how tobacco industry hijacked public health agenda
DESCRIPTION
A presentation by Hemant Goswami on How tobacco industry have managed to manipulate the public health agenda over the years. Quoting from the tobacco industry documents itself, Hemant demonstrated the tactics the industry uses to plant tobacco control legislations themselves to prevent any effective and powerful legislation from coming into effect. Example of how Indian Tobacco Control law has been weakened by the industry influence has also been given by Hemant in the presentation.TRANSCRIPT
how how how how Tobacco ControlTobacco ControlTobacco ControlTobacco Control agendaagendaagendaagenda and the and the and the and the
GovernmentGovernmentGovernmentGovernment’’’’ssss have beenhave beenhave beenhave been
manipulatedmanipulatedmanipulatedmanipulated by the by the by the by the Tobacco Industry?Tobacco Industry?Tobacco Industry?Tobacco Industry?
how how how how ‘‘‘‘Tobacco ControlTobacco ControlTobacco ControlTobacco Control’’’’ agendaagendaagendaagenda and the and the and the and the
GovernmentGovernmentGovernmentGovernment’’’’ssss have beenhave beenhave beenhave been
manipulatedmanipulatedmanipulatedmanipulated by the by the by the by the Tobacco Industry?Tobacco Industry?Tobacco Industry?Tobacco Industry?
The Real PictureThe Real PictureThe Real PictureThe Real Picture
Hemant GoswamiHemant GoswamiHemant GoswamiHemant Goswami
www.Tobaccowww.Tobaccowww.Tobaccowww.TobaccoFreeFreeFreeFreeIndia.OrgIndia.OrgIndia.OrgIndia.Org
SmokeSmokeSmokeSmoke----Free LegislationsFree LegislationsFree LegislationsFree Legislationssponsored by the Tobacco Industry?sponsored by the Tobacco Industry?sponsored by the Tobacco Industry?sponsored by the Tobacco Industry?
Around�the�late�1980s,�the�tobacco�industry�made�a�fundamental�shift�in�its�legislative�strategy�from�simply�fighting�bills�it�didn't�like,�to�actively�drafting�and�pushing�legislation�designed�to�head�off�public�resistance�to�its�products.�They�called�it�their�"proactive�strategy"�or�"throwing�bombs."�They�used�it�to�dissipate�opponents'�resources,�harass�them,�get�out�in�front�of�them�and�keep�them�from�causing�more�trouble�for�the�industry.�Related�strategies�to�manipulate�legislations�was�already�being�practiced�by�the�Industry�since�70’s.
Lessons in Legislative Manipulation From the Tobacco Industry by Anne Landman
[From the Tobacco Industry Documents Depository]
SmokeSmokeSmokeSmoke----Free LegislationsFree LegislationsFree LegislationsFree Legislationssponsored by the Tobacco Industry?sponsored by the Tobacco Industry?sponsored by the Tobacco Industry?sponsored by the Tobacco Industry?
TACTIC: Instead�of�a�Strong�Law,�Manipulate�to�Push�a�Weak�One�[That�too�at�the�federal�level]
One�corporate�legislative�"bomb-throwing"�tactic�involves�pushing�through�weak,�ineffective�laws�designed�to�head�off�more�restrictive�ones.�
The�Industry�uses�friendly�legislators�to�introduce�and�steer�the�bills�and�amendmends.�
The�Tobacco�Industry�Strategy�has�been�clear; "Publicly,�tobacco�industry�advocates�should�express�the�position�that�NO�smoking�restriction�law�is�desirable. If�pressed,�they�should�acknowledge�that�uniform�regulation�throughout�the�state�is�preferable�to�the�state�of�confusion�which�now�exists. Privately,�our�lobbyists�would�of�course�encourage�legislators'�support�of�the�substitute�[weak]�bill.“
The Proactive LegislationThe Proactive LegislationThe Proactive LegislationThe Proactive Legislation
Why�Industry�Pushes�
Smoke-Free�
Legislations?
Tobacco Industry Ensures Tobacco Industry Ensures Tobacco Industry Ensures Tobacco Industry Ensures ComplianceComplianceComplianceCompliance
Promoting�laws�Which�do�not�hurt�their�business
Building RelationshipsBuilding RelationshipsBuilding RelationshipsBuilding RelationshipsA Part of Well Planned StrategyA Part of Well Planned StrategyA Part of Well Planned StrategyA Part of Well Planned Strategy
What�is�Grasstops?
The The The The GrasstopsGrasstopsGrasstopsGrasstops StrategyStrategyStrategyStrategy
THE INFLUENCE OF THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY ON EUROPEAN TOBACCO-CONTROL POLICY - Gerard Hastings, Kathryn Angus.
