[Intl-tobacco] Nigeria: ad council opposes billboard ban

[Robert Weissman]

Flexing Muscles Over Cigarette
Outdoor Advertising practitioners fight the Advertising
Practitioners Council of Nigeria (APCON) over its decision to ban
advert
by Ayorinde Oluokun, The News (Lagos)
Source: All-Africa.com, 2002-04-09, via tobacco.org
URL: http://allafrica.com/stories/200204090411.html

Standing taller than all other structures around it, beside the Ketu
end of the Lagos mainland bridge, is a beautiful sight: a three
dimensional billboard with floodlights mounted on every side. The
billboard is even more attractive, at night when the lights are on.
Highly visible to commuters on top of the bridge is a side of the
billboard with an overwhelming golden background and a picture of a
"macho" half naked man cooling off in a water hydrant.

There are about 200 of such towers scattered all over the country
and the average cost of one tower is "between 6 to 10 million naira"
according to Babu Akinbobola, a past president of the Outdoor
Advertising Association of Nigeria (OAAN). But for the legal action
instituted by members of OAAN against the advertising industry's
regulatory body, Advertising Practitioners Council of Nigeria,
APCON, such sights would have vanished from the Nigerian landscape
since the first day of January this year.

APCON had, at the end of its annual general meeting held in Abuja in
August last year, announced a series of measures aimed at curtailing
the advertisement of alcoholic and tobacco products. In a press
conference addressed by the Chairman of the council, Chief Olu
Falomo, it was announced that with effect from 1 January 2002, the
advertising or promotion of tobacco products on television, home
videos and outdoor hoarding is banned. The statement also insinuated
the banning of pitch panel display of tobacco products (brand or
pack) in sporting arenas or stadia and the restriction of
advertisement of tobacco products in print (newspapers/magazines) to
inside covers and run of pages among other restrictions. 

Falomo said these measures and others already taken by the council
are actually to take the sail out of the gale of "blanket bans being
proposed on the advertisement of these products" and that, "the
measure is a response to the overwhelming evidence globally that
tobacco is hazardous to health."

Since the 'August declaration', the issue has been generating a lot
of heat not only from companies like the British-American Tobacco,
BAT, manufacturers of premier cigarette brands like Benson & Hedges,
Rothmans and Dunhill, but also from sectorial groups like the OAAN,
the Association of Advertising Practitioners of Nigeria, AAPN, the
Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria, NPAN, as well as the
Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria, BON. While NPAN and BON are
yet to formally make their position known on APCON's pronouncements,
OAAN has not only gone to town objecting to the proposed ban but has
also forwarded a protest letter to the council.

At a press conference summoned by OAAN to make its position known on
the issue, the Vice President of OAAN, Chief Ipoola Ahmed Omisore
described APCON's decision as "an abrupt and sudden decision to wipe
out a N2 billion business (outdoors, media and production) from the
current dormant Nigerian economy."

Omisore described the five month notice given members of his
association to stop using their billboards for cigarette
advertisements as very short "especially when it is realised, that
in outdoor advertising business, contracts or media bookings are
made by  our (OAAN) clients/agencies on a minimum of 12 months or
yearly basis." "Who is going to bear the brunt of breach of
contract
litigation? Is APCON ready to be joined as co-defendant in likely
suits that would emanate?" OAAN asked rhetorically.

Omisore further said the decisions will lead to collapse of
business, loss of jobs and loss of revenue to the local governments.
Rather than effecting the ban 1 January, 2002, OAAN suggested a
programme of gradual withdrawal of plans for the withdrawal of
advertisements of tobacco on billboards which will lead to a total
ban on 1 January, 2006.

Though AAPN agrees with OAAN that the deadline should be extended
beyond 1 January , 2002, they differ on the length of such an
extension. AAPN, in its position paper signed by Mrs. Bola Thomas,
its president noted that "the ban if enforced as announced by APCON,
would definitely cause serious economic dislocation. This is because
the tobacco advertisements account in Nigeria has an annual
investment profit worth N1.6 billion. With the heavy loss of revenue
by the advertising industry, this will undoubtedly have its
multiplier effect on the Nigerian economy." The association
therefore recommended that tobacco advertising should remain with
the following moderations: the tobacco advertising concept should
not be aspirational or played around success; the use of outdoor
hoarding should remain but the advertising materials should be in
black and
white with no product displayed or in use while the use of lighted
billboards should be discouraged.

Alternatively, the AAPN recommended a one year extension for the
enforcement of the ban (1 January, 2002 -January 1, 2003) to allow
all pre-booked advertisements to run fully, all newly invested money
to be fully expended and investors to re-coup their investment. On
the other hand, APCON through its Registrar, Dr. Joseph Bel-Molokwu
has been justifying its position. "What has happened is not a ban as
presented by some mass media. All APCON has done is to reduce the
media range for the advertising of tobacco products. The products
still have full realms in radio, newspapers, magazines as well as
sponsorship," he said. On the possible loss of revenue by
practitioners in the event of a ban, Dr. Molokwu said: "it saddens
me if any attempt is made to monetise this grave issue. How many
billions of naira, may I ask, are the lives, the future, the health
and social well being of society worth? Money making should be the
least of issues in this matter."

Such appeal to sentiments, however, is not enough for OAAN to let go
a yearly investment of over N800 million in outdoor advertisement by
tobacco companies. When the association thereby perceived that APCON
is resolute in its determination to enforce the ban, OAAN has no
other option, according to its President, Chief Jas Oyekan "than to
challenge the authority of APCON to ban any product which is legally
produced." The institution of the legal action, according to him,
does not signify OAAN's objection to the ban. "It's all about
safeguarding our investment and at the same time, to let APCON know
that we all have a stake. We pleaded that they should allow us
sometime to divest our structure for other products. We appeal that
they should give us five years despite the fact that we know APCON
has no legal right to ban tobacco advertising. It's the
responsibility of the National Assembly to make laws not that of
federal government parastatals like APCON."

OAAN's suit filed in December last year is requesting the court to
determine whether APCON is empowered by the Advertising
Practitioners Act. Cap 7, Laws of Nigeria 1990 to legislate in
respect of what product can be advertised or not and whether the
resolution passed by the council placing a total ban on the outdoor
advertisement of tobacco products is within the powers conferred on
APCON by the 1990 Act.

The association therefore requested the court to declare that the
decision to ban outdoor advertisements of tobacco products is
ultra-vires, unconstitutional, an usurpation of the constitutional
duties of the National Assembly and therefore null and void. It went
further to seek an order of injunction restraining APCON "from
carrying into effect the said operation or in any way obstructing or
interfering with the applicants in the prosecuting of their trade
and
business." 

OAAN's grouse, according to an affidavit sworn to by Oyekan is that
its member companies have complied with the code of advertising
practice issued by APCON as it relates to outdoor advertising of
tobacco and invested a lot of money in order to comply with the
code. He argued further that the APCON resolution was directed at
the outdoor advertising industry as "there was no such resolution in
respect of newspapers, radio, television and other visual forms of
advertising."

The major concern in the industry now is that the outcome of the
suit will either strengthen or weaken APCON as a regulatory body of
the advertising profession in Nigeria. As noted by a senior
advertising practitioner, "APCON is only as powerful as long as
practitioners submit themselves to it. It's only in Nigeria that we
have such a body and by the hasty decision to ban tobacco
advertising without sufficient debate and notice, the council has
demonstrated insensitivity towards issues that relate to the
livelihood of those they were expected to protect and regulate.