How Tobacco Bill Provoked Controversy in Senate

Wife of former Chief Justice of Nigeria and member of the African Union Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, Mrs. Maryam Uwais and Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello are engaged in a healthy, even if needless, argument on the propriety or otherwise of disallowing children to participate in the recently-held public hearing on the Tobacco Control Bill in the Senate. Sufuyan Ojeifo examines the tenor of the controversy.

The purpose of the public hearing on the Tobacco Control Bill held on July 20 and 21, this year, in the Senate Hearing Room One, was to get stakeholders’ input into the Bill, preparatory to the Third Reading (clause-by-clause consideration and passage). From the various submissions at the hearing, it was evident that the anti-Tobacco Control Bill groups were in the minority. The majority groups understandably succeeded in swaying public sentiments in favour of the Bill, which was sponsored by Senator Olorunnimbe Mamora.

The pro-Tobacco Control Bill groups already had their task well-cut out for them by the sponsor of the Bill and the entire membership of the Senate Committee on Health, all of whom were on the same page in their mission to achieve control, sale and consumption of the product. Specifically, the proposed legislation is entitled: “A Bill for an Act to Repeal the Tobacco (Control) Act 1990 Cap T16 Laws of the Federation and to Enact the National Tobacco Control Bill 2009 to provide for the Regulation or Control of Production, Manufacture, Sale, Advertising, Promotion and Sponsorship of Tobacco or Tobacco Products in Nigerian and for other Relates Matters.”

Expectedly, the issue was controversial. Apart from the British America Tobacco Nigeria (BATN), which attempted a diplomatic opposition, there was groundswell of support for the Bill. It agreed that tobacco had impact on public health, but supported appropriate regulation the industry as it would help to reduce the impact.

But the controversy that has unexpectedly bludgeoned its way into the public domain on account of the public hearing, organised by the Senate Committee on Health under the Chair of Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, centres on the propriety or otherwise of disallowing some school children to air their views on the occasion.

Wife of former Chief Justice of Nigeria and member of the African Union Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, Mrs. Maryam Uwais and Obasanjo-Bello are engaged in disputation over the decision by the latter to shut out the children from making a presentation at the hearing.

Uwais was miffed that the rights of the school children were abridged. She is, no doubt, an advocate of the protection of the child rights. On her part, Obasanjo-Bello insisted that the children come before their rights and from her position, she is an advocate of the protection of the child. Specifically, Uwais had in a letter to Obasanjo-Bello, copies of which were sent to the Senate President, Senator David Mark and Senator Mamora (sponsor of the Bill) said that in denying the children the opportunity to speak, Obasanjo-Bello had said that she was a mother and so felt the need to protect children.

According to Uwais: “You aid that you would not allow children to be ‘used’ or ‘paraded’ before the Committee and that even in law courts, the evidence of a child would need to be corroborated during a trial. Besides, in your view, since adults were present and knew what the issues were, there was absolutely no need for a person under the age of 18 to participate in the proceedings.

“To further support your own assertions, you added that at hearings in the Senate, persons who intended to contribute could be compelled to swear oaths on the scriptures appropriate to their faiths, which in fact, in your understanding, was another excuse for denying them the right to be heard on an issue that concerns them, also. In conclusion, you mentioned that the Child Rights Act did not allow for children to speak at such fora.”

After citing the various sections of the Constitution, the Child Rights Act 2003 and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ratified by Nigeria since July 23, 2001), she knocked off the position of Obasanjo-Bello. She said that that public hearing was not a court of law as the Senator would want people to believe. She said “while not delving into the justifications and reasons for the policy, laws and formalities that apply in family court proceedings or in trials where children testify as witnesses and the need for corroboration and/or not swearing on oath or not, the point must be made that rules of evidence that are strictly observed in a court of law do not apply to public hearings.

“Indeed, even in judicial proceedings concerning a child, the court is compelled to make available the opportunity for the views of the child to be heard directly or through an impartial representatives, depending on the circumstances; the fact remains that his or her views must be heard and the court is obliged to ensure that, in its own discretion, predicated upon the best interests of the child…”

The first reaction to Uwais came from Lawyer-Aides in the National Assembly (LANASS), under the leadership of Mr. Akande Oluwatosin, which faulted the position Uwais, to the effect that Obasanjo-Bello violated the rights of the school children by not allowing them to present their position at the just concluded public hearing on the Tobacco Control Bill. The body, in a statement issued in Abuja, said that while Obasanjo-Bello based her decision on the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, Uwais had anchored her protest on the provisions of Section 3 of the Child Rights Act.The Section reads: “The provisions in Chapter 1V of the Constitution of the Federal republic of Nigeria, 1999, or any successive constitutional provisions relating to fundamental rights, shall apply as if those provisions are expressly stated in this Act.”

LANASS said, “From the above provision, it is clear for all purposes and intent that the drafters of the Child Rights Act made it subject to the constitution and besides, it is elementary that the basic law above all laws in every nation is its constitution.”