The Industry FearsThe Industry FearsThe Industry FearsThe Industry Fears
And�the�Proactive�Strategies
Engage with LawmakersEngage with LawmakersEngage with LawmakersEngage with Lawmakers
USING�RELATIONS�TO�AVERT�POSSIBLE�REGULATIONS
The Game PlanThe Game PlanThe Game PlanThe Game Plan
Evaluating�Legislation�and�Deciding�Which�Will�Get�Through
Are we sitting DUCKS?Are we sitting DUCKS?Are we sitting DUCKS?Are we sitting DUCKS?
The�Industry�Claims�– way�back�in�1994
[We�Have�Passed�Tobacco�Control�Legislations]
Who Is the Winner?Who Is the Winner?Who Is the Winner?Who Is the Winner?
Tobacco�Industry�or�the�Public�Health�Advocates
We�Have�Actually�Lost
Indian LegislationIndian LegislationIndian LegislationIndian Legislation
Indian�Tobacco�Control�Legislation�was�passed�on�April�30,�2003�(By�the�Upper�House�too).�It�does�not�refer�to�the�FCTC�but�rather�reads;
“WHEREAS,�the�Resolution�passed�by�the�39th�World�Health�Assembly�(WHO), in�its�Fourteenth�Plenary�meeting�held�on�the�15th�May,�1986�urged�the�member�States�of�WHO�which�have�not�yet�done�so�to�implement�the�measures�to�ensure�that�effective�protection�is�provided�to�non-smokers�from�involuntary�exposure�to�tobacco�smoke�and�to�protect�children�and�young�people�from�being�addicted�to�the�use�of�tobacco;�AND�WHEREAS,�the�43rd�World�Health�Assembly�in�its�Fourteenth�Plenary�meeting held�on�the�17th�May,�1990,�reiterated�the�concerns�expressed�in�the�Resolution�passed�in�the�39th World�Health�Assembly�and�urged�Member�States�to�consider�in�their�tobacco�control�strategies�plans�for�legislation.”
QUESTION: Why�was�there�such�a�haste�– When�the�FCTC�negotiations�had�already�reached�its�final�stage,�why�the�hurry?�When�the�Indian�government�was�a�part�of�the�FCTC�negotiation;�why�there�is�no�reference�of�the�same�in�the�tobacco�control�legislation?�And…
Any�Guesses?????
Over the Years Tobacco Over the Years Tobacco Over the Years Tobacco Over the Years Tobacco control is handled by Federal/ control is handled by Federal/ control is handled by Federal/ control is handled by Federal/
Union Governments Union Governments Union Governments Union Governments –––– Why?Why?Why?Why?
EXAMPLE�– INDIA
According�to�the�Indian�Constitution,�all�trade�and�related�matters�are�a�subject�matter�of�the�State�
government�and�the�Union/Federal�Government�is�not�allowed�to�interfere�in�it�(except�for�specified�
items).�The�Seventh�Schedule�of�the�Constitution�provides�for�the�specific�list.�However�making�a�
departure�from�this,�a�specific�provision�was�inserted�in�the�“Tobacco�Board�Act,�1975” and�later�in�
“Cigarettes�and�Other�Tobacco�Products�Act,�2003�(COTPA)” which�declared�that,�
“It�is�expedient�in�the�public�interest�that�the�Union�should�take�under�its�control�
the�tobacco�industry.”
Thereafter�this�placed�“Tobacco” directly�under�the�control�of�the�Union�Government.�It�restricted�the�states�greatly�in�
matters�of�enacting�legislation�and�gave�the�final�authority�only�to�the�Union�Government�to�make�rules�(delegated�
legislation)�or�amend�the�law.
The Industry StrategyThe Industry StrategyThe Industry StrategyThe Industry StrategyGo for National/Federal LegislationsGo for National/Federal LegislationsGo for National/Federal LegislationsGo for National/Federal Legislations
FROM�THE�HORSE’S�MOUTH
Example Example Example Example ---- IndiaIndiaIndiaIndia
Section�4: No�person�shall�smoke�in�any�public�place:
Provided that�in�a�hotel�having�thirty�rooms�or�a�
restaurant�having�seating�capacity�of�thirty�persons�
or�more�and�in�the�airports,�a�separate�provision�for�
smoking�area�or�space�may�be�made.
This provision was inserted in the last minute on the basis of
a single half-page representation by the Hotel and
Restaurant Association. Prior to 2003, such a provision/ exemption did not exist in any of the State level tobacco
control legislations.
