tobacco companies that have said they should be appreciated, because when people smoke and die, the government is socially responsible to lesser number of people. Those are the questions Mrs. Armstrong should be addressing. However, what the government is talking about is damage that has occurred and is occurring, and extrapolating what the future damage would be.”

The way out, he says, is to make tobacco companies accountable to the society. “Since we are starting from way behind, as a developing country dealing with myriads of developmental issues, from malaria in the 21st century, to polio, infant mortality, maternal mortality, child education, illiteracy and governance, the most effective social approach is to hold the industry accountable. We don’t have the resources to start now, and then meet up down the line. We are talking about a society where there’s so much poverty, where some people still do not have water to drink. If a tobacco company puts up a well, what do you expect? We must get tobacco companies accountable; at a minimum, they must adhere to standards that have been adopted against them and for them in their own countries, because their business cannot run in England or US the way it runs in Nigeria.”

Another government lawyer, Dapo Akinosun, thinks same of tobacco, saying that the industry will be regulated, no matter the duration of the legal tussle. “Tobacco is a dangerous product, and for many years, we were deceived into smoking it. I was a victim when I was younger. I was lucky to stop. I have no health defects because the human body can naturally repair itself, depending on the level of damage. But in some cases, damage can be irreparable.”

He also expresses confidence that the case will be won by government: “There is always the victory of right over wrong, of good over evil. Of course, tobacco companies have very deep pockets, but as you can see all over the world, they are in a losing battle; it’s only a matter of time. We know that if the society does not stop them, we will someday get to a level where four-year-olds smoke.”

ALL efforts to get pro-tobacco lawyers to discuss the myriads of allegations against the product and their makers were met with polite reticence. Fourth defendant, Mrs. Funke Adekoya SAN, Managing Partner, AELEX Legal Practitioners and Arbitrators, when contacted on phone, said: “Well, I’m sorry. I’m involved in the litigation, so I’m not in a position to speak on it at all. No, I can’t say anything on it.”

Also, third defendant, Elias Gbolahan, declined to speak, saying: “I don’t even comment on cases that I am not involved in, not to talk of cases that…. It can’t happen now, it’s unprofessional. I have absolutely no comment sir. I’m sure there would be other people who would probably be happy to talk to you. I don’t think it is right to comment on the pages of a paper.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Wikileaks and White Glove Deaths (psychologytoday.com)