The group further poked a hole in Uwais’ argument that Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which provides for the Right of Freedom of Expression of every Nigerian, including the secondary school students covered them. According to the body, “True, not limited by age but this Section and others-37, 38, 40 and 41, in Chapter 4 are limited by the Derogation Clause as provided in Section 45 (1) of the same Constitution, which states: ‘Nothing in Sections 36, 38, 39, 40 and 41 of this Constitution shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society-(a) in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality and public health; or (b) for the purposes of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons.’”

The body said, “Sequel to that is the provision of Section 45 (1) (b) that such limitations on the above-named sections can be for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons, which, predictably and for the test of reasonableness, is one of the reasons adduced by the Senator (Obasanjo-Bello) for her action that the young persons (school children) be refrained from public discussions on smoking for protectionist reasons.”

LANASS said that it could agree more because “these young people are not even supposed to be found in places where such topics are being discussed, ab-initio.” It observed that Uwais in her position cited Section 19 of the Child Rights Act with the footnote-“Responsibilities of a Child and Parent” but that she omitted to mention Section 20 with the footnote-“Parent, etc., to provide guidance with respect to Child’s Responsibilities.”

Accusing Uwais of insincerity for citing only Section 19 without taking it together with Section 20, LANASS argued that it is only when “both sections are read together as a whole that sufficient legal analysis of that part of the Act might have been done.” The body also tackled Uwais for berating Obasanjo-Bello for purportedly misconstruing the Senate Committee Public hearing as a court. According to the body, “: But unknown to most Nigerians, the senator was right and Mrs. Uwais, ironically, was the erring party. Court, as defined by Section 2 of the Evidence Act, is not restricted to a structure or building where judgments are pronounced but includes judges, magistrates and all persons empowered to take evidence except arbitrators.

“Since National Assembly Committees are empowered, by law, to take evidence, they could constitute what is a court, following the provisions of the Evidence Act. Therefore, the Senator (Obasanjo-Bello) was accurate in her analogy; even if it appears she had no knowledge of the legal truth of her statements.”

But in her reply to Uwais dated July 29, 2009, Obasanjo-Bello said, “…On the second day, Mrs. Uwais was again present. After the first few speakers, I asked what other groups were present and the presence of some children in school uniform was indicated. I had seen the children and assumed they were observers to the proceeding which is allowed and even educative.

“I said and insisted children are not allowed to give uncorroborated evidence in court and that the school children being minors would not be allowed to talk on an issue that could easily be resolved by adults. Please note that apart from being minors, the children submitted no memorandum as individuals or as a group and did not represent any group. The public hearing was specifically on the Tobacco Bill; all other issues were irrelevant unless it directly affected our understanding of the Tobacco issue in Nigeria.”

“According to the sixth edition of the Columbia Encyclopaedia, 2008, the age of consent is the age which according to the law, persons are bound by their words and acts. Below the minor age, unless there are extenuating circumstances, children are not allowed to give evidence in court. On a comparative level, legislative investigations in a Presidential system are fashioned after law courts and Senate Committees here and in the US are allowed to subpoena persons and do have legal backing as courts.

“Committee findings can lead to various reprimands and sanctions and can be followed by arrest. It is a criminal offence to lie before a legislative committee. We are allowed to ask people to take oath if deemed necessary. Senate Committees are allowed to make their own rules as long as it follows the rules of the Senate. Deciding who will speak in the Senate chambers is the prerogative of the Senate President and in a committee room; it is the prerogative of the Chairman of the committee,” she said. She added, “Order 64 of the standing rules of the Senate 2003, says ‘the President in the Senate and Chairman in any Committee shall be responsible for the observance of the rules of the Order in the Senate and Committee respectively and their decision upon any point of order shall not be open to appeal and shall not be reviewed by the Senate except upon a substantive motion after notice.’

“Age of consent is important to protect children from exploitation. It is generally agreed that children can be easily manipulated and their opinions tutored and I don’t believe this is my idea as it is normal in all jurisdictions across the world not to unnecessarily expose children to adult issues such as violence and sexual content. I don’t think I am saying anything that is not universally accepted to say children can be easily influenced.

“To obtain testimony from a minor, the parent or guardian has to be present or there must be verifiable written consent from them. Taking a child out of school on a school day on an issue where there was no disagreement like protecting children from tobacco is insensitive on the part of the people that did it and it’s against the welfare of the children. Middle class people usually do not do this to their children but it’s the children of poorer people that are pulled from school and brought to a hearing room on an issue they do not need to participate in.

“Will these same people allow their own children to be taken out of school for such matter? I am a mother and I will not let any school allow my child to be taken for such an event. The best child right is not about exposing children to undue interference but in letting them grow up to have their own opinions and make their minds up about ideas on their own. That is the essence of the right to Freedom of Expression in the 1999 Constitution alluded to by Mrs. Uwais.

“It is actually child exploitation to subject children to give testimony to prove one’s point especially when the protection of the children from smoking was not a part of the bill that was being disputed. If the children lost confidence from not being allowed to talk in the senate, it was the fault of the people that brought them without clearing or following laid down rules by the committee.

“In order to forestall rancorous and unnecessary disputations during committee hearings, it is the norm to always ask for prior submission of memo before the hearing date so that stakeholders can be listed and if need be appropriately advised. This was not the case with these school children in uniforms during school hours without a tinge of evidence of their parents/guardians consent.”

Obasanjo-Bello continued: “After I made my decision not to allow the children to speak, Mrs. Uwais wrote a note to Senator Mamora who was sitting to my right and he showed me the note and whispered to my ears that I should let the children speak based on the note, I reiterated my point to the audience and moved on. Several minutes later, Mrs. Uwais again sent a note to Senator Ekaette, sitting on my left, showed me another note from Mrs. Uwais but advised that I should go on with the hearing as she was leaving for another committee commitment. I again made my point about not allowing children to speak. Must one listen to Mrs. Uwais’ advocacy for child’s rights in a matter involving Tobacco?”

Consider her summation of the Uwais opposition: “Apparently, I am being blackmailed since last week in national newspapers because I didn’t allow Mrs. Uwais to have her way. My authority as chair of the Committee means nothing to Mrs. Uwais if she is not allowed to have her way or I let the children talk. The hearing was not about children’s right but Tobacco; why should we divert the proceedings to child rights so she would have her way.”

Her conclusion: “Finally, under the United Nations convention on the rights of the child, a child is anyone under the age of 18 and these children need to be protected from exploitation. It is in line with the rules of the Senate as well as under common law not to allow children give uncorroborated evidence. There was no compelling reason to allow the children to give evidence since the issue of tobacco negatively affecting children and health generally was not controverted by anyone at the hearing….

“In consonance with the rules of the Senate, it is my prerogative to allow anyone to talk as the Senate President also has the prerogative to allow any senator or anyone else to talk as he deems fit. By all standards, local and international, public hearings are no place for children. Almost all national issues, directly or indirectly, affect children and that does not mean that we must parade children to give their opinions on all issues.

“Everything from economy to violence in our society affects children but we don’t necessarily parade them before the Senate when such are being discussed. I lived in the US when some of the tobacco hearings were being conducted in the US senate and I never saw children give evidence. I don’t know why in Nigeria with the prominent breaches of the child’s rights, the so called activists for children’s rights cannot do anything to make us feel their impact.

“In all this, I see lack of knowledge of legislative process, rules and procedure. The tobacco bill had a good public hearing and there is no need to create an issue where none exists: not even from a seeming outsider…who weeps louder than the bereaved. I plead with Mrs. Uwais to leave this matter alone and move on to many of the breaches of the Child’s Right Act that occur every day and lead to serious physical and emotional damage to children.” Will this controversy abate or it will continue to dominate the public space over and above the real issue of controlling Tobacco production, manufacture, sale, advertising, promotion, et al?

SOURCE

Fumes of fury on Big Tobacco

-Olukorede Yishau

From the Americas to Europe and the continent of Africa, these arecertainly not the best of times for tobacco giants, no thanks to thecampaigns against smoking, which have necessitated calls for morecontrol and regulation against the tobacco industry. In the US,President Barack Obama has signed into law the FDA bill, which for thefirst time in the history of the country introduced some level ofregulation into the hitherto unregulated industry.

In Africa, the tobacco industry has continued to thrive after theywere clamped out of Europe. The continent is gradually catching upwith Asia as the most profitable region in terms of sales revenue andproduct development for Tobacco companies.

However, certain African countries are gradually rising up to thechallenges posed by the tobacco industry, Kenya has passed into law acomprehensive tobacco bill to regulate and curb the excesses of thetobacco companies in the country. Mauritius has adopted toughermeasures against the industry in terms of sales and advertisement andthe count of countries taking steps aimed at tobacco control keepsincreasing by the minute.

In Nigeria, several groups have in the past tried to draw theattention of the Nigerian public to the dangers of tobacco and itsattendant evils but with moderate success.

Akinbode Oluwafemi, Programme Manager Environmental RightsAction/friends of the Earth, said ‘’past governments in Nigeria havealways failed to recognise the problems associated with tobacco and infact with the tobacco industry; they were concerned about bringingforeign investment and in fact brought the biggest tobacco plant insub- Sahara Africa without recourse to the health implications of thepublic and all these have given no room for the civil society toproperly clamour for regulation for the industry".

Starting from Monday, July 20, the tobacco industry began anotherround of battle. This time, the field is at the National Assembly andthe gladiators of this renewed campaign for control within theindustry are led by Senator Olorunimbe Mamora in partnership withcivil society groups.The Senate Committee on Health has begun a publichearing on the National Tobacco Control Bill 2009 sponsored by SenatorMamora, which seeks to regulate and control the use of advertisementof tobacco products, ensure proper labelling of tobacco products forsale in Nigeria, ban the supply of tobacco products to young persons,requires picture warnings on cigarette packs, stop the use of falsepromotions for sale of tobacco products and the creation of theNational Tobacco Control Committee.

Mamora said he was compelled to take on the industry after seeing whatthe industry has been silently doing to the public health system inthe country. The Senator disclosed that a recent survey done by theLagos State Government on the indicative health and economic costs onwhat tobacco currently inflicts on the state indicated over 9,527tobacco related cases were recorded in Lagos hospitals in the year2006 and that the state was subsidising the health costs of itscitizens by over N200,000. All these, according to him, have to bereduced and that the only way government can ensure that this isaccomplished is if control and regulation is introduced to the tobaccoindustry.

"We owe this country a lot, and part of our debt is to put laws whichwould safeguard the future of the coming generations if we controlorganisations, products and people who sell killer products.

"But in their objections to the proposed bill, representatives of thetobacco companies have claimed that steps aimed at introducinglegislation to the industry would lead to job cuts and companyclosures, a claim debunked by Oluwafemi.

According to him " those who say the regulation of the industry andparticularly this bill would lead to job losses are lying. in the BATplant in Ibadan they have the most sophisticated plant in Africa andthey do really need to employ many people. In reality they have lessthan 1000 people working in that plant, so why are they spreadingrumours of job loss when they know what they sell would kill over a100,000 people in a year.

"When asked about the level of support for the bill around governmentcircles he disclosed that the level of support the proposed bill hasreceived has been wonderful "for the first time we have a presidentwho sees the health of its citizen has its major priority and the wifeof the president is vehemently campaigning against cancer and we allknow tobacco causes cancer and the health minister has also offered tosupport the bill all the way.

"At a recent interactive dinner on the bill, the minister of Health,Professor Babatunde Osotimehin, disclosed that the Federal Governmentis committed to the enactment of laws committed to the check andcontrol the consumption of tobacco in the country. Osotimehin furtheradded "We should do everything possible to ban tobacco smoking becauseit does not add value at all. Some people talk about the economicvalue of tobacco companies, but I don’t believe there is any economicvalue because when they employ 20,000 people, they kill 100,000. Weshould try as much as possible not to do things that will add to theburden we suffer from HIV. So, we will try and put our weight behindthis bill".

Support for the proposed bill is not only coming from the governmentcorner, International organisations are deeply concerned about thesituation in Nigeria. Adeola Akinremi, Regional Coordinator for Africaof the Framework Convention Alliance disclosed that because Nigeria iskey factor in the fight against Tobacco on the continent all handsmust be on deck to ensure that the bill is supported and eventuallypassed into law." we all saw what the FDA law did in the USA, passing the Nigerian Lawwould not only have the same impact in Africa but it would also serveas the battle cry for other countries yet to initiate such measures intheir countries

"Many supporters of the bill feel this is the right time for governmentand the civil society to rally around each other and ensure that thefight against big tobacco companies is won.

Oluwafemi said, "this is the right time for Nigeria to protect andensure the health rights of its citizen and I am sure with this newgovernment we would be able to make sure that tobacco companies stopthe unrestricted initiation of Nigerian youths and women intosmoking".

Now that the public hearing has been concluded, it may not be wrong tosay that the entire nation and the global community is watching theIyabo-Obasanjo-Bello-led Senate Commiitte on Health to see how it goesabout the task of giving Nigeria a true legislation to regulate thetobacco.

SOURCE

CONFESSION OF A TOBACCO EXECUTIVE

By BETTY ABAH

I stand this day, before, not only you, fellow colleagues and executives, but before my conscience and the inscrutable eyes of History. I stand condemned, lampooned and almost lifeless.
I am resigning my position as Chief Executive Officer of the Western Cigarettes International Company here, knowing now that the party for me, for us and the illegal trade of the most advertised, yet one of the most dangerous substances known to man, is over. And because the weight in my heart can no longer allow me to continue to work as CEO.
I’ll tell you a story before I walk out the door this cold and uncomfortable morning.
Last night, my eight-year old son who attends the British Make-Over Worldwide School here in Lagos walked up to me, hands akimbo.
“Daddy, is it true that you are a murderer?” He asked.
I was shell shocked, but mustered the strength to ask him “Why, Brandy? Who the hell put that idea in your small head?”
“It’s Johnny, my class mate. He said his Daddy told him that you make a product that kills people, and that you have already killed millions of people world wide. Dad, do you kill people for a living?”
Before I could collect myself, my son proceeded to give me a lecture in morality, and queried why I sell packaged death. But unlike his mother (from whom I am now divorced, any way), I couldn’t shout him down and argue my way through. I was caught in a trough of condemnation.
With unsteady hands I walked into my study, slumped into a chair, and the result of the soul searching that followed is the paper I hold in my hand today.
(Oh, yes, I divorced his mother for pissing me off all the time, yelling at me to get out of the controversial business of marketing disease and death through addiction. And she never failed to remind me daily that I neither smoke nor allow our son to, yet work day and night to addict other people’s children. Two years ago, I filed for divorce).
You may I am throwing in the towel particularly because of the nightmarish turn of events in Nigeria , our biggest market in Sub-Saharan Africa. In your minds, you may have already condemned me, thinking it’s because of the recent hearing at the National Assembly on the National Tobacco Control Bill, a huge bad news for our business if allowed to be passed because it will mean stricter legislation, no doubt, what with high taxes, gory pictures of cancerous bodies on tobacco packs, ban on smoking in ALL public places, and the stuff that just anybody could sue us for damage.
You might even have assumed that it’s because of the outcome of our last meeting when, in despair, we analyzed the impact of the recent Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act passed by the US Congress which will empower the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate tobacco like hard drugs! No doubt, it is historical and will bring a sweeping change not only to tobacco use in the USA , but send ripple effects world wide. It perhaps fulfills, in installment, the prophecy of one of our repentant former executive that tobacco will be outlawed one day. But that is not exactly why I am leaving.
I haven’t related this fully before, but the fact is that I have killed people, old and young, in installments, for three decades. I started out in North Carolina , the biggest tobacco farming state in the USA as a salesman. So immense was my marketing skill that in five years, I had enlisted 10 of my friends and 12 family members into the smoking club (by the way, five are already dead of lung cancer), emerged as the district’s ‘Best Marketer of the Year’ thrice and had been employed as a senior marketing personnel in St. Moses Incorporated. That was about 30 years ago, a decade after the US Surgeon-General, for the first time, declared that smoking was dangerous to health. In the 20 years that I worked in the USA , we battled all kinds of opposition in the face of emerging knowledge. But we found ways round the missiles including the 1971 ban on tobacco advertising on television and radio and the 1988 rules against smoking on airline flights. And of course, the 1998 $206 Billion “Master Settlement” agreement that seven tobacco companies reached with 46 states in 1998 to resolve lawsuits and change their marketing practices. The media hawks were also on our necks, revealing secret industry documents which outlined how we planned to addict youngsters, the use of the different flavours to attract target groups, the cliché about 60 carcinogens and 4,000 toxins in cigarette smokes bla bla bla. Life itself is a battlefront, isn’t it?
But we soldiered. Soon we discovered the developing nations with their low level of health education, weak legislations and ‘flexible’ government officials would provide economic shoulders to weep on.
And, in no time I was easily spotted as one with the business acumen to explore the vast and fertile Chinese market. By the time I left China , five years later, the Asian giant had become one of our greatest success stories, with billions of dollars rolling in yearly. But in retrospect now, I remember that we had also contributed significantly in preparing China to grow into the epicenter of a tobacco epidemic. As at the last count, if you remember, the WHO says China has the highest rate of tobacco-related mortality globally with one million people dying every year from cancers of the lungs, bladder, heart disease, stroke, emphysema, gangrene and countless other tobacco-induced ailments. Not to talk of the thousands of others sickened and killed via second hand tobacco smoke.
In any case, I went on to consolidate our company’s success in India . Our experiment with ‘refined bidi’ and also other forms of smokeless tobacco became the model for the horde of international companies converging and feeding fat on other Third World economies. But I had to leave four years later despite the breakthroughs there. It was also too obvious that India was about exploding: one billion sticks of cigarettes up in smoke every day; highest incidence of oral cancer in the world; One third of all cancer patients in the world based in India ; 1 out of 10 Indian adults dying of tobacco related diseases. These WHO-backed statistics were more than we could chew and the activists’ bickering became more than we could swallow, so I picked my suitcase and left.
It was then I got called on the Nigerian mission. And the rest, you know, is recent history.
I have understandably been so mad by the activities of the irritants here called the anti-tobacco activists, to erode the monumental success we‘ve recorded in less than a decade of our re-entry into Nigeria . As you know, Mr. Sanjo, the ex-while ruler spoilt us silly. Of course in 2000, he left behind state matters to come to our head office in order to sign our MOU bringing us to his country as ‘foreign investors’. I remember that night, the other executives and I had a loud Champaign party in London and wondered if Africans would ever learn. We couldn’t help but marveled how a country would give us such a presidential welcome when we were being driven from ours! Who were his advisers? Anyway, that was his business. After all, ours was cigarette making and marketing.
And, you still remember all our marketing gimmicks, how we targeted youths through musical and sporting events, women through fashion shows, and bombarded everyone through aggressive advertising. We also hyped our corporate image through a contrived CSR. Whenever our activities are questioned, we put up the usual defense about smoking being a matter of choice. But, c’mon, it’s no secret that when someone comes into contact with a nicotine-laced cigarette, he no longer has a choice other than to drag and drag and drag until he/she is dragged into the grave! I am still amazed the world bought that dummy from us in the first place.
Well, I must say in the last seven years I have enjoyed the famous Nigerian hospitality. In the office here, I have enjoyed your cooperation, your camaraderie and team spirits. But today, I leave this question for you; ‘Are you prepared to ask the stigma-tainted question that I couldn’t face last night?’ For sooner or later, they will ask you. You may want to ruminate on that, and walk out the way that I soon will. Or sit still, in shame.
I cannot be a part of my son’s future, for that future is full of questions, stigma and naked shame. But please tell him, by the time I am gone, that I died a broken and remorseful man. Tell him that I really was a murderer, but then I died a repented murderer. Perhaps he can right the wrongs by salvaging his generation, by telling them about the death that lurks in tobacco use, the same death I marketed for three decades. No, I am not fit to live.

Abah is a Project Officer and Gender Focal Person with Environmental Rights Action (ERA). Presenter of Tobacco & You

Court adjourns Tobacco’s case

By Kolade Adeyemi

Kano High Court presided over by Justice Wada Rano has again adjourned the case between the Kano State Government and British American Tobacco (BAT)Company to October 28 for its adoption of addresses in application filed by the parties involved.

When the case came up for hearing last Thursday, the judge dismissed the request of the company (defendant) to amend everything they had already filed in adherence to the prayers of the plaintiff counsel, Mr. Babatunde Irukere.

Irukere had earlier challenged the prayer of the counsel for the defendant for an amendment of what they had earlier filed, arguing it would create delays and frustrate the process of justice. In his submission, the plaintiff counsel argued that, discussing the service of process for the past two and half years is still dragging the case backwards, pointing out that the court has shown in its ruling that in the interest of justice and urgency, the court should expedite action so that the merit of the case could be seen.

Earlier, counsel for the defendants, Phillip Morris International SA, Ebun Sofunde (SAN) argued that they were ready to move any application, but disagreed that there was a difference between resolve and hearing, which was the bone of contention.

The parties resolved to correspond all applications and process within 45 days to allow the proper hearing of the case which was adjourned to October 28.

SOURCE

Child Rights: Uwais’ Position on Tobacco Bill Faulted

Lawyer-Aides in the National Assembly (LANASS) has faulted the position of the wife of the former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Mrs. Maryam Uwais, to the effect that Chairman of Senate Committee on Health, Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, violated the rights of the young persons by not allowing them to present their position at the just concluded Public Hearing on the Tobacco Control Bill.

Uwais had reportedly sent a protest letter to the Senate President, Senator David Mark, on the purported breach of the rights of some secondary school students who had stormed the National Assembly to witness the public hearing.

The body, in a statement issued yesterday in Abuja, said that while Obasanjo-Bello based her decision on the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, Uwais had anchored her protest on the provisions of Section 3 of the Child Rights Act.

The Section reads: “The provisions in Chapter 1V of the Constitution of the Federal republic of Nigeria, 1999, or any successive constitutional provisions relating to fundamental rights, shall apply as if those provisions are expressly stated in this Act.” LANASS said, “From the above provision, it is clear for all purposes and intent that the drafters of the Child Rights Act made it subject to the constitution and besides, it is elementary that the basic law above all laws in every nation is its constitution.”

The group further poked a hole in Uwais’ argument that Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution which provides for the Right of Freedom of Expression of every Nigerian, including the secondary school students.

According to the body, “True, not limited by age but this Section and others-37, 38, 40 and 41, in Chapter 4 are limited by the Derogation Clause as provided in Section 45 (1) of the same Constitution.

“It reads thus: Nothing in Sections 36, 38, 39, 40 and 41 of this Constitution shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society-(a) in the interest of defense, public safety, public order, public morality and public health; or (b) for the purposes of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons.”

The body said, “Sequel to that is the provision of Section 45 (1) (b) that such limitations on the above-named sections can be for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons, which, predictably and for the test of reasonableness, is one of the reasons adduced by the Senator (Obasanjo-Bello) for her action that the young persons be refrained from public discussions on smoking for protectionist reasons.”

LANASS said that it could not agree more because “these young people are not even supposed to be found in places where such topics are being discussed, ab-initio.”

It observed that Uwais in her position cited Section 19 of the Child Rights Act with the footnote-“Responsibilities of a Child and Parent” but that she omitted to mention Section 20 with the footnote-“Parent, etc., to provide guidance with respect to Child’s Responsibilities.”

Accusing Uwais of insincerity for citing only Section 19 without taking it together with Section 20, LANASS argued that it is only when “both sections are read together as a whole that sufficient legal analysis of that part of the Act might have been done.”

The body also tackled Uwais for berating Obasanjo-Bello for purportedly misconstruing the Senate Committee Public hearing as a court.

According to the body, “: But unknown to most Nigerians, the senator was right and Mrs. Uwais, ironically, was the erring party. Court, as defined by Section 2 of the Evidence Act, is not restricted to a structure or building where judgments are pronounced but includes judges, magistrates and all persons empowered to take evidence except arbitrators.

“Since National Assembly Committees are empowered, by law, to take evidence, they could constitute what is a court, following the provisions of the Evidence Act. “Therefore, the Senator (Obasanjo-Bello) was accurate in her analogy; even if it appears she had no knowledge of the legal truth of her statements.”

Big Tobacco Sets Its Sights on Africa

- Jeffrey Kluger

It's easy enough to buy a smoke at Isa Yakubu's grocery store on a busy street in Lagos, Nigeria. Never mind if you don't have much money. Most local merchants are happy to break open a pack and sell cigarettes one at a time — single sticks, as they're known — for about 10 Nigerian naira, or 7 cents. "St. Moritz is the most popular brand," says Yakubu. "But [people] also like Rothmans and Benson & Hedges."
Single sticks go fast at 7 cents each — an especially good price point for kids. And while Yakubu says he doesn't sell to children, other shopkeepers do. About 25% of teens — some as young as 13 — use tobacco in some parts of Nigeria, double the smoking rate of Nigerian men, and many pick up the habit by age 11. That's a demographic powder keg, one that means big trouble if you're a health expert and big promise if you're a tobacco executive. Both sides agree on one thing, though: across all of Africa, cigarettes are set for boom times. (See pictures of vintage pro-smoking propaganda.)
In recent years, the world has increasingly been cleaving into two zones: smoking and nonsmoking. In the U.S. and other developed countries, Big Tobacco is in retreat, chased to the curbs by a combination of lawsuits, smoking bans, rising taxes and advertising restrictions. Fewer than 20% of adult Americans now smoke — the lowest rate since reliable records have been kept — and a tobacco crackdown is under way in Europe, Canada and elsewhere. In April, Congress boosted federal cigarette taxes threefold, from 32 cents a pack to $1. In June, President Barack Obama signed a law giving the FDA the power to regulate cigarettes like any other food or drug.
But the West is not the world, and elsewhere smoking is exploding. In China, 350 million adults are hooked on tobacco, which means the country has more smokers than the U.S. has people. Smoking rates in Indonesia have quintupled since 1970. In Russia, boys as young as 10 start lighting up. This year, tobacco companies will produce more than 5 trillion cigarettes — or 830 for every person on the planet.
It's in Africa, however, that the battle for the hearts, minds and lungs of new smokers is being waged most aggressively — and Nigeria offers a telling look at how the fight is unfolding. For all the woes that beset the continent, Africa still enjoys the lowest smoking rates in the world, largely because most people just can't afford it. In Ghana, the male smoking rate (which in most places in the world is higher than the female rate) is only 8%; in the Democratic Republic of Congo, it's 14%; in Nigeria, it's 12%. Compare that with 31% in India, 56% in Malaysia and a whopping 61% in China. But the tobacco industry abhors a vacuum, and in recent years, industry players — principally London-based British American Tobacco, Switzerland- based Philip Morris International and the U.K.'s Imperial Tobacco — have been working hard to fill it. "We've done this before," says Allan Brandt, a professor of the history of science at Harvard University and the author of The Cigarette Century. "When something gets regulated here, we move the risk offshore." Says Michael Eriksen, a former policy adviser for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: "Africa is in play." (See how many people smoke around the world.)
Spreading the ScourgeBig Tobacco's footprint in Africa has been hard to miss for a while. British American markets its wares — which include Dunhill and Pall Mall — in a vast crescent sweeping from South Africa to Congo and west to Ghana, as well as throughout North Africa. In 2003 the company planted its stakes deeper, building a $150 million factory in Nigeria. Philip Morris, whose brands include Marlboro and Chesterfield, has a smaller presence on the continent. "We are a minor, minor player," says spokesman Greg Prager. But that could change. The company does no business in Nigeria, but it controls about 15% of the market across North Africa and has a scattered 10% share elsewhere. It has also built a new factory in Senegal.
That expansion increasingly happens through the single-stick model, and that's the traffic that causes the most worry. People who buy cigarettes by the stick are typically the poor, the uneducated or the young — all groups less likely to have learned of the perils of smoking. "[A single stick is] much more affordable, and for young people, it's easier to conceal," says Babatunde Irukera, an antismoking lawyer working with the Nigerian government.
See TIME's tobacco covers.
Watch TIME's video "Au Revoir Cigarettes."
What's more, though British manufacturers, like American ones, put warnings on cigarette packs, the labels do no good if a pack is something you never see. Like other antismoking activists, Irukera believes industry actively promotes single-stick sales (which also occur in Asia, the Americas and elsewhere in the world). But the companies answer that the matter is out of their hands. Says British American spokeswoman Catherine Armstrong: "If retailers choose to break [packs] up and sell them one at a time — which I believe is very widespread across Africa — that's not something we have any involvement with." Still, the sticks are getting out, and the companies are cashing in. According to Emmanuel James-Odiase, an antitobacco counselor in Nigeria, more than 200 teens in his country begin smoking every day. (Read "Why a Tobacco Giant Backs a Tough New Antismoking Bill.")
Making it harder to contain those numbers is the fact that the same multinationals that are Africa's cigarette suppliers are also its benefactors. Tobacco companies have jumped into the corporate-social- responsibility game, doing all manner of benevolent work across Africa and Asia. In 2005, Philip Morris paid $5 billion to buy Indonesian cigarette-maker Sampoerna, a company that was already pouring money into scholarships for local students. British American does similar work in Malaysia, and in Nigeria has devoted 1% of its local profits to improving access to drinking water, health care and vaccines. That kind of largesse buys the companies a measure of indebtedness.
"It's hard to tell a village, 'You shouldn't accept these new wells or bicycles because it's from industry,' " says Stella Bialous, an adviser to the World Health Organization. "[But] when it comes time to pass regulatory things the company doesn't think reasonable, they can call in their chips. They have all these little groups dependent on their money."
In some cases, those "little groups" include the government. In 2007 the Nigerian Customs Service signed an agreement with British American to work jointly on curbing the unlicensed tobacco trade — which diverts profits from industry. The company courted the government two years earlier, with a three-day retreat at a local resort. "It's not the industry's job to be in charge of government policy," says Bialous.
But Nigeria and Africa as a whole are starting to push back. In 2003 the World Health Assembly adopted the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, a treaty designed to attack smoking through a mix of methods including bans and tax hikes. So far, 164 countries have joined the pact, including 48 in Africa. The U.S. signed the treaty in 2004 but has yet to implement it, though the President is expected to seek Senate ratification soon, adding a very big player to the team.
If such antismoking strategies are to succeed, health experts warn that speed is essential. "The challenge for Africa is to adopt policies to reduce tobacco use before the epidemic sweeps across the continent," says Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. To that end, Nigeria is taking a page from the West's playbook, filing a $45 billion damages suit against British American, Philip Morris and the domestic firm International Tobacco, alleging what Irukera calls a "clear strategy to market their products to young people." The tobacco companies deny the charge.
For all the efforts of the lawyers, doctors and treaty writers, it's at the grass roots that the fight against tobacco will be won. On a hot Friday afternoon not long ago, a group of students in blue-and-yellow uniforms gathered for a lecture at the Shepherd Secondary School in Ketu, a poor neighborhood in Lagos. "Have you seen anybody smoking on TV?" asks James-Odiase, the antitobacco counselor. The class nods, and one boy admits that he admires the way male actors look when they smoke. "With each puff he takes," the counselor warns, the actor's "life reduces by five seconds." The kids of Ketu — new to such things — gasp at that.
Later in the day, Salau Moshood, 17, reflects on what he's learned. "I heard today that smoking is not good, especially for children," he says. "My advice to the people is that they should stop." That advice may or may not be heeded, but health officials everywhere will count it as a win if Moshood himself and millions of other Africans never start.

SOURCE

Groups hail Senate hearing on tobacco bill

-David Ajikobi with agency reports

The Senate has been hailed by international groups and non-governmental agencies for helping in the fight against tobacco smoking in the country.
The upper chamber of the National Assembly is working on the National Tobacco Control Bill and its Committee on Health on Tuesday held a public hearing on the bill.
Kayode Soyinka, a medical practitioner and representative of the World Health Organisation who was at the public hearing, applauded the Senate for helping in the fight against tobacco addiction and associated diseases.
"We fully support this effort, which is to domesticate the WHO- initiated Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Nigeria became a Party to this Convention in October, 2005, and this bill fully conforms to the provisions of the international treaty," said Mr. Soyinka on Friday.
Africa Tobacco Control Alliance, a collection of groups and institutions working on tobacco control in Africa stated in a letter signed by its chairperson, Racheal Kitonyo, that Nigeria is not alone in the quest to domesticate the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control provisions.
"Nigeria would be following the lead of other African countries such as South Africa, Kenya and Mauritius that have already began implementation of FCTC provisions."
"The Africa Tobacco Control Alliance challenged the Senate on a quick passage of the bill. We believe the bill is essential to improve the health of all Nigerians and we want to throw our weight as Africans behind the laudable move of your senate to achieve this," he said.
A United States based group, Corporate Accountability International also commended the country's move to domesticate the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, pointing out that urgent actions are needed to stem the rising tobacco - related deaths across the world, 80 percent of which occur in the Global South.
The Corporate Accountability Group, in a letter to members of the senate health committee, signed by its International Policy Director, Kathryn Mulvey, charged the lawmakers that Article 5.3 of the Framework incorporates measures to protect the tobacco control law from interference from tobacco industry.
"Full implementation of the FCTC in Nigeria and around the world will save millions of lives and change the way Big Tobacco companies operate globally," the group said.
Adeola Akinremi, the regional coordinator of Framework Convention Alliance, a global alliance of organisations working on tobacco control, who personally submitted a memorandum at the hearing described the bill as a great and bold step by the Nigerian senate to safeguard the health of Nigerians.
"This is one bold step to protect Nigerian citizens and the senate deserves commendation. However it is time for vigilance on the part of the senate and all Nigerians to ensure the current standard of the bill is not compromised when it is passed into law," he said
The bill sponsored by Olorunnibe Mamora, (representing Lagos East) is to regulate the manufacturing, distribution, sales, and consumption of tobacco products in Nigeria and is principally targeted at reducing the population of smokers and the effects of smoking on public health, the economy and the environment.
At the public hearing on Tuesday, more than 40 civil society groups sent in memoranda to support the bill. There were statements from the Minister of Health, Babatunde Osotimehin who was represented by Mike Anibueze; former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Umaru Modibo, former Attorney General of Lagos State, Yemi Osinbajo, the wife of the former Chief Justice of the Federation, Maryam Uwais among others.

SOURCE