[Headed by ITC Limited, the biggest tobacco company in India. ITC operates a chain of big hotels in India]
Example Example Example Example ---- IndiaIndiaIndiaIndia
Section�5. (1)�No�person�engaged�in,�or�purported�to�be�engaged�in�the�production,�
supply�or�distribution�of�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�products�shall�advertise�
and�no�person�having�control�over�a�medium�shall�cause�to�be�advertised�cigarettes�
or�any�other�tobacco�products�…………………
Provided that�this�sub-section�shall�not�apply�in�relation�to—
(a)�an�advertisement�of�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�product�in or�on�a�package�
containing�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�product;
(b)�advertisement�of�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�product�which is�displayed�at�the�
entrance�or�inside�a�warehouse�or�a�shop�where�cigarettes�and�any�other�tobacco�
products�are�offered�for�distribution�or�sale.
This exemption did not exist in any of the State level tobacco control legislations. No body asked for it …. But
the exemption sneaked into the legislation…
Public PlacesPublic PlacesPublic PlacesPublic Places[An area fully exploited by industry to spread [An area fully exploited by industry to spread [An area fully exploited by industry to spread [An area fully exploited by industry to spread
confusion]confusion]confusion]confusion]
Section�2 (l)�“public�place” means�any�place�to�which�the�public�have�access,�whether�as�of�right�
or�not,�and�includes�auditorium,�hospital�buildings,�railway�waiting�room,�amusement�centres,�
restaurants,�public�offices,�court�buildings,�educational�institutions,�libraries,�public�
conveyances�and�the�like�which�are�visited�by�general�public�but does�not�include�any�open�
space;
Then�there�was�an�attempt�to�correct�it�in�the�rules�…..�Which�added�to�
more�confusion
Rule�2(c) “open�space” mentioned�in�Section�3(1)�of�the�Act�shall�not�include�any�places�visited�by�
the�public�such�as�open�auditorium,�stadium,�railway�station,�bus�stop�and�such�other�places;�
and�
This�was�further�complicated�(and�added�to�the�confusion)�by�the
October�2,�2008�notification�which�provided�even�a�newer�definition�
of�“Public�Places.”
Promoting Major AberrationsPromoting Major AberrationsPromoting Major AberrationsPromoting Major Aberrations
Provision of “The Cigarettes (Regulations of Production, Supply and Distribution), Act, 1975:”
Section�19: Offences�to�be�cognizable�and�bailable -
(1)�Notwithstanding�anything�contained�in�the�Code�of�
Criminal�Procedure,�1973,�an�offence�punishable�under�this�
Act�shall�be�bailable.
(2)�For�the�avoidance�of�doubts,�it�is�hereby�declared�that�
every�offence�punishable�under�this�Act�shall�be�cognizable.
New LegislationNew LegislationNew LegislationNew Legislation
Provision of “CIGARETTES AND OTHER TOBACCO PRODUCTS ACT, 2003:”
Section�27: Notwithstanding�anything�contained�in�
the�Code�of�Criminal�Procedure,�1973,�an�offence�
punishable�under�this�Act�shall�be�bailable.
(The�necessary�requirement�of�the�offences�being�
COGNIZABLE�is�missing)
Criminal Procedure CodeCriminal Procedure CodeCriminal Procedure CodeCriminal Procedure Code
THE�FIRST�SCHEDULE
II-CLASSIFICATION�OF�OFFENCES�AGAINST�– OTHER�LAWS
If�any�offence�is�punishable�with�imprisonment�for�less�than�3�years�
or�with�fine�only�it�is�triable by�any�magistrate�and�shall�be�treated�
as�Non-Cognizable(Unless�the�cognizability of�an�offence�is�mentioned�in�the�legislation)
Meaning�thereby: A�policeman/enforcement�officer�can�not�
make�arrest�without�warrant�and/or��register�FIR�or�investigate�
without�courts�prior�order.�
Both,�the�provisions�related�to�advertising�ban�as�well�as�the�graphic�
warning�are�stuck�in�this�technicality.
Makes it uselessMakes it uselessMakes it uselessMakes it useless
This�lacunae�leaves�the�pictorial�warning�
provisions�largely�un-implementable�and�
useless.�Only�a�highly�motivated�law�
enforcement�officer�is�likely�to�go�
through�the�long�process�to�book�any�
violator.�This�has�till�date�not�happened�
with�Section�5;�which�also�has�a�similar�
lacunae.�
Manipulation even with the Manipulation even with the Manipulation even with the Manipulation even with the public warning textpublic warning textpublic warning textpublic warning text
Rule�3�reads: Prohibition�of�smoking�in�a�public�place.�—(1)�The�owner�or�the�manager�or�in�charge�of�the�affairs�of�a�public�place�shall�cause�to�be�displayed�prominently�a�board,�of�a�minimum�size�of�sixty�centimeter by�thirty�centimetre in�the�Indian�languages(s)�as�applicable,�at�least�one�at�the�entrance�of�the�public�place�and�one�at�conspicuous�place(s)�inside,�containing�the�warning�“No�Smoking�Area�-Smoking�here�is�an�offence�
However�this�was�replace�by�a�new�regulation�recently�(in�2008). Interestingly,�no�one�from�the�tobacco�control�or�public�health�community�asked�for�it.�Effectively�it�reduced�the�size�of�the�warning�and�also�made�it�more�complicated�to�comply�with.�The�dangerous�thing�is�– No�one�noticed�this�change�or�questioned�why�this�was�done.�
Schedule�II�[�The�New�Provision�w.r.t.�the�warning�against�smoking�at�public�places]
1.�The�board�shall�be�of�a�minimum�size�of�60�cm�by�30�cm�of�white�background.
2.�It�shall�contain�a�circle�of�no�less�than�15�cm�outer�diameter�with�a�red�perimeter�of�no�less�than�3�cm�wide�with�a�picture,�in�the�centre,�of�a�cigarette�or�beedi with�black�smoke�and�crossed�by�a�red�band.
ExampleExampleExampleExampleDirect BribesDirect BribesDirect BribesDirect Bribes
All�the�major�political�parties�in�the�Indian�Parliament�were�given�donations�by�the�biggest�tobacco�company�“ITC�Limited.”
The�donation�(Official�– on�record)�runs�in�crores for�all�the�National�political�parties�in�India.
In�2005,�ITC�Limited�provided�1.44�crore Rupees to�the�Congress�and�1.37�crore to�BJP (The�ruling�and�the�opposition�political�parties�in�Indian).�
Some�of�the�parties�which�have�accepted�money�in�2005�from�ITC�Limited�are�All�India�Anna�DravidaMunnetra Kazhagam - Rs.�0.06�Crore;�All�India�Trinamool Congres - Rs.�0.04�Crore;�Bahujan Samaj Party�- Rs.0.19�Crore ;�Bharatiya Janata Party�- Rs.1.37�Crores;�Biju Janata Dal - Rs.0.11Crore�;�Dravida MunnetraKazhagam - Rs.0.16�Crore;�Indian�National�Congress�- Rs.1.44�Crores;�Indian�National�Lok Dal - Rs.0.03�Crore;�Jammu�&�Kashmir�National�Conference�-Rs.�0.03�Crore ;�Nationalist�Congress�Party�- Rs.0.09�Crore;�Samajwadi Party�-Rs.�0.36�Crore;�Shiv Sena - Rs.0.12�Crore;�Telegu Desam Party�- Rs.�0.15�Crore;�Janata Dal (United)�- Rs.0.08�Crore;�Jharkhand�Mukti Morcha - Rs.0.05Crore;�Rashtriya Janata Dal - Rs.�0.21�Crore;�Shiromani Akali Dal - Rs.�0.08�Crore;�Telangana Rashtra Samithi -Rs.�0.05�Crore
2005 – Annual Report of ITC
Example Example Example Example –––– Involving Public Involving Public Involving Public Involving Public FunctionariesFunctionariesFunctionariesFunctionaries
Background
� Godfrey�Phillips�India�Limited,�is�the�second�largest�tobacco�company�in�India�associated�with�“Phillips�Morris.” It�has�a�cigarette�brand�named�“Red�&�White.”
� In�1980’s�this�brand�was�being�promoted�by�targeting�it�to�the�lower�middle�and�middle�class segment.
� As�a�conscious�attempt�to�market�and�promote�these�cigarettes,�the�“Red�&�White” brand�was�positioned�to�associate�it�with�the�aspiration�levels of�the�middle�class�and�lower�middle�class�of�India.�
� One�of�the�identified�aspirations�of�the�middle�class�was�recognised�as�a�need�to�appear�different;�to�do�something�worthwhile;�to�be�brave�and�to�be�identified.�The�whole�marketing�strategy�of�GPI�revolved�around�this�concept�and�thereafter�the�concept�of�“Bravery” became�an�inseparable�part�of�the�brand-image�of�“Red�&�White”
� Since�1990,�the�bravery�awards�are�handled�by�the�marketing�team of�“Godfrey�Phillips�India�Limited” and�the�expenses�are�debited�to�the�marketing�account�of�the�company.�The�vice-president�marketing�or�sales�of�GPI�is�the�one�who�coordinates�the�activity.
� The�Law�is�against�it�and�it�prohibits�any�kind�of�promotion�of�aby tobacco�product�in�any�form.�Section�5 of�the�“Cigarettes�and�Other�Tobacco�Products�Act,�2003” reads;�“no�person�shall�take�part�in�any�advertisement�which�directly�or�indirectly�suggests�or�promotes�the�use�or�consumption�of�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�products.” Section�5-(3)�further�reads; No�person,�shall,�under�a�contract�or�otherwise�promote�or�agree�to promote�the�use�or�consumption�of— (a)�Cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�product;�or��(b)�Any�trade�mark�or�brand�name�of�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�product�in�exchange�for�a�sponsorship,�gift,�prize�or�scholarship�given�or�agreed�to�be�given�by�another�person.
� Article�13-2�of�FCTC: “Each�Party�shall,�in�accordance�with�its�constitution�or�constitutional�principles,�undertake�a�comprehensive�ban�of�all�tobacco�advertising,�promotion�and�sponsorship.”
� We�(the�presenter,�Hemant�Goswami�and�Burning�Brain�Society)�even�went�to�the�High�Court,�highlighted�the�issue�and�got�an�assurance�from�the�Government�that�they�will�adhere�to�the�law�on�tobacco�control�and�not�engage�in�such�activities.�However,�the�brand�promotion�continues�with�the�support�of�top�politicians.
Tobacco IndustryPartnering with the
Government officials and Politicians
Example Example Example Example ---- 2 2 2 2 Brand EndorsementBrand EndorsementBrand EndorsementBrand Endorsement
From the “Brochure” of GPI
Indian Union Minister for Finance (Defence Minister in the previous government)
Governor of Madhya Pradesh
Former Advocate General of
India
Chief Minister of DelhiDr Verghese Kurien,
Known as the father of White Revolution
in India
Vice President & Finance Minister of India (Now Ex)
Who’s-Who�of�every�State�participate�in�the�tobacco�companies�indirect�promotion�and�liaison�activity.�Some�for�greed,�some�for�a�
return�favour�and�others�for�unknown�reasons?
The (present) Home Minister of India
Example Example Example Example ---- 2222List of people who help out the tobacco company – They are the people who should otherwise enforce
the tobacco-control law. No surprise that not a single case under the tobacco control law has been registered since the promulgation of the legislation. Since the enactment of the legislation in 2004, the
patronage of top bureaucrats and politicians continues. Credit goes to the tobacco companies for keeping these people on their rolls.
The Punjab Governor and UT Administrator
Gen. S. F. Rodrigues at the Red & White
Activity
ExampleExampleExampleExample
The Vice-President of India along with the then
Finance Minister (Now Home Minister) on June 3, 2005 at Delhi
Invitation issued by the office of the Vice-
President, Government of India for covering
the “Red & White Bravery Awards”
Invitation sent to the press from the office of Vice-President of India [Obtained by Hemant Goswami from the office of the Vice Presidents]
Tobacco farmer Tobacco farmer Tobacco farmer Tobacco farmer
gets just 1 cent gets just 1 cent gets just 1 cent gets just 1 cent
from every dollarfrom every dollarfrom every dollarfrom every dollar
spent on spent on spent on spent on
tobaccotobaccotobaccotobacco
But the fact is that the poor farmer gets less than 1% (one percent) of the net value from any kind of tobacco product sale
Interestingly Interestingly Interestingly Interestingly …………........ Nobody talked about farmers during the MSA negotiations when tobacco was on the verge of being declared an illegal product. In-fact, the farmers were not even referred to and neither were they considered stakeholders.
A Manipulation Game –Emotional Plank
in the name of
Farmers
Whenever tobacco industry is cornered,
the politicians and the bureaucrats on the roll of the industry start talking about
the “Interest of the Farmers.” Recently,
major changes and policy shift in
tobacco control in India was done by calling it in the “Interest of the tobacco
farmers.”
These pictures were supposed to appear
on tobacco brands and were also notified
in 2005 – However they never saw the
light of the day. Why and How?
NOTIFICATION NOTIFICATION NOTIFICATION NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 5th July 2006New Delhi, the 5th July 2006New Delhi, the 5th July 2006New Delhi, the 5th July 2006
G.S.R. 402EG.S.R. 402EG.S.R. 402EG.S.R. 402E
Rule�2(c):�“Principal�display�area” means�
(i) for�box�type�packages,�two�equal�sized�largest�surface�area(s)�of�the�box�that�may�be�displayed�or�visible�under�normal�or�customary�conditions�of�sale�or�use;�
(ii) for�pouch�type�packages,�the�entire�surface�area�of�the�pack�that�may�be�displayed�or�visible�under�normal�conditions�of�sale�or�use;
(iii)�for�conical�or�cylindrical�type�of�packages,�the�entire�curving�area�of�the�pack�that�may�be�displayed�or�visible�under�normal�or�customary�conditions�of�sale�or�use;
(iv)�for�any�other�form�or�type�of�package,�the�entire�surface�area�of�the�pack�that�may�be�displayed�or�visible�under�normal�or�customary�conditions�of�sale�or�use;
(b)“specified health�warning” means,�such�health�warnings�as�specified�by�the�Central�Government�from�time�to�time,�in�the�schedule�to�these�rules.
Rule�3.�Manner�of�packing�and�labelling.-
3(1)�Every�person engaged�directly�or�indirectly�in�the�production,�supply,�import or�distribution�of�cigarette�or�any�other�tobacco�products�shall�ensure�that,-every�package�of�cigarette�or�any�other�tobacco�product�shall�have�the�specified�health�warning�exactly�as�specified�in�the�schedule�to�these�rules;�
The ScheduleThe ScheduleThe ScheduleThe Schedule
Schedule
(see�rule�3)
Components�of�specified�health�warning.-
The�components�for�the�specified�health�warning�shall�include:
(1) Skull�and�Bones�Sign.- Every�specified�health�warning�shall�mandatorily�include�a�pictorial�depiction�of�skull�and�bones�sign,�in�white�on�a�black�background�(100%�black)�with�white�outlines.�This�sign�shall�be�prominently�placed�on�the�top�left�hand�corner�of�the�warning.
(2) Health�Warning.- The�warning�“Smoking�Kills” (on�smoking�forms�of�tobacco�products)�and�“Tobacco�Kills”(on smokeless/chewing�and�other�forms�of�tobacco�products)�shall�appear�in�white�font�colour�on�a�red�background�(consisting�of�100%�magenta�+�100%�yellow).
(3) Pictorial�Representation�of�ill�effects�of�tobacco�use.- Pictorial�depiction�of�the�ill�effects�of�tobacco�use�on�health, shall�be�placed�below�the�skull�and�bones�sign,�and�should�appear�in�colour�exactly�as�in�the�soft�copy�provided�in�the�CD�accompanying�these�rules.
(4) Health�Message.�- Every�specified�health�warning�shall�include�the�health�message in�black�font�colour�on�a�white�background. The�health�message�should�be�printed�in�easy�to�read�black�font�on�a�white�background�and�the�font�type/font�size�shall�be,�exactly�as�per�the�soft�copy�provided�along�with�these�rules.�
…………………
3.�Minimum�size�of�the�specified�health�warning.-
(1)�The�minimum�size�of�the�specified�health�warning�on�each�panel�of�the�tobacco�pack�shall�be�3.5�cm�x�4�cm�to�ensure�that�the warning�is�legible�and�prominent.
(2)�The�size�of�all�components�of�the�specified�health�warning�shall�be�increased�proportionally�according�to�increase�of�the�package�size�to�ensure�that�the�specified�health�warning�occupies�fifty�percent�of�the�principal�display�area/s�of�the�pack.�
Notification ReplacedNotification ReplacedNotification ReplacedNotification Replaced
MAJOR�SETBACKS:
1. Picture�Warning�on�both�sides�replaced�with�one�side
2. 50%�display�on�both�panels�(100%�one�side)�replaced�with�
40%�on�one�side
3. Strong�picture�messages�replaced�with�meaningless�and�
useless�messages
4. The�necessity�of�having�the�warning�language�in�local�
language�done�away�with
……..Thereby�making�the�whole�exercise�ABSOLUTELY�USELESS
Breach of Trust with the Breach of Trust with the Breach of Trust with the Breach of Trust with the PublicPublicPublicPublic
Dilution of graphic images to be printed on tobacco productsDilution of graphic images to be printed on tobacco productsDilution of graphic images to be printed on tobacco productsDilution of graphic images to be printed on tobacco products
2
00
8
20
05
What The Law ProvidesWhat The Law ProvidesWhat The Law ProvidesWhat The Law Provides
Section�8:�
(1)�The�specified�warning�on�a�package�of�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�products�shall�be—
– (a)�legible�and�prominent;
– (b)�conspicuous�as�to�size�and�colour;
– (c)�in�such�style�or�type�of�lettering�as�to�be�boldly�and�clearly�presented in�distinct�contrast�to�any�other�type,�lettering�or�graphic�material�used�on�the�package�or�its�label�and�shall�be�printed,�painted�or�inscribed�on�the�package�in�a�colour�which�contrasts�conspicuously�with�the�background�of�the�package�or�its�labels.
(2)�The�manner�in�which�a�specified�warning�shall�be�printed,�painted�or�inscribed�on�a�package�of�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�products�shall�be�such�as�may�be�specified�in�the�rules�made�under�this�Act.
(3)�Every�package�containing�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�products�shall�be�so�packed�as�to�ensure�that�the�specified�warning�appearing�thereon,�or�on�its�label,�is,�before�the�package�is�opened,�visible�to�the�consumer.
What The Law ProvidesWhat The Law ProvidesWhat The Law ProvidesWhat The Law Provides
Section�9:
(1)�Where�the�language�used�on�a�package�containing�cigarettes�and any�other
tobacco�products�or�on�its�label�is—
(a) English,�the�specified�warning�shall�be�expressed�in�the�English language;
(b) any�Indian�language�or�languages,�the�specified�warning�shall�be expressed�in�such�Indian�language�or�languages;
(c)� both�English�and�one�or�more�Indian�languages,�the�specified�warning�shall�be�expressed�in�the�English�language�as�well�as�in�such�Indian�language�or�languages;
(d)� partly�English�and�partly�any�Indian�language�or�languages,�the�specified�warning�shall�be�expressed�in�the�English�language�as�well�as�in�such�Indian�language�or�languages;
(e)� any�foreign�language,�the�specified�warning�shall�be�expressed�in�the�English�language;�contents.
(f)� partly�any�foreign�language�and�partly�English�or�any�Indian�language�or�languages,�the�specified�warning�shall�be�expressed�in�the�English�language�as�well�as�in�such�Indian�language�or�languages.
(2)�No�package�of�cigarettes�or�any�other�tobacco�products�or�its�label�shall�contain�any�matter�or�statement�which�is�inconsistent�with,�or�detracts�from,�the�specified�warning.
The kind of aberrationsThe kind of aberrationsThe kind of aberrationsThe kind of aberrations
29th�September�2008 Notification:
Rule�3(f): The�specified�warning�shall�be�inscribed�in�the�language/s�usedon�the�pack:
Provided�that�where�more�than�one�language�on�the�back�the�specified�warning�shall�appear�in�two�languages,�one�in�which�the�brand�name�appears�and�other�in�the�local�language of�the�area�where�the�product�is�being�sold.”
Replaced�by�28th�November�2008 Notification:
Rule�3(f): The�specified�warning�shall�be�inscribed�in�the�language/s�usedon�the�pack:
Provided�that�where�more�than�one�language�on�the�back�the�specified�warning�shall�appear�in�two�languages,�one�in�which�the�brand�name�appears�and�any�other�language used�on�the�pack.”
WHY?WHY?
The ProvisionsThe ProvisionsThe ProvisionsThe Provisions
2005;�5th�July�2006�Notification�and�15th�March�
2008�Notification
� Rule�3(e):�no�product�shall�be�sold�unless�the�
package�contains�the�specified�health�warning:
Provided�that�the�specified�health�warning�shall�be�
printed�on�every�retail�pack�in�which�the�tobacco�
product�is�normally�intended�for�consumer�use�or�
retail�sale,�as�well�as any�other�external�
packaging,�such�as�cartons�or�boxes;
WHY?WHY?
Major AberrationMajor AberrationMajor AberrationMajor Aberration
15th�March/�29th Sep.�2008�Notification
� Rule�2(b):�“package” means�box,�pouch,�conical,�cylindrical�or�any�other�type�of�pack�used�for�packing�cigarette�and�other�tobacco�products.
3rd�May�2009�Notification
� Rule�2(b):�“package” means�pack�in�which�cigarette�and�other�tobacco�product�is�packaged�for�consumer�sale�but�shall�not�include wholesale,�semi-wholesale�or�poorapackages�if�such�packages�are�not�intended�for�consumer�use;
Dilution Dilution Dilution Dilution ---- Rule 3(1)(b)Rule 3(1)(b)Rule 3(1)(b)Rule 3(1)(b)2005/�5th�July�2006�Notification
Rule�3�(1): Manner�of�packing�and�labelling�- Every�person engaged�directly�or�indirectly�in�the�production,�supply,�import�or�distribution�of�cigarette�or�any�other�tobacco�products�shall�ensure�that�–(b) the�specified�health�warnings�shall�occupy�at�least�fifty�percent of�the�principal�display�area/sof�the�pack�and�shall�be�positioned�parallel�to�the�top�edge�of�the�package�and�in�the�same�direction�as�the�information�on�the�principal�display�area/s:
Provided that�for�conical�packs,�the�widest�end�of�the�pack�shall�be�considered�as�the�top�edge�of�the�pack:
Provided�further�that�for�box�and�pouch�type�of�packs,�the�specified�health�warning�shall�appear�on�both�sides of�the�pack,�on�the�largest�panels;
15th�March�2008�Notification
Rule�3(1)(b) the�specified�health�warnings�shall�occupy�at�least�fourty (40%) percent�of�the�principal�display�area/s of�the�pack�and�shall�be�positioned�parallel�to�the�top�edge�of the�package�and�in�the�same�direction�as�the�information�on�the�principal�display�area/s:
Provided that�for�conical�packs,�the�widest�end�of�the�pack�shall�be�considered�as�the�top�edge�of�the�pack:
Provided�further�that�for�box�and�pouch�type�of�packs,�the�specified�health�warning�shall�appear�on�both�sides of�the�pack,�on�the�largest�panels;
3rd�May�2009�Notification
Rule�3(1)(b) the�specified�health�warnings�shall�occupy�at�least�fourty (40%)�percent�of�the�principal�display�area/s of�the�front�panel of�the�pack�and�shall�be�positioned�parallel�to�the�top�edge�of�the�package�and�in�the�same�direction�as�the�information on�the�principal�display�area/s:
Provided that�for�conical�packs,�the�widest�end�of�the�pack�shall�be�considered�as�the�top�edge�of�the�pack:��(�The�Second�Proviso�about�display�on�both�sides�go�missing)
Penal ProvisionsPenal ProvisionsPenal ProvisionsPenal Provisions
� Section�20�(2): Any�person�who�sells�or�distributes�
cigarettes�or�tobacco�products�which�do�not�contain�either�
on�the�package�or�on�their�label,�the�specified�warning�and�
the�nicotine�and�tar�contents�shall�in�the�case�of�first�
conviction�be�punishable�with�imprisonment�for�a�term,�
which�may�extend�to�one�year,�or�with�fine�which�may�
extend�to�one�thousand�rupees,�or�with�both,�and,�for�the�
second�or�subsequent�conviction,�with�imprisonment�for�a�
term�which�may�extend�to�two�years�and�with�fine�which�
may�extend�to�three�thousand�rupees.
Penal ProvisionPenal ProvisionPenal ProvisionPenal Provision
� Section�20:�(1) Any�person�who�produces�or�manufactures�
cigarettes�or�tobacco�products,�which�do�not�contain,�either�
on�the�package�or�on�their�label,�the�specified�warning�and�
the�nicotine�and�tar�contents,�shall�in�the�case�of�first�
conviction�be�punishable�with�imprisonment�for�a�term�
which�may�extend�to�two�years,�or�with�fine�which�may�
extend�to�five�thousand�rupees,�or�with�both,�and�for�the�
second�or�subsequent�conviction�with�imprisonment�for�a�
term�which�may�extend�to�five�years�and�with�fine�which�
may�extend�to�ten�thousand�rupees.
WHY?WHY?
OldOldOldOld Cigarette Act of 1975Cigarette Act of 1975Cigarette Act of 1975Cigarette Act of 1975
The�Cigarettes�(Regulations�of�Production,�Supply�and�Distribution),�Act,�1975�[The�Act�replaced�by�2003�Act�- COTPA]
� Section�17:�Penalty- Any�person�who,-
(a)�sells,�or�distributes�or�supplies�in�the�course�of�any�trade or�commerce,�any�package�of�cigarettes�which�does�not�contain,�either�on�the�package�or�on�its�label,�the�specified�warning,
(b)�produces,�or�supplies�or�distributes�in�the�course�of�any�trade�or�commerce,�any�package�of�cigarettes�which�does�not�contain,�either�on�the�package�or�on�its�label,�the�specified�warning,
(c)�advertises,�or�takes�part�in�the�advertisement�of,�cigarettes�if�such�advertisement�does�not�include�the�specified�warning,
shall�be�punishable�with�imprisonment�for�a�term�which�may�extend�to�three�years,�or�with�fine�which�may�extend�to�five�thousand�rupees,�or�with�both.
Clearly the new legislation has been made weaker Clearly the new legislation has been made weaker Clearly the new legislation has been made weaker Clearly the new legislation has been made weaker and also been diluted even if compared to 1975 Actand also been diluted even if compared to 1975 Actand also been diluted even if compared to 1975 Actand also been diluted even if compared to 1975 ActClearly the new legislation has been made weaker Clearly the new legislation has been made weaker Clearly the new legislation has been made weaker Clearly the new legislation has been made weaker and also been diluted even if compared to 1975 Actand also been diluted even if compared to 1975 Actand also been diluted even if compared to 1975 Actand also been diluted even if compared to 1975 Act
LetLetLetLet’’’’s Rewind >>>>>>s Rewind >>>>>>s Rewind >>>>>>s Rewind >>>>>>
ItItItIt’’’’s Time to be Proactives Time to be Proactives Time to be Proactives Time to be Proactive
The tobacco Industry has been manipulating both the Government as well as Public Health Activists. Most of us are playing to their tunes and merely REACTING to what the industry throws at us. The Industry is well prepared for all this……..
…….It’s time to be PROACTIVE and undo the DAMAGE