The tobacco industry can be likened to the proverbial devil that never sleeps. The last two years have witnessed a plethora of exposes on their behind-the-scenes activities including attempts to derail the implementation of the World Health Organisation – Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) and exploitation of war zones and unstable countries to sell their deadly products. Two leading multinational tobacco companies – British America Tobacco (BAT) and Philip Morris International (PMI) have been linked to the disturbing trends.
A Reuters report in July 2017 unveiled a massive, secret campaign by PMI to undermine the WHO FCTC, depicting “a company that has focused its vast global resources on bringing to heel the world’s tobacco control treaty.”
BAT was not only mentioned in allegations of widespread bribery and corruption in Africa, it was also heavily indicted in secret movement of millions of undocumented U.S. dollars across international borders into war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). An investigation by The Guardian of London exposed BAT’s role in flooding South Sudan with its cheapest cigarette brands following years of war and operating around Somalia to continue selling cigarettes in the country.
As if these were not enough, in September 2017, PMI announced it was funding a foundation for smoke-free world to the tune of $1 billion over a 12-year period beginning in 2018.
The foundation was formed to promote research into so-called “reduced-risk” products currently being developed and marketed by PMI and other tobacco companies. But the WHO swiftly warned its global partners to keep a safe distance from the foundation, insisting it’s WHO/FCTC and not PMI’s alleged ‘harm reduction’ business strategy or its foundation – represent global consensus on how to prevent and reduce tobacco use and associated death and disease. Renowned institutions across the globe were unanimous in their “No” to the PMI initiative.
Some of the denouncers include the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, the International Framework Convention Alliance for Tobacco Control, American Cancer Society, World Heart Federation, Physicians for a Smoke-free Canada, among others.
Also, 17 public health schools in the U.S. and Canada, including Harvard and Johns Hopkins, early this year also pledged not to touch any form of research money from the foundation, citing the fact that it is too closely tied to an industry that sells deadly products to millions.
But the warning of the WHO would seem not to have sunk into the ears of Nigerian authorities as the foundation is said to be in talks with the International Centre for Biotechnology (ICB) – a Category II Centre under the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) domiciled at the University of Nigeria Nsukka (UNN) to support alternative livelihoods for Africa’s smallholder tobacco farmers.
Though a host of public health experts have raised concerns about the foundation’s engagements with UNN, and even petitioned the Vice Chancellor, Professor Benjamin Ozumba, details of the talks are still not in the public domain. A local NGO – The Environmental Rights Action (ERA) – equally petitioned the institution cautioning that the institution risks undermining its reputation and credibility by associating with the Foundation hence it should distance itself from it.
It also alerted that the foundation had begun contacting civil society organisations, conference committees and other entities around the world to initiate dialogue and inform them about potential “funding opportunities.”
In the letter, the group said the work of the foundation will enable PMI to boost its credibility as a legitimate stakeholder in discussions about tobacco risk reduction while it continues to aggressively market its cigarette brands and instigate legal entanglements to derail countries acting to implement policies proven to reduce tobacco use.
It is noted that the foundation’s communications are currently targeting low-income, low-prevalence countries where reduced risk products represent a new business opportunity for PMI’s tobacco products, not a solution to the epidemic.
This development cannot be said to be the first of its kind and PMI is not alone in the scramble for an acceptable public image. BAT Nigeria (BATN) is also involved in similar schemes that it tags Corporate Social Responsibility through which it launders its image and strikes the pose of a stakeholder in Nigeria’s agricultural development.
Nigerians are, however, not fooled. Tobacco companies have always claimed they want to help find solutions to harm caused by their products. For nearly 70 years, they have funded so-called “independent researches” with manipulated outcomes to advance cigarette sales.
It therefore goes that the UNN owes Nigerians a response to the petition as it prides itself as an institution of global repute. If research institutes of its kind in other parts of the world have distanced themselves from the PMI-funded foundation, there is no reason why it should continue to play the ostrich to calls to make public what it has going on with the foundation.
Lagos